Islamic state – MCA/Gerakan should stop hypocrisy and double standards


(Speech 2 at the first Public Ceramah/Consultation with DAP MPs, Excos, State Assemblymen at Chin Woo Hall, Ipoh on Saturday, 12th April 2008)

In the past few days, MCA and Gerakan leaders have suddenly found their voice and become quite articulate, as if to prove to Malaysians that after the March 8 “political tsunamii” they have learnt their lesson and are breaking away from their past culture of silence and subservience in the Barisan Nasional.

But this is not really the case, as they continue as captive as before March 8 to Umno political hegemony.

MCA and Gerakan leaders, including the MCA President, Datuk Ong Ka Ting, seems to be competing among themselves to lash out at the DAP for misleading the Chinese in Malaysia in the last general election over PAS’ Islamic state agenda.

MCA and Gerakan leaders should stop applying double standards on the Islamic State issue. When on Sept. 29, 2001, the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad declared that Malaysia was an Islamic state, unilaterally, arbitrarily and unconstitutionally abrogating the cardinal nation-building principle in the Constitution and Merdeka “social contract” that Malaysia is a multi-religious and secular state with Islam as the official religion but not an Islamic State, there was not only no objection from MCA and Gerakan leaders – they gave immediate public support.

Similarly last year, when the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak trampled on the Malaysian Constitution and the 1957 “social contract” and declared Malaysia as an Islamic state, there was not a whimper of opposition or protest from Ong Ka Ting and the other MCA, Gerakan and Barisan Nasional Cabinet Ministers and leaders.

It is the height of irresponsibility and hypocrisy for MCA and Gerakan leaders to demand that the DAP must come out openly about our stand on Malaysia as an Islamic state, when it is the MCA and Gerakan which should stop its hypocritical, opportunistic and unprincipled stand on the Islamic state.

DAP’s stand of Malaysia as a secular state and opposition to Malaysia becoming an Islamic state, violating the secular basis and commitment of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract”, is so crystal clear and unmistakable that only the most ignorant or unprincipled can question it.

It is not the DAP which must come out clearly on its stand on Malaysia as an Islamic state – as it is the MCA and Gerakan which had betrayed their party founding principles on Malaysia as a secular state and not an Islamic state.

For a start, MCA and Gerakan leaders should stop applying double standards on the Islamic State issue and they should ask Abdullah and Najib to withdraw their declaration that Malaysia is an Islamic state and return to the founding principles of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract” on the secular basis and character of Malaysia, which was not questioned even by Barisan Nasional leaders until Mahathir’s “929 Declaration” on Sept. 29, 2001.

Recently, the statement by some PAS leaders on Islamic state have created “waves” in the country as well as among the three political parties, DAP, PAS and PKR.

DAP leaders had said throughout the recent general election campaign that DAP and PAS had no links or relationship as the DAP had always remain steadfast in our commitment to preserve the secular basis of Malaysia as agreed by the forefathers of the major communities on the attainment of independence and nationhood half a century ago and our rejection of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

The results of the March 8, 2008 general election, which which came like a political tsunami, ending the Barisan Nasional’s unbroken two-thirds parliamentary majority and brought down the Barisan Nasional in five states, sent out a clear verdict – that the majority of Malaysians want far-reaching changes in the country and the people want DAP, PAS and PKR to co-operate to effect these changes.

This message is most clear in Perak and Selangor where without the co-operation of the three parties to form a coalition government, power would have to be returned to the Barisan Nasional.

This message has been vindicated just now when I asked the thousand people gathered at this DAP Public Ceramah/Consultation here tonight whether they support the formation of a DAP-PKR-PAS coalition government in Perak to effect the changes Malaysians of all races and religions desire, and there was an unanimous show of hands in support.

There was another massive show of hands of support to demonstrate that the changes that voters want in the March 8 political tsunami is for accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance and not for Islamic state or hudud laws – as the majority not only of non-Malays but also of Malays are clearly not in support of Malaysia becoming an Islamic state.

The co-operation of DAP, PAS and PKR in the proposed Pakatan Rakyat is clear and specific on the common goals of accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance and not for an Islamic state or hudud laws.

There is a great difference between the DAP’s relationship with PAS and PKR on the one hand and the MCA and Gerakan with UMNO in Barisan Nasional on the other.

DAP’s relationship with PAS and PKR is one of equals while MCA and Gerakan’s role in BN is a subservient one totally subject to Umno’s political hegemony.

In Pakatan Rakyat, DAP makes it clear that our stand on Malaysia as a secular state and our objection to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state is a fundamental principle which is not open to compromise – while MCA and Gerakan had compromised away this principle in the Barisan Nasional by accepting the public declarations of Mahathir, Abdullah and Najib of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

DAP, PKR and PAS are working on a common statement of principles as the basis for co-operation of the three political parties in Pakatan Rakyat at state and national levels so that there could be no mistake or misunderstanding on the basis of co-operation of the three political parties – and that such a co-operation has nothing thing to do with the issue of Islamic state or hudud laws.

In 2001, an earlier attempt to create an opposition front comprising four political parties, DAP, PKR, PAS and Parti Rakyat in the form of an Alternative Front failed because of the breach of the common programme “Towards A Just Malaysia” when PAS unilaterally went ahead to push its programme of an Islamic state.

If the proposed Pakatan Rakyat is to survive and succeed in fulfilling the trust and hopes of the people as expressed in the March 8 “political tsunami”, then it must not repeat the mistakes of the Alternative Front, and must fully commit the constituent parties to the principles of justice, freedom, democracy and good governance, and not allow it to be used as an excuse to pursue separate agendas such as an Islamic state or hudud laws.

  1. #1 by durian83 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:03 pm

    Hi Uncle Kit,

    I agree with ur point of view…however, to strengthen DAP, u must not compromise on the issue of islamic state….also, I would strongly advise you to stick with “Msian First” concept-JUSTICE, FREEDOM,INTEGRITY & EQUALITY,

    HArdcore DAP supporter,

  2. #2 by Plaintruth on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:05 pm

    The raykat had keep their end of the bargain in the Merderka Constitution to sustain the Monarchy system (with entitlements to Sultans, entourage, princes and princesses), I am at a loss as to why the government is not keeping thier end of the bargin to upheld the rest of the constitution – that every raykat are treated equally and just.

  3. #3 by robleong on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:16 pm

    Totally agree with Kit. Action speaks louder than words. MCA and Gerakan will be judged by their past actions, or inactions, here and in the case of Kerismuddin.

  4. #4 by toyolbuster on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:27 pm

    BN knows the weaknesses of DAP, and all they need to stir up any frictions between DAP and PAS, and ultimately, the PR, is to instigate any PAS idiots on the Islamic state issue. That has become the “bogeyman” of DAP especially Karpal. The rakyat would prefer DAP to stay calm and ignore BN’s instigation, cos there is no way PAS can amend the constitution without a 2/3 majority. Even if PKR were to join force with PAS, they still can’t get their 2/3. The real danger lies in Sabah, and PR must ensure a victory to take over the Fed Govt in order to “sanitise” the citizenship issue that have plagued the state with foreign “citizens”.

  5. #5 by pulau_sibu on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:27 pm

    I am hopping that PAS will be different. PAS has the potential to become the most democratic and fair Islamic political party in the world. So far PAS has demonstrated this status and will set the example for the rest of Islamic world.

  6. #6 by sebol on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:28 pm

    What is LKS definition of secular?

    From my undertanding, secular is seperating religion from everything.

    but, There is “Agama Rasmi” in our constitution.

    In Germany, there are Christian Democrat Party, That’s mean there are not secular.

    Being democratic doesnt mean we have to be secular.

  7. #7 by sickandtired on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:37 pm

    MCA and Gerakan are not relevant any more.

  8. #8 by trashed on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 2:55 pm

    sebol said
    “Being democratic doesnt mean we have to be secular.”

    Unfortunately, a theocracy can’t be democratic or espousing the principles of equality for all. Justice will be religious justice. Integrity means following whatever the religion says is the right thing to do and freedom means … it is to be within the space the theocracy determines and the goalposts may shift anytime.

  9. #9 by baoqingtian on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:00 pm

    In 2001 Mahathir declared M’sia an islamic state but MCA and Gerakan had no [deleted] to object. In 2007 Bodowi and Nutjib declared M’sia an islamic state. At that time MCA and Gerakan wanted to object but it was already too late because Krismuddin’s swift action managed to [deleted]before they could utter a word.

  10. #10 by Putera Fulus on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:15 pm

    YB LKS,
    Seharusnya isu Negara Islam ini tidak lagi diperbincangkan. MCA/GERAKAN/DAP termakan dengan dakyah jahat UMNO terhadap konsep negara islam. Jika orang Cina sensitif dengan isu dengan negara Islam. Orang Melayu Islam pun sensitif dengan konsep Malaysian Malaysia yang dicanang DAP dan hak samarata dalam hal agama. Itu tak termasuk isu BABI di Selangor yang tercetus gara-gara tindakan terdesak YB Teresa untuk memancing sokongan orang cina. Tetapi kenapa YB LKS tidak melihat betapa universalnya YB PAS di Selangor dalam menyokong projek ini. Sehinggakan kalau dilihat hampir majoriti laman Blog Penyokong PAS menyokong projek ini. Adakah YB LKS tidak dapat membandingkan kebaikan islam yang ditonjolkan oleh Parti PAS atau masih ditutup dengan kelemahan Islam Hadhari ciptaan UMNO. YB kena ingat kalau PAS gagal menangani isu ini dikalangan orang Melayu dan Islam. Tidak mustahil pilihanraya akan datang Selangor dan Perak akan jatuh ketangan BN kembali. Jesteru itu janganlah terlampau lantang dengan memainkan isu negara islam hingga melukakan perasaan rakan sendiri. Saya sendiri pun tak akan undi DAP sekiranya tanpa sokongan dan keyakinan yang diberikan PAS terhadap DAP. Saya juga percaya pengundi Melayu islam lain turut mempunyai pendapat yang sama dengan saya. Dalam Pilihanraya lepas Pemimpin Pas telah menyarankan kami agar undi DAP untuk melawan kezaliman BN. Harap YB faham permintaan kami janganlah disensasikan lagi perkara ini.

  11. #11 by Godson on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:20 pm

    Aiyah…forget this M-Chicken-A/Gerakan Belakang. Now they become opposition..ha ha ha ha….. . Im blessed to live till today to see them barking underneath Krismudin’s sarong. Man..they are desperate sitting among the sinking UMNO.And that K-urang a-J-ar must go also. Yeah….they are sinking.

  12. #12 by dawsheng on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:34 pm

    “DAP’s stand of Malaysia as a secular state and opposition to Malaysia becoming an Islamic state, violating the secular basis and commitment of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract”, is so crystal clear and unmistakable that only the most ignorant or unprincipled can question it.”

    Uncle Kit, this statement of yours is a double-edged sword. Just how crystal clear and unmistakable DAP’s stand on the Islamic State issues when for weeks some had demanded for clarification but to no avail? I will appreciates it if you can be specific and direct in your reference of the most ignorant and unprincipled who has questioned DAP’s position with regards to the Islamic State issues.

  13. #13 by Kim Yew on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:36 pm

    Lim,

    Clearly, Gerakan had lost the support of the chinese community total since they secured 0 seat in Penang. MCA also lost their support from chinise community, so we do not need to quarrel with them regarding Islamic State or Secular states. The people has punished them 0n 8 March Election. MCA and Gerakan need to be sincere when they raise any issues in future, they could not simply talk nonsence anymore with the information technology and knowledgeble Rakyay

  14. #14 by allen ng on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:38 pm

    MCA and Gerakan are crying over split milk.I bet they are the servant of UMNO and now trying to create havoc to DAP and associates over the Islamic issue.
    They must mirror themselves first as they supported Mahathir initially when he declared Malaysia as an Islamic state.They were dead silence over the issue, and infact DAP were the ones championing the issue without fear or favour.Why double-standards now? I hope they, the eunuches of UMNO would wake up from their senses and do something concrete for the Chinese or else it would be history for them in the next GE.

  15. #15 by kcb on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:46 pm

    MCA and Gerakan are really thick-skinned!
    Thank you MCA and Gerakan, please mind your own business, we don’t need you both to represent the Chinese in this country.
    By the 13th GE, both of you will become opposition parties!

  16. #16 by lankauc on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 3:46 pm

    After 50 years and still cannot understand the Merdeka constitution. That’s why Malaysia is still very…. very ….still far away from our neighbour in many terms (name what you like). We are still fighting over petty issues (Islamic, ketuanan melayu lah, NEP etc) within Malaysian. Hello brother (UMNO and BN) how to compete with others? Our enemies are outsidelah….still cannot see…..then continue sleeping. Lets the PR take over.

  17. #17 by wag-the-dog on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 4:17 pm

    Secularism is not our enemy: A Muslim’s open letter

    Visit http://www.wagthedog-malaysia.blogspot.com for details.

  18. #18 by allasstra on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 4:49 pm

    wag the dog is a spammer,…..
    spamining it’s empty blog to attract advert from filthy adult sites….
    dont go,…..dont click !

    lease u contribute to adult.click !

  19. #19 by sebol on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 4:51 pm

    Trashed:

    Who told you PAS Islamic State is “theocracy”?
    UMNO?

  20. #20 by octo61 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 5:05 pm

    Got this from Malaysian Insider.

    Muslim conversions: No need to inform family, says Nik Aziz

    KOTA BARU, April 13 — Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat yesterday said it was not necessary for non-Muslims to inform their family of their wish to embrace Islam.

    He was reacting to the proposal by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to make it compulsory for non-Muslims to inform their family before converting to Islam to avoid problems in future, like tussles over the remains of a deceased convert for burial.

    Nik Aziz said the requirement for would-be Muslims to do so could hinder them from converting to Islam.”

    Could Uncle Kit enlighten us on this? What is DAP/Pakatan’s stand on this issue? Why is Pakatan not issuing any statement on this issue?

    Thanks Uncle

  21. #21 by strupper2003 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 5:25 pm

    YB,

    I remember the Gerakan Convention well when Dr M announced nonchalantly that Malaysia is an Islamic.

    As a journalist and apolitical science graduate, I understand the significance of the declaration immediately. So did Lim Keng Yaik and Koh Tsu Koon (who were sitting next to Dr M).

    After Dr M made the announcement and left the press conference, we sought LKY and KTK response but they refused to comment.

    When I return to the newsroom and brought the matter up to the editor, he dismissed it off hand, choosing to argue what Dr M actually meant.

    The next day, the Malay papers went to town with it while the paper i worked for buried the story.

    I never forget that day and will probably never will. I learnt Umno can do whatever it wants and MCA, Gerakan, MIC will always be subservient to the party.

  22. #22 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 5:35 pm

    YB LIM.

    I think what YAB Lim Guan Eng ( Chief Minister of Penang) had stated on the squabbles and infighting among Umno leaders as ‘ family matters ‘, not involving pakatan is EXCELLENT.

    YAB has distanced himself from being a party to their fall from grace and become disgraceful.

    In similar context , i only could appeal that Yb Karpal Singh , could also stay away from the tit tat with Yab Tun’s allegations and persistent attack on Pakatan, especially Dap and PKR. Notice Tun, has not sharpened his knife on pas.

    mca and gerakan are spent forces. the only publicity they could attract now is to be seen to be using the Islamic issues to distract the public from their own smelly stench of incompetency and corrupt practises. i would not give two hoots about their behaviour.

    donald mcdonald, had even disclose that mca spies are out to video cam roaming mca leaders in hotel rooms or even expensive condos. maybe there are more than one chua soilek.

    THE RAAYAT are no longer fooled by these spent ‘ selfish ,used ,expired once upon a time representative of chinese and multi races parties.

    Pakatan can only move forward. Leave these baggages behind please.

  23. #23 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:13 pm

    What is the difference between Barisan Alternatif (“BA”) and Pakatan Rakyat (“PR”) besides the obvious one that DAP left BA because of ideological differences with PAS in 1999 and collaborates with PAS in PR in 2008 in spite of ideological differences???

    Unless one says that in 2008 there are no ideological differences between PAS & DAP which of course even the most naïve would not believe.

    Immediately after 8th March Kelantan Deputy Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yaakub’s and press secretary to Pas president Roslan Shahir Mohd Shahir make the statements reaffirming “the values of the Islamic state were already incorporated in the “Negara Berkebajikan” and that “in states where Pas is the dominant party, we will try to set up an Islamic state”; PAS deputy spiritual leader Datuk Dr Haron Din said in Harakah Daily that PAS would amend the constitution and turn Malaysia into an Islamic state if it held control of the federal government.

    From here is obvious the first difference is that in PR’s case, the second echelon leaders of PAS reaffirm the Islamic state (the ideological difference) while first echelon PAS leaders reaffirm PR’s common goals of good governance, accountability and dislodgement of common enemy BN. This is of course double-talk except not by same group but different groups (first and second echelons of PAS) within same party.

    To say that PAS has dropped the Islamic state agenda is untenable because no first echelon leaders of PAS contradicts what its second echelon leaders – Ahmad Yaakub Roslan Shahir Mohd Shahir Dr Haron Din – said. Their non rebuttal and non contradiction must inexorably infer that PAS first echelon leaders endorse what second echelon leaders said, probably on their behalf. In fact PAS’s president Hadi made it clear that the Islamic state and Hudud will be implemented in PAS controlled state with muslim majority! It is to be deduced that PAS has not dropped its agenda even if it acquiesce with its exclusion in Proposition Manifesto of 2008.

    What is more interesting is that PR’s other main component party -Parti Keadilan Rakyat & its defacto leader Anwar- also did not contradict what PAS’s second echelon said.

    Only DAP’s LKS & Karpal Singh reaffirmed that DAP’s cooperation with PAS in PR was based on mandate of rakyat (both Malays & Non Malays) on March 8 for accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance and not for Islamic state or hudud laws.

    Of course DAP could say that – and keep repeating that – but is there use in this when there is no evidence so far that neither PAS nor PKR publicly agree for the record??? So in substance not much different from BA situation in 1999 is there???

    Which brings me to second difference between BA in 1999 and PR in 2008. Now the Opposition parties are like barbarians reaching at the gates of BN’s citadel and fortress and due to the considerable confusion and disarray in the latter, the Opposition “barbarians” stands good chance to breach the walls, enter into the fortress and take over control. Needing the common effort none of the barbarians will talk of their irreconcilable differences, of how they are going to share the spoils and who is going to be dominant to asset its agenda just so not to spoil and weaken the common effort for the final assault.

    We can understand the dynamics and logic of all that : but to say that there is peace and prospects of working together after the BN’s citadel is taken control of will be a triumph of hope over logic that imposes on even the most naïve.

    In the circumstances it would be better counsel not to harp too much on alleged hypocrisy and double standards of MCA/Gerakan and their connivance with UMNO’s Islamic State especially when by no stretch UMNO’s Islamic state is on all fours (ideologically similar) when compared with that of the Islamic theocratic state espoused by PAS with whom DAP is collaborating under PR.

  24. #24 by alberttye on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:18 pm

    The principle that Malaysia is a secular state, where there is freedom, social justice and equality with special assistance to those who are weaker, poorer and handicaped, is sacrosanct.

    This is basest principle on which the Pakatan Rakyat is formed.

    If this policy could not be agreed wholeheartedly and pursued, there is no point in forming the people alliance and the power in 2-3 states be handed back to BN !

  25. #25 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:18 pm

    Sorry Typos – “acquiesced with its exclusion in Opposition Manifesto of 2008″… and “…who is going to be dominant to ASSERT its agenda just so not to spoil…”

  26. #26 by ablastine on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:21 pm

    Ya why bother to even reply to all the stupid comments from all the imbeciles in MCA and Gerakan. In most people mind, members of these parties are there only to enrich themselves by selling the rights of the people they claim to represent. Let them just die a natural death now that their master UMNO is going to implode. I would recommend politician to stay away from the mine field of religion and focus all your effort to governing the country and bring about its ascent. Look at Singapore. We are now being left so far behind. We have wasted enough of time. Come on guys go and learn something from these fellas in SG who simply make money fall from the sky for them. If they can do it we should be able to do it better. Just copy their methods.

  27. #27 by bukanbumi on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:22 pm

    Sebol says:
    In Germany, there are Christian Democrat Party, That’s mean there are not secular.
    —————————–
    But I think most Germans go Church only 3 times in their life time.
    1) First time – Baptism
    2) Second Time – Marriage
    3) Third Time – Death

    Unlike the Catholic elsewhere, most of them can’t even recite their prayer.

  28. #28 by Godfather on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:23 pm

    For once on this topic, I agree with Jeffrey. The pot should not be calling the kettle black.

  29. #29 by hiro on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:24 pm

    I congratulate PR leaders for coming up quickly to defuse any confusion, by saying that PAS leaders’ comments are personal in nature. It would be better for more senior PAS leaders to stand up and take this stand as well and to support Hadi Awang that it is not feasible to establish an Islamic State in Malaysia just to allay any concerns by the public.

    We may not like to hear all these criticism from MCA, but it is a role they are expected to play, and PR has a role to quickly and effectively counter this head on. In fact, with MCA as the watchdog, PAS should be more careful what it says, just as DAP should be more careful in what it says even if it is saying the right things, with UMNO as the watchdog.

  30. #30 by chiakchua on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:25 pm

    Yes, MCA and Gerakan are practising double standard, especially MCA; they are scared to death with UMNO. Never mumble a word when UMNO claimed Malaysia is an Islamic state, but keep harping on DAP on some PAS leaders’ statement on the issue. Shame on them!

    With due respect to the royal family of Kelantan, I really feel saddened with the Regent’s speech. My goodness! Sad, sad, sad!

  31. #31 by cancan on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:29 pm

    Why now? Why not before?

    Link: http://www.kingsmary.blogspot.com/

  32. #32 by stevchew on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:32 pm

    MCA and Gerakan are now both irrelevant. Both trying very hard to impress the Chinese with their ‘huha’ but they forget that we are not bloody fools.

  33. #33 by mauriyaII on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:40 pm

    For PR to survive and be an effective political tool, the leaders of the DAP, PAS & PKR should just ignore the Islamic issue being dug up by the MCA and GERAKAN.

    What is important is the Constitution. It is clearly stated that Malaysia is a secular nation and Islam is the official religion. It allows the existance of other religions and places of worship. What that oxymoron Mahathir or the Imam of Islam Hadhari says has no meaning. They were just playing to the gallery.

    As usual the [deleted]in the MCA, GERAKAN & MIC did not even raise a whimper against those statements.

    Please do not be drawn into arguing the Islamic issue. It would only cause dissent among the PR partners.

    Please do not let down the rakyat who voted in the PR for change.

  34. #34 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:41 pm

    I think to the DAP, logic dictates the collaboration with PAS under PR in 2008 stands no better prospects in the longer term as that under BA in 1999. The only difference is the Aphrodisiac of Power – it is so near that it can be smelled and only with the power of unity (even betwen irreconcilable and diametrical opposites like DAP & PAS ) can the final goal be attained : dislodgment of the moribund BN that has so far been lodged itself like a HIV virus on the body politic draining it off all vitality. So any other options, no matter how destined to be unworkable, is in the minds of those oppsed to the ruling coalition worth the try. The human grasps at a straw in a desperate situation. There is a common and immediate enemy that needs to be dealt with, and there’s a longer term one. Under such a constraint, disparate groups of different ideologies unite to rid off the immediate enemy and once that is done, turn against one another to fight for dominance.

    Now Historical case in point is : In World War II, Britain’s Winston Churchill US Franklin Delano Roosevelt (with their special relationship & common tradition) were pleased to join forces with Russian Communist Joseph Stalin to fight and put an end to common enemy, Fascist Nazis Adolf Hitler so that when the moment Berlin fell, the USSR Red Army and the Western Forces competed to take over as much of Europe as they could leading to erecting of the Berlin Wall dividing 2 separate spheres of hegemony, the Eastern European countries under the larger Communist Soviet Union and those on the other side under the liberal capitalist democracy of West and protection of NATO.

    That’s politics – power and Malaysian players are no different.

    So the fight between DAP & PAS will come later and I just hope that the DAP will not be worse off in that inevitable contest or more important the country’s and the rakyat’s agenda of accountability, integrity, justice, democracy and good governance will not be set further back in the fall out. Lets hope we don’t rid off racism & corruption for Islamo-facism gaining currency west of South East Asia.

  35. #35 by kerishamuddinitis on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:56 pm

    MCA and Gerakan are only fooling themselves when they make such statements. There are so many Malays, Chinese and Indians who are fully aware of what they stand for – MCA and Gerakan DO NOT stand for interests of Malaysia and Malaysians; Gerakan cannot pretend nor hope to delude the rakyat into imagining that they are representing the interests of the Malays or Indians because they are rotten to the core and totally racist in their philosophy and values; they are play the race card all the time, theirs brand of politics is based on exclusion – like MCA, if you are not Chinese, you are not welcome. Gerakan leaders are all Chinese, right, save for an Indian here and there, where their voices cannot be heard at all. Sad part is MCA and Gerakan still don’t acknowledge that they have been REJECTED by the Chinese (MCA) and all races (Gerakan). Hey, many, many Chinese VOTED for PAS! Ask the Chinese in Kelantan! They chose to vote for PAS than to vote for running dogs, incidental serfs to UMNO and two-faced, fork-tongued cowards who didn’t dare to challenge Kerishamuddin but now want to talk about protecting non-Muslim interests! Pordah-lah!

  36. #36 by boh-liao on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 6:56 pm

    Talking is one thing, action is another.

    DAP may insist that DAP does not compromise on the issues of Islamic state and hudud laws. PAS may say PAS has left the Islamic state out of its political manifesto. PR may declare that all the bosses of the three political parties are united in realising a just Malaysia and that PR would walk the middle path and build a country which would be welcoming to Malays, Chinese, Indians, and others.

    However, statements by different politicians from the political parties within PR are giving messages that disturb and confuse ordinary people and voters. These statements become the bullets of BN and will be fully twisted, exploited by the mainstream media.

    For example, in response to AAB’s proposal that Malaysians who wish to convert to Islam must first inform their immediate families (which was immediately welcome by the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism), Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat yesterday said it is not necessary for non-Muslims to inform their family of their wish to embrace Islam.

    Sometimes PR politicians forgot that they are ruling a number of states and aspiring to be the government-in-waiting. They still have the opposition mentality of speaking for the sake of criticising. They forgot that they are now living in the glass house, not outside. Throwing a stone at the glass house is easy, but do remember who is inside.

    Already this country is stuck in so many negative things. Our citizens want to see things moving ahead as soon as possible.

    PR, already facing many difficulties untangling the endless knots and cryptic actions left by the previous BN state governments, should be concentrating on rebuilding the fortunes of the various states under their control.

    PR senior politicians should not be making contradictory statements and shooting their own feet every now and then. They should not be wasting their time doing damage control and fire-fighting all the time.

    Otherwise, history will repeat itself – the three strange bedfellows, each having a different dream, will eventually go on their separate ways and lose the support of voters. What a shame!!!

  37. #37 by k1980 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:03 pm

  38. #38 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:19 pm

    jeffrey.

    i think the use of the terminology of “babarian” to describe pakatan raayat is of bad taste.

    voters like me, certainly had much thought before we coss the x where dap and pas /pkr were in the last election.

    had not the dap/pkr/pas decided upon a one to one contest, ,march 8th 2008 will not be the waterloo for bn.

    pas will be pas and dap will be dap.

    in similar context, how HAD, mca,mic,gerakan,ppp worked with umno. certainly umno did not start off as an islamic party but became more islamic than pas to win over the malays. but mind you, many malays especially the middle class are seeing Islam practise in malaysia stiffling their career and life. even jeanne abdullah have occasionally refuse to be ” tudunged”. this is elite malay.

    just visit any of the ” to be seen places in kl,and the good crowd at the watering holes are malays . whether alcohol is consumed or not, i am not aware. but these places are strictly restricted if the practise of Islam is to hold .

    i believe that malays themselves would reject hudud laws. it is only that rejection would be deemed unholy. but being holy is more than skin deep. it is the niat , and not the external. there is the zahir and the batin.

    yrs truly.

  39. #39 by ALLAN THAM on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:27 pm

    It was very sad that MCA and GERAKAN have not learned about the real reason why they have have lost the Chinese support. Why they keep concentrating and focus on the cheap tactic on playing the racial and religious cards. The Chinese deserting you people because you have all dare not speak up for issues affecting all Malaysian and the Chinese also do not believe PAS will go for Islamic state. At least many people that I know, especially those in Kelantan, they are happy lot. The real issues that affecting us are Corruption. Do not wast your time and just focus on the Port Klang Free Trade Zone. Just disclose all if MCA boss (UMNO) do not agree you disclose then you should go ahead for full disclosure then and OTK tender his resignation . By doing do I am sure MCA can win back many many more votes in the year 2012.

  40. #40 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:38 pm

    ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH, the use of the word “Barbarians at the Gates” as a metaphor is NOT intended to be derogatory or aspersions to Opposition Parties as to be attributed bad taste.

    It is a metaphorical reference derived from the book “Barbarians at the Gate by” Bryan Burrough (Author) which Hollywood made a film of “Barbarians at the Gate (1993)”, starring: James Garner, Jonathan Pryce Director: Glenn Jordan .

    Author, Bryan Burrough is a former reporter for the Wall Street Journal.

    “Barbarians at the Gate” has been called one of the most influential business books of all time – the definitive and historical account of the largest takeover in Wall Street history. The book (a management investment banking book) tells the story of how the CEO of RJR Nabisco, F. Ross Johnson, frustrated with a low stock price, decided to propose a management led leveraged buyouts or LBO – the largest in history – of the firm. Barbarians at Gate in our context is Opposition parties take over of political/management control of Malaysian Inc (cash-rich like RJR Nabisco that has ceased to innovate or reinvent) to give good shareholders (or rakyat)’s returns.

  41. #41 by ShiokGuy on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:44 pm

    YB Lim,

    Frankly speak we the people did not vote or agreed on Islamic State (At least I am speaking on myself, and all my immediate family whom I convince to vote anything but BN)

    My father an his friend can vote DAP without any problem, but when the option is BN vs PAS. They will vote BN without even think about it.

    I manage to convince them no way PAS is going to rule and no way Malaysia is going to be an Islamic State. I even use RPK argument about the 2/3 majority.

    When the S#*&!D PAS talk about the Islamic State again, and they call me and tell me off. I will hard time asking them to do the same in GE13.

    You better work with PKR to control PAS big mouth else come GE13, PR will be history again.

    My politic view and comment here..
    http://shiokguy.blogspot.com/search/label/Politic

    PAS said they are just politicking. Yeah right, sorry wrong Channel.

  42. #42 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 7:53 pm

    Uncle Kit

    The real problem that worries me here is not MCA’s so-called hypocritical stance but your own delusion that PAS’ has suddenly turned a party that has given up on the Islamic state objectives and adopted democratic principles.

    That TDM declaring Malaysia an Islamic state was a political move at that time to counter the pressure that PAS was bearing on him and attacking his Islamic credentials. I hope you are not too old to have forgotten those years.

    TDM’s Islamic state was for all intent and purpose was purely semantical for it did not change the way the country was being administrated or policies being formulated.

    But the PAS’ Islamic state model is a very different kettle of fish altogether. Comparing both is exercise in idiocacy that I certainly do not expect to come from someone of your intellect and integrity. So please stop making a fool of yourself. I am sure that you are not as naive as those twenty-something political greenhorns who has no knowledge of PAS’ history. That comparing Islam Hadhari to Hudud is like comparing a fire cracker to a 10 Mega-ton thermonuclear bomb.

    The longer you live in such delusion, the bolder PAS becomes and the closer we edge to slippery slope of the Islamic Republic of Malaynistan. And obviously you and your strategists have not been following the discussions in the Harakah and other PAS blogs on their future plans on Islamisation of the nation. I do and I see the storms of Hudud laws hovering on the horizon.

    Many non Muslims like me are deeply concerned that PAS’ political partners like DAP and PR unwittingly help the Islamist party to gain power and assist then in setting up an Islamic republic.

    I had outlined in another thread on how exactly PAS plans to achieve their objectives and I do hope that all the PR-owned state governements monitor the activities of PAS and keep them in a very tight leash.

    But you might have noted that in Kedah things are already changing though the public pronoucements of the MB is very different. I have a few friends working in Langkawi and they tell me that raids into entertaintment outlets there has started, led by the Mullahs of Jabatan Agama Islam. They are of the view that PAS’ plans to turn Langkawi into a sort of Islamic Paradise Island and encourage Arabs and Muslim tourist by inculcating Islamic values and policies. It is a matter of time that tax-free alcohols and bikinis are banned.They fear that with these crackdowns the non muslim tourists will be driven off.

    PAS’ tactics are very much similar to those employed by Adolf Hitler and his NAZI party to gain power. And once this has been achieved it will be impossible to reverse it as all democratic instituitions will be abolished.

    One of the aspects of Malaysian democraphics that many people are unaware is the declining birth rates and population % of non Muslims. Even in Penang the current 43% of Chinese population likely to decline and by 2013 the Muslims will be the majority. This will radically alter the political scene for DAP there.

    I do hope that DAP not to place too great a hope on Anwar as a partner against PAS’ plans. For Anwar all it matters is the Prime Ministership and he would gladly be one, irrespective the country practices Westminster parlimentary democracy, Islamic Hudud or even Fascism. Like a Political Vampire, all he wants and needs is to drink and get intoxicated on naked political power.

  43. #43 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:00 pm

    ISLAMIC STATE: REAL OR JUST MERE RHETORIC?

    I’m quite sure most would agree if I say the idea of an Islamic state is anathema to the Chinese as assimilation is.

    Despite exhortations to the contrary (it is but mere exhortations because constitutionally this is not provided for and certainly not thought of) we all know that Malaysia can never be equated to an Islamic the way Pakistan is or Iran is. The “magic words” were first uttered by a leader who was facing challenges to his leadership and a quick end to his political career after some two decades. He chose to throw the monkey wrench to see if the machinery could be made to grind to a halt. It was his way of saying that as a leader he was indispensable. Well, he is not as history has now shown.

    “Islamic state” is the wrong label to give to this issue today. We can all agree that nowhere does the country’s Constitution even come close to stating that Malaysia is an Islamic state. We should look at the accelerated encroachment into our fundamental liberties under the guise of Islamization as a human rights issue. Yes, it is but a human rights issue. When there is an issue as to whether the deceased has in fact and in law converted to Islam or is still a Hindu or a Buddhist when he dies, that issue which is one of conversion must be adjudicated by a civil court and not the syariah court. Malaysians (who are not Malays) should be allowed their freedom to follow whatever religion they choose. Is that not what a Muslim convert wants to do when he or she re-converts to his or her original religion? Is that not an exercise of her or his freedom of speech which is protected under the Constitution?

    Politicians either side of the political divide would do well to refrain from referring to Malaysia as an Islamic state and address the real issues. Enough time has elapsed to convince us that there can be no end to the rhetoric. It is not much more than mere rhetoric. Now that elections are over, it is time we roll up our sleeves and look at the problem the way it ought to be looked at and. from the perspective of human rights.

    There is nothing wrong with a double-tracked system of justice so long it is correctly applied. One applies to Muslims and the other to non-Muslims. If there is ambiguity in the language used, there is nothing that a constitutional amendment could not solve.

  44. #44 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:03 pm

    ////And once this has been achieved it will be impossible to reverse it as all democratic institutions will be abolished/// – Killer. Well said. That’s the measuring cast of difference between PAS and UMNO. The latter uses religion for piolitical expedience : PAS means it. :)

  45. #45 by ChinNA on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:04 pm

    Malaysia will be an Islamic state, sooner or later. It will be thru UMNO or PAS or another party. Who that is, I don’t know.

    One thing I know, PAS will not change but it is not necessarily bad. It will live to fight for the betterment of Islam and Muslim in Malaysia. What I do hope to happen, is that in that journey, non-Muslim are not discriminated and marginalised.

    To me, this is politics and it is about power. If one day, the non-Muslims’ power are greatly diminished, so will it’s ability to to influence what happens.

    Imagine that in the years to come (another 50, 100, 150 years?) when non-Muslim is only 0.5% of the population of Malaysia, it is not fair to still object to Malaysia being a Islamic country.

    This is an eventuality, Malaysia will be a Muslim country. It will come to past and only the timing is unsure.

    As much as I hate to say it, each of the current main ethnic groups have a strong sense of pride and heritage. The yellow people will always be yellow. The Malays will always be Malays. The Indians will always be Indians too.

    We cannot deny our ethnic heritage. It is who we are. To lose it is to lose our identity. In some ways, this heritage of ours will create a duality, we are all Bangsa Malaysia BUT we are also individually Chinese, Malay or Indians too.

    Should this then be a hindrance to meaningful co-existence? By all means, NO!

    However, we need to learn how to live together or we can choose to leave Malaysia (even that is better than ethnic riots and chaos).

    A lot of us have chosen to stay (by choice or pressured by circumstances) here, and some have chosen to not to. To each his own.

    To those who stay, we need to make it work.

    To the majority group, do not be mistaken. Do not enslave the minority, for none had been made a master or another. We need to be fair to all and no one will stand for ‘penindasan’ to be perpetuated.

    Be truthful and be fair, and the rest will take care of itself.

  46. #46 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:08 pm

    So ChinNA from what you said, do you think or conclude that the DAP has been used (deceived) via Pakatan Rakyat as stepping stone to advance and further by several steps ahead PAS’s Islamic theocratic agenda???

  47. #47 by manora on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:19 pm

    Dear YB Lim,
    Like many I am taken by great surprise with the March election results.I thought it will never happen in my life time when the Malay voters deserted UMNO and even voted for DAP.Please treasure this and never never loose it.UMNO is in deep trouble and will be difficult for them to regain their past glory.Do not fall into any trap or do anything stupid which will drive the Malay masses back into UMNO’s dirty arms.
    I always find DAP’s response to the Islamic state issue rather worrying.When any of the mainstream newspapers reports something supposedly spoken by a Pas leader DAP always jumps.Just stay calm and seek clarification before you guys react.
    Just 2 days ago SinChew on their frontpage headline screamed that Pas wants to grab central power and implement the Hudud.They claimed to have pick that from Harakahdaily. YB Lim, please go to Harakdaily.com and read the original article.Dato Dr Haron Din was quoted to say that Pas needs to control the central government before it can implement Hudud.I may not understand it fully but from what I can read it seems that he is quite resigned to the fact that Pas can never gain enough power to amend the constitution to change the present laws into Islamic laws.He admitted that we are secular.
    When Dato Ahmad Yaacob was quoted by the BN papers about Pas being the prime power in Pakatan Rakyat,again every one especially you guys from DAP jumped.Everybody seems to be so trusting of the Star, New Straits Times etc.When the Dato gave his comments later on the reactions, non of the BN papers bother to report.
    YB Lim,my point is to plead with you guys not to help UMNO regain their power.Don’t fall into their traps and start friction with Pas or PKR.The Malay population may just react the way UMNO wants.

  48. #48 by Godfather on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:22 pm

    It is disingenous to think along the lines that DAP “has been used (deceived) via Pakatan Rakyat…”. It could well be that the DAP has used Pakatan Rakyat to get to where it is today or it could well be that all the three parties have used each other for their own ends.

  49. #49 by tsuchong on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:28 pm

    The issue of PAS islamic state agenda should not arise anymore. The islamic principal is the core of their party and it is their right to do so.

    I think its the similar concept. DAP’s fundamentals are based on socialist principles, while PAS’s are based on islamic principles.

    But despite the differences, there are similarities as well. Peace, justice, equality, honesty, etc.

    Forget about the issue! Move on!

  50. #50 by ChinNA on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:39 pm

    Let me tell you a story.

    A man walks thru the door and gets into the house to he confessed that he wants to join the religious fraternity of people already living in this house. However, he cannot get out because the door does not permit a fraternity member to get out.

    Has this violated the freedom of the man to stay or leave this fraternity?

    However, please note this had been a practice of this fraternity to prevent anyone from getting out of the house because once a person joins the fraternity, he is not allowed to get out.

    So even if this man no longer wants to part of this fraternity, he is still forced to be in it.

    Now, there comes a second man. He visits his friends in this house every other week and this went on for years. Unfortunately this second man died. His friends claimed that he is a member of this fraternity and he needs to be buried according to the rules and rites of this fraternity.

    Understandably the second man’s family understands and agrees to this request because a day before he passed away, this second man declared to all his family and friends that his intends to join this fraternity on the next morning.

    Time passed and a third man too passed way. He is just like the second man, a passionate, sincere and honest person. This time, again, his friends at the fraternity made the same request to this third man’s family.

    Well, there were some resistance as the family believes in their heart that this third man would not have done that due to his convictions.

    They finally relented due to might of the fraternity. This fraternity had the backing of the highest court in the land behind them. However, this family believes that he who takes the body does not take the spirit and soul. When the time is right, the third man shall return in an uncorruptible body.

    At this juncture I would like to raise a 3 questions:

    1. Is preventing the first man to leave the fraternity correct when he no longer wants to be a member?

    2. Does the act of declaration by the second man helps to clarify a lot of misunderstanding?

    3. Does the act of the members of this fraternity a pursuit of godliness?

    Maybe some of the readers have something to say. I would be glad to know your views.

  51. #51 by ChinNA on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:43 pm

    Jefferey,
    I did not draw those conclusions and it is not my intent to drive readers to those conclusions.

    One thing I know, if we go to the bargaining table, we need to have things of value to the other party.

    Without which, there is nothing to bargain at all.

    That would be a sad day indeed, when it happens.

    Thanks for the comments.

  52. #52 by ktteokt on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:44 pm

    What difference does it make whether it is UMNO who declares Malaysia an Islamic state or PAS doing so? Like I say, if at all Malaysia is an Islamic state, MCA and Gerakan have to get out of BN as soon as possible for they do not qualify to remain in the parliament of an Islamic nation.

    The question is are these morons from MCA or Gerakan HALAL at all? Do they not consume pork? Have they been circumcised? Have they thrown away their ancestral worship tablets? If these people from MCA or Gerakan have not complied with these conditions, how can they support the saying “MALAYSIA IS AN ISLAMIC STATE” or remain with BN as partners in government!!!!

  53. #53 by undergrad2 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:47 pm

    The issue today is not who used who to get to where. The issue now is, having got to where we are, what shall we do? Shall we sink our differences and seize on the moment which comes round once in a generation or more, to work together for a better future for all Malaysians? Or should we just let it pass?

  54. #54 by catharsis on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 8:48 pm

    SOCIAL CONTRACT!!!!!! YOU CAN TELL THAT TO MY FOREBEARS ………………..I AM BORN AND BRED HERE IN MALAYSIA SO THAT MAKES ME AS “BUMIPUTRA”AS ANYONE ELSE.

  55. #55 by ShiokGuy on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 9:26 pm

    I don’t agreed.

    We can have all Malaysian to be a Muslim, but we will still against a federal gov based on Hudud law, or Islamic principle.

    Don’t mixed politic with religion. They simple not suppose to be mixed. Like we do not accept racial based party, we reject it in GE12. And we should reject it in GE13 at the same time we shall reject religion based political party.

    I will help to make sure it will happen. Me having Wet Dream?

  56. #56 by cemerlang on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 9:41 pm

    50 years to spoil everything and people must be dumb enough to think that restoration can take place within a few days.

    Not just the Ministry of Health, but also the whole government of Malaysia under Barisan Nasional that needs a lot of overhauling works.

    Rumours have it that PTD ( pegawai tadbir dan diplomatik ) aka managers do not listen to the voice of the grassroots’ levels. In this case, then stop telling people to be like this and like that; work as a team, but in reality it is not done. I thought professionally educated managers should know how to manage properly.

    If the Prime Minister resigns, it too is not enough to restore back those 50 years. May be it is not restoration. May be it is tearing down and building up again. Tearing down all the nonsense. Building up what should be built up.

  57. #57 by rainmankl on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 9:42 pm

    Why worry ,everyone?

    Even PAS win ALL their allocated parliament seats , they cannot
    form the government , not even to mention you need 2/3 of total seats.
    Even PKR won’t support that.
    Please stop all the argument and let Anwar toppled the present BN,
    and this is the MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITY.

    The rest we will take it one at a time.

    MCA and Gerakan have sold their souls out generations ago
    and I hope the next round we will finish them off forever.

    Honestly, I thing Ummo will be here to stay , but as a minor opposition party after the next round.

    I will be here the next round and the next

  58. #58 by shortie kiasu on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 9:53 pm

    It is most unbecoming behaviour of MCA & Gerakan to behave hypocryptically as far as the issue of whether Malaysia is an Islamic State or may become one in the future by attacking other people or parties except themselves.

    We do not where they would stand at this moment if the PM Abdullah is going to declare once again, like before, that Malaysia is an Islamic State now?

    All they would say is: Yes, yes, yes… They have no qualm in saying that.

  59. #59 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 10:02 pm

    “It could well be that the DAP has used Pakatan Rakyat to get to where it is today or it could well be that all the three parties have used each other for their own ends” (Godfather) – that is a fair comment. Equally true is Undergrad2’s comment – “The issue today is not who used who to get to where. The issue now is, having got to where we are, what shall we do? Shall we “seize on the moment which comes round once in a generation or more, to work together for a better future for all Malaysians? Or should we just let it pass?”

    Now the three Opposition parties having used each other for their own ends have achieved to arrive at the doorstep of seizing the moment – the power from BN – what is likely to happen next?

    There is no question everyone says it works “for a better future for all Malaysians” but the question is whose version of better future for all Malaysians will prevail???

    People here behind DAP believe it is in separation of religion from government and governance by man made laws whereas PAS supporters believe in a theocratic state in which religion and government are integrated and governance by Divine Sharia laws.

    In such a competition for the future for all Malaysians, which agenda – between secular and a theocratic one – after a certain point ie. the point of taking over power from the BN has the better chance to succeed taking into consideration our cultural milieu, racial composition etc???

    So it is correct that “the issue today is not who used who to get to where” but rather after getting to where everyone wanted, who will, from that point onwards, stand to reap greater mileage to make its agenda prevail over the other, having regard to existing parameters of our cultural milieu, racial composition and existing laws and the nature of majority of politicians on both sides of the fence. This is the other question that we should all ask.

  60. #60 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 10:14 pm

    Take the case of Perak. DAP, PKR and PAS “used one another” to get where they are – wining the state government. DAP & PKR had won majority of state seats, not PAS but it is PAS nominee that got the Menteri Besar position not only because he is qualified academic sense but also because he meets pre-eligibility requirements in state constitution requiring a ethnic Malay to be MB. In other words, I talking of the existing infrastructure of laws and custom and usage in the country. At Federal level then, with Constitution saying Islam is official religion, with many moderate muslim daren’t openly speak against PAS’s brand of politics, with religious sympathisers in all sectors of civil service, tertiary and judicial establishment and uniformed services – with TDM’s 20 years of Islamisation in place – with this entire infrastructure, from the point of getting BN out onwards, which party will most likely be at vantage point and have natural advantage from the existing “infrastructure” in place to assert and make its agenda prevail over the rest?

  61. #61 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 10:34 pm

    Declaring Malaysia as an Islamic country and implementing Hudud laws and turning the country into the Islamic republic of Malaynistan is two entirely and mutually exclusive matters.

    One of the key reasons why many non Muslims rejected BN in 12GE is that the creeping Islamisation under the AAB’s rule as examplefied by the episodes of “body snatching” and tugs-of-war over departed family members or children.

    And now to say that (as stated by ChinNA) Malaysia will be an Islamic state sooner or later and we all have to accept is in my view is totally NOT ACCEPTABLE.

    As I had stated earlier, the Islamic state models of UMNO and PAS are as different as a festive firecracker and a 10 Mega Ton Thermonuclear bomb. UMNO is a fundamentally secular party that tries to infuses Islamic elements into the Malay culture. PAS on the otherhand is a fundmental party which has no use for culture and tries to bulldoze over local elements by its imported brand of radical Wahabbi-brand of Islam.

    Don’t forget that the Islamisation of UMNO was the direct result of PAS’ pressure and the influence of none other than Anwar Ibrahim. Some of us will recall that the entry of Anwar into UMNO heralded a new era where the party was given a green make over. And Anwar implemented so many new religious initiatives within the government and UMNO. Many still recall with bitterness when Anwar pushed through Islamic Civilization as one of the subjects for all non Muslims students as one of the compulsory subject despite the vehement objections from various quarters.

    ChinNA, I think you are confusing between an Islamic nation (which we are according to BN) and the one based on Hudud laws. If you wish to see the difference, try living in Iran.

    While I don’t dimiss the possibility of Malaysia turning Malaynistan, the majority of Malaysian Muslims are against Hudud laws (based on the poll by MRC). But if PAS gains power (either thru PR or alone), then we can be sure that Malaysia will turned into an Islamic Republic ala Iran. And that will also spelt the end of all democratic instituitions and there will be no way to reverse it as multi-party elections will be abolished (unless you want to choose one Mullah over the other Mullah) as well.

    That glossing over PAS’ objectives and adopting the ostrich-posture while making a pwer-grab for the Federal govt will only postpone the Day of Reckoning.

    Some supporters’ assertion that we should focus on similarities rather than differences are fine when you are in the Opposition and not when you actually rule the nation. This is because when you are in the Opposition all you do is crititcise but when you are entrusted to administer, you must know make decisions on daily or even hourly basis. So hiding behind shared objectives will no longer tenable or enough.

    This problem is also has afflicted Uncle Kit here. He seems to have stuck in the “Retro” mode of dishing out criticisms rather than being in the “Forward” mode of making decisions that will propel the country to a new level of social equality, religious freedom, governmental transparency and personal liberties.

  62. #62 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 10:41 pm

    Can someone please tell me how bad is an Islamic State? so I can prepare for the worse.

    1. no liquer? I can live with that.
    2. no bikini? No problem.
    3. no porno on the net? Even better.

    does it mean
    1. no equality in education, business deal, and what else? no freedom of religion? culture? language?
    anyone got a scenario?
    how bad can it be?

  63. #63 by lakilompat on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 10:51 pm

    The leeann,

    I always believe freedom of choice.

    I just went to Penang Forum, looks like to tackle such issues, it is not so easy, we must have a social infrastructure to sustain unity. Social infrastructure, comes in all form.

    Pls, visit my site leave some comments, i’ve taken some pictures of the Penang forum at my site jbozz23.proboards105.com feel free to leave some comments etc.

  64. #64 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:00 pm

    I was thinking my friends are in Kelantan since born, n she is still a Buddhist, go to Chinese school, having the right education.
    Enough wealth to go for holiday, having fun at the islands around.

    If PAS was to totally change the whole culture, they would have done it many years ago.
    And if they were to change it like Iran, it would face resistant from many others.

    And right now, PAS is only the MB in Perak. If he is bad, then we vote him out next election.

    Are we so terrify of something that is not even coming yet?

    I think right now PR should concentrate on fixing and improving, and ignore whatever instigation from others.

    These Gerakan and MCA were just trying to break PR up so they have chance the next time.

    And if PAS can’t work, it is easy to kick them out of PR.
    Nothing is impossible.

  65. #65 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:02 pm

    Thank you lakilompat, I need that site.

  66. #66 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:07 pm

    leeann

    Your question is not an unfamiliar one coming from many twenty-something Malaysians.

    I have rather interesting background on this topic even though I am a non Muslim. Perhaps you have seen that I have given a bit of my background but if you had missed, please allow me to share it.

    I studied in a local university some years back and at that time this university was completely run over by the PAS supporters controlling everything from the teaching and admin staff to student councils.

    Though the UUCA forbids political activities, no body really cared. The lecturers were card-carrying PAS members who never interested in teaching but only in spewing anti-govt venoms and initimidate moderate Muslims in the class.

    The HEP meanwhile introduced measures such as no shorts for sports even for male students, no actvities during praying time (you need to stop playing football when the prayer rings out of the speakers), no minggling of sexes, wearing of tudungs for non Muslim females for official functions and orientation week, total ban on any cultural activities (including Malay ones), no entertaintments, etc,ctc. The only thing that we ever had was sports but even in this the discrimination was based in religion.

    The student council in meantime organised ceramah after ceramah on religious matters and completely ignored the existance of students of other religion. And then there was the political ceramahs that invited the PAS leaders.

    I had many friends in my class who were PAS activist and some of them who hold high national level positions in the party. We still keep in touch and once in a while meet up for a chat.

    So having brought up in such environment, I am well aware of what PAS and their brand of Wahabbi style Islam entails.

  67. #67 by Loh on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:15 pm

    PAS is clear that it would want to make this an Islamic state, whatever that means, if it can. This would be possible when the population in the country are closer to 100% muslims, and when most of them prefer it to be Islamic state. If BN continues its rule uninterrupted, with another two million non-Malays leaving our shore in the next three decades, the population structure in the country could come close to be an Islamic state.

    When PAS takes over the influence of the Malays, and UMNO leaders are willing to follow the lifestyle of PAS leaders, and they are able to obtain 2/3 majority it would be possible that Islamic state could be formed. However, if Pakatan Rakyat would move away from corruption and prove to be a government for all Malaysians, there would not be a need to sing the tune of Ketuanan Melayu. Without the push effect, the population ratio among the various ethnic groups would not undergo drastic changes in the next few decades, even if BN and BR alternately assumes power, Islamic state would remain only a vision for PAS.

    Meanwhile DAP should accept the fact that its coalition partners had different visions, but it should be willing to pull out of the coalition when they cannot agree to a common approach to serving the people.

    The threat of Islamic state is not of immediate concern compared to Ketuanan Melayu, for non-Malays. In fact when Malaysia becomes an Islamic state, it would be through Ketuanan Melayu programmes, and there would not be many non-Malays left anyway.

  68. #68 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:17 pm

    Killer,
    Thanks.
    If I were there, I think I would have been a Aminah right now. Brain washed. It sounds boring but it was not really harming of what you experienced. I wish I could feel the fear of that but I just can’t.

    Any other bad things they did to you? I am curious.

  69. #69 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:26 pm

    leeann

    Perhaps you have not much exposure, just like our friend lakilompat.

    Ok, let me list what PAS’ Islamic state means to us:

    1. Hudud laws: Some examples

    – Brutal and uncivilised punishments such as amputations, stoning, whipping
    – Raped woman needs 5 witnesses to charge the rapist otherwise she will be prosecuted with adultery if she bears the child (punishment is stoning to death)

    2. Woman rights : well, basically it doesn’t exist.They can’t vote, work (unless when it involves only women), get educated, drive a car, go out alone, etc. They must wear veils (tudung), cover the whole body, no make up, etc.

    3. Personal liberties : No one can question the Ulama as they are the rep of the God. Only they are allowed to interpret the laws and their word is final. Personal liberties are sacrified for the good of religion (and the ruling Mullah)

    4. Democracy : there is no democracy, only theocracy. under this model you don’t question, you just follow orders. There will be no multi-party elections. Once you change to Islamic state, there is no turning back.

    5. Entertainment : Movies, songs,etc are forbidden unless it is about praising the lord or Mullahs

    6. Minority rights : they are segregated and have no social & economic status or rights. They have to pay much higher taxes but enjoy lesser rights. While there will be no right pressure to convert, there will be tremendous indirect pressure

    7. Education : No secular system but religious based one.

    8. Discrimination : While there will be no racial discrimination, but this will be replaced by even worse religious based one

    9. Others :
    – No eating or business activities during the fasting month
    – Segregation of sexes in all aspects of social life
    – No alcohol, pork. cigarettes, gambling,etc
    – TV and radio programs only religious based

  70. #70 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:27 pm

    I think Loh is right, things like that may come in the next few decades or it may not come at all.

    I dun think PAS is a major concern now, it is only their vision as Loh said.

    I have a feeling it will remain their vision forever.

    But PR will break up very soon if PAS issue continue and BN will rule back, it is just their dirty tactic.

    And when BN is back, we will face the same problems over and over again.

    Damn….n it is not fun.

  71. #71 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:42 pm

    Loh

    You are reading it wrongly.

    UMNO’s Islamisation programs are just a reaction to PAS’ more extreme brand of Wahabbism. These two parties are fighting to win the minds of muslims and based on the MRC polls the Muslims prefer a less radical brand of Islam although they would like to see Islamic values to be infused to their lives.

    This is no very different from the resurgent of religious activitism among the non Muslims too. But as long as this brand of Islam is not extreme and can work with other religions I am fine. That’s why AAB has introduced Islamd Hadhari which is a brand of enlightened Islam for the modern world.

    Even if Malaysia is 100% Muslims and ruled by UMNO, I very much doubt that it will turn into Malaynistan.

    While you are rightly concerned about Ketuanan Melayu, this is not all about Kris-waving. This merely means that the Malays’ special rights must be respected. We have lived with this for almost 4 decades and the non bumis still having their culture,language and religion preserved as nowhere else outside their native countries. The bumis had demonstrated that they are willing to share the country with their non bumi brothers and sisters.

    BTW this oft repeated story 2 million non Malays leaving the country is one without factual basis.

  72. #72 by stanlee_99 on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:45 pm

    At this time, Anwar should look for someone can be his successor even though at present he might think no body is suitable at present. The person should be capable and able to lead the party in the future election, even without Anwar existence.

    In the recent movement, he could risking his life as he is continuing jeopardise “TOP” minister position in the country, as if these people think he is the “torn” to their party.

  73. #73 by Killer on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:52 pm

    leeann

    well this is the typical reaction of many young Malaysians who had voted for PR, saying more out of wishful thinking than basing facts and logical reasoning.

    Many of these young people voted out of frustration on what they perceived as increasing Islamisation but the funny thing is PR has a party which declared objective is Iranian style Islamic state. I personally find it hard to phantom such reasoning.

    I wish I could share your optimism about PAS but why do you think they are already talking about forming the federal govt and turning the county into Malaynistan ?

    Also it is not so simple that DAP can walk out of PR. If DAP walks out, then the Perak state will fall to BN and in Penang they will not have 2/3. The same goes for Selangor.

  74. #74 by leeann on Sunday, 13 April 2008 - 11:55 pm

    Life is about taking risk anyway.
    We will dump UMNO anyway no matter what.

    I would like to see and wait like what Raja Petra predicted,

    There will be 2 parties. BN n PR.

  75. #75 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:09 am

    Killer,

    Thanks for elucidation to readers here Wahabbi style political Islam of PAS as in large swathes of other Middle Eastern Countries. Many have direct experience the oppressive policies of BN/UMNO and none, much of Islamo-facism so perhaps one can understand why the imperative of getting rid of BN, even in the process of collaborating with or strengthening PAS’s agenda is deemed quite acceptable when weighing cost and benefit. Hence the attitude “Life is about taking risk anyway” by leeann.

    Kelantan is always used as point of reference why PAS is moderate and that rejection of PAS by detractors is branded as irrational ‘Islamophobia’. This approach does not take into consideration that Kelantan is a special ‘show case’ to sell PAS’s agenda to rest of Multiracial Malysia. Just like the way the ‘show house’ (with renovation costing more than construction cost of the unit) is used in developer’s launch to sell their houses….UMNO’s racial or corrupt policies may or may not be reversible : their underlying drive is power and capitalistic. If they need to ameliorate and change their packaging for the market (voters) to accept, they may re-invent for the better since their main goal is retain power and make money like other political parties/politicians in the more modern so called first world countries. The difference in PAS’s case is that its agenda is ultimately not subject to re-invention, compromise or reversal for the simple reason that, to believers, the formation of the Almighty’s state as near to the original one as possible is a sacred mission that is immutable and unchanging and cannot be subject to compromise. All compromises are but temporary to serve and work towards the ultimate goal.

  76. #76 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:10 am

    Thanks, Jeffrey, for your very helpful and thoughtful comments here! I hope your well-reasoned and well-articulated comments will persuade many people.

    PAS’ version of Islamic State is far and away more dangerous than UMNO’s nominal version (though I think the latter’s subtle Islamisation should also be resisted). I’m afraid DAP is not well-placed to criticise MCA and GERAKAN on the issue of Islamic state, given its current co-operation with PAS in PR. But DAP’s reiteration of its commitment to a secular pluralist Malaysia at this juncture is very helpful.

  77. #77 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:16 am

    Risk is indeed inevitable, but rationality requires that we opt for a course of action that will most probably lead to maximal gains and minimal losses.

  78. #78 by HB Lim on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:23 am

    Just for the sake of argument and clarifying our thoughts, assume that when Parliament convenes in a few days, a Muslim MP stands up with a Private Bill which proposes a Constitutional amendment to abolish the civil courts and vest all judicial powers on the Syariah Courts with the consequential removal of all laws which do not conform with Islamic jurisprudence and the interpretation of the remaining applicable laws according to Islamic tenets and principles, and against all odds, he manages to convince two-thirds of Parliament and the Bill became law, do we accept that result, that law amending the constitution, as part and parcel of the game played according to the rules of democracy? Of course it will not happen at least for the foreseeable future, it is just a hypothetical question just like a law school examination question, but the same democratic and constitutional law principle is all the same applicable. The constitution can be amended by the rules contained in the constitution.

    Someone said in this thread that if the population of the non-Muslims were to dwindle to insignificance and the 99% Muslim majority wants an Islamic State, what can the insignificant minority say or do? As it is, we need only a 67% majority, not of the people but of the Parliamentarians, to be able to amend the Consttitution in whatever ways they want.

    PAS is entitled to their dreams and rights of installing an Islamic State through the democratic process according to the rules as laid down in the constitution. So is UMNO in pursuing their Malay agenda and the MCA and MIC in their aspirations to be chained in slavery to UMNO.

    What can the DAP do? As I have always said, DAP should work for a further entrenchment of the secular nature of the constitution. For example, PAS and DAP can agree that for a Islamic State to be installed, a referendum needs to be carried out and a certain majority of the peoples’ votes is necessary before the constitutional amendments to that effect can carry. That would be a more constructive way of handling the impasse.

    Assuming there is a private bill proposed for the total abolition of Chinese schools. Of course, no MP in his right mind would do that but this is also a hypothetical question posed for the sake of discussion and argument. What should DAP do if they are opposed to the bill? You just cannot stop someone from introducing a bill in a democracy. You can call him names, criticise the move till you are blue in the face but if that MP persists, the matter will still have its day to be debated in Parliament. Say that the bill has a good chance of being passed through Parliament. What do we do? We play the game by the rules – back-door dealings between MP’s, creating the mood and momentum of protests by the people through whatever means, get empirical research and evidence to support our argument against the Bill, get the support of leaders in the field of education….etc., etc. and if all else fails, through the ballot box.

    Same for the Islamic State issue. We must be clear in our mind and accept the fact that PAS has every legitimate and democratic right to aspire and work towards an Islamic State, just like the DAP is legitimately and democratically entitled to want a secular Malaysian Malaysia. We can register our disapproval or objection to an Islamic State; that is also our democratic right and we are entitled to register our opposition in the loudest way. But by being loud alone would not get us anywhere if PAS is successfully working from the ground up and surreptitiously, slowly but surely, getting the numbers to get through Parliament a change in the constitution to make their dreams come true. We have to do more than shouting. We play by the rules to thwart their efforts.

    First and foremost, we must articulate why we oppose an Islamic State. Saying that an Islamic State would sanction draconian laws like amputation etc would not be sufficient and reveals more our ignorance of Islam than knowledge of it. As far as I know, the evidentiary requirement to nail a person for a crime which invites that kind of punishment is much higher than our civil law requirement. Anyway, their counter argument to that is simple – Islamic law applies only to Muslims, therefore why are you so concerned?

    To counter arguments for an Islamic State, we need to know Islam accurately and deeply. We need to have the resources, knowledge, substance, legitimacy to enter into the arena to discuss and refute arguments for an Islamic State. Our target should not be the non-Muslims for they are with us. We should be able to address the moderate and modern Muslims and win them to our side by well-articulated and dispassionate discourses and persuasion based on a proper, accurate and legitimate interpretation of Islam without necessarily being condescending about it. We should not criticise just for the sake of criticising.

    In the meanwhile, we can start encouraging PAS to declare their stand and what they would have done if faced with the facts of Lina Joy or the predicament of the Seremban Chinese family in the latest body snatching case. What is their belief in the matter of conversion out of Islam? The Quran is silent on that. Some read the Hadith as imposing a death sentence for murtads while others place a historical context for that pronouncement and say that the death penalty does not apply outside that historical context. What is the official stand of PAS on this? How, in PAS’ view and belief, can a Muslim convert out of Islam? I, for one, do not know their stand on this issue.

    The point is that it is immediately wrong to expect and want PAS to do away with or denounce their Islamic State agenda. In any event, they would not. Would the DAP do away with their Malaysian Malaysia? Don’t expect others to do what you would not do. I am sure DAP do not demand that PAS retract their aspiration for an Islamic State; they just do not support it and just want PAS to keep quiet about it, at least for the time being. But I think the better course is to engage in a dispassionate discussion, discourse and debate with PAS about its perspectives on an Islamic State ( what the hell is that? I am sure many are still very much in the dark about what that State entails so far as PAS is concerned), and if an Islamic State as envisaged by PAS is not very different from a conscionably administered, justice-based state, whether we should or could just agree to drop the use of the term “Islamic State”, whether in their Islamic State, non-Muslims can still enjoy the civil law and the civil courts, the position of other religions and their practices and places of worship etc etc. We need all these answers in the open.

    As it is now, everytime PAS opens their mouth about an Islamic State, DAP is put on the defensive and the new opposition parties, MCA and Gerakan, jump in to confront and attempt to embarrass DAP by accusing it of supporting PAS or bluffing the people. To me, I will just ask them to spell out clearly what is it about an Islamic State they are so averse to. They jump at the mention of the words “Islamic State” and I venture to think that they have no idea what is it that they are so opposed to except for the fact that it is something Islamic or something to do with Islam. After being slaves of UMNO for so long, one would have thought that they would have got very used to anything Islamic. Anyway, we should not waste too much of our time on irrelevance or irrelevant people.

    I guess what I am trying to say at the end of it all is that we must not fear the aspiration of PAS for an Islamic State. We must not pre-judge or misjudge Islam. The best thing to do with fear is to know that which you fear about and after all the knowing, we may find that the fear was not warranted in the first place anyway. I believe our mind should be open to and walk into the Islamic world and know it well without having to embrace it.

    I want to be pragmatic – there is no way in Malaysia that we can be spared of the Islamisation process. My plan is simple – Stay put if it is bearable and get the hell out of it if is not. This is my right and nobody can take that away. But given an opportunity, I would stay back to help those who are not as fortunate to have the luxury of migrating.

    The first step to assuage our fear may just be the simple step of visiting and staying for a while in Kelantan and experience life there as a non-Muslim. I have been there and life as a non-Muslim there is not that oppresive or frightening. I would say that the general state of relationship and harmony between Muslims and non-Muslims is much better than many other parts of Malaysia that I have been to. It is a case I think of more politics and polemics against than the simple truth about Islam.

    I am not for an Islamic State, I want to make this very clear. But I don’t want to cringe or be emasculated by the fear of it either. Do we have a choice with or about Islam and Islamisation in Malaysia?

  79. #79 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:24 am

    Here we go again…the anti-PAS guy living in the UK giving us dire warnings about the future of Bolehland and of Pakatan Rakyat. Guess we are now inviting anti-Islam comments as well.

  80. #80 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:40 am

    PAS has the right to pursue whatever it wants. But if it wants to be part of PR alongside DAP, either DAP or PAS must give up some of its rights to pursue some agendas if some of DAP’s agendas are based on an ideology that clashes with PAS’s or vice versa.

    Given that DAP does not want to give up its ideology of secular pluralist democracy, it should either
    i. persuade PAS to give up its ideology, OR
    ii. withdraw from PR

    Thus, no one is asking anyone to deny PAS’ right to pursue its own agendas.

  81. #81 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:53 am

    What sort of language are you talking ?

    “PAS has the right to pursue whatever it wants.” Then, “PAS must give up some of its rights to pursue some agendas if…”.

    Does Cambridge teach this sort of doublespeak ?

  82. #82 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:56 am

    Let us use a concrete present day example as illustration of the difficuties foreseeable.

    PM Badawi proposes amendment of law to make it compulsory for non-Muslims to inform their family before converting to Islam to avoid problems in future, like tussles over the remains of a deceased convert for burial.

    What is Pakatan Rakyat’s response? Will DAP & PAS vote against or for the PM’s proposal in Parliament?

    Kelantan MB & PAS’s spiritual advisor Nik Aziz is on record for stating that it was not necessary for non-Muslims to inform their family of their wish to embrace Islam. Nik Aziz said the requirement for would-be Muslim to do so could hinder them from converting to Islam. The PAS spiritual leader said nobody should stop anyone from embracing Islam.”It is not right to impose the requirement (to inform family members) of one’s desire to embrace Islam because it concerns an individual’s right.”

    Would DAP vote the same way as PAS??? I’m sure that DAP is looking at the rights of other family members with whom the intending convert had an earlier relationship and understanding premised on him not being a muslim. PAS is however prioritizing the convert’s right over all other family members, hence dispensing the re-requirement prior consultation proposed by PM.

    So back to the question : Can DAP & PAS work within an Opposition Coalition; can they even vote the same direction on a simple issue like the one raised by the PM?
    This is just one simple issue of the many to come….

    This bears on the issues raised by Lee Wang Yen – “Given that DAP does not want to give up its ideology of secular pluralist democracy, it should either
    i. persuade PAS to give up its ideology, OR
    ii. withdraw from PR….”

  83. #83 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:58 am

    C’mon guys, wake up ! We all know that PAS cannot give up its ideology – we’ve known this for over 30 years – so why the hypocrisy of asking them to do so ? Just say what you guys really mean – DAP should withdraw from PR. Don’t give this so-called nobility of choice, when the choice is clearly not available.

  84. #84 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:59 am

    A Party X can of course pursue whatever X as a party wants to pursue.

    But if it wants to join a coalition, it must adopt the common policies/agendas of that coalition. If the common policies/agendas of that coalition clash with some of X’s own agendas Y, X can either
    1. drop those agendas Y
    2. persuade other members in the coalition to amend their common agendas/policies so that Y no longer clashes with them.
    3. stay away from the coalition.

  85. #85 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:01 am

    Kit knows better than most that by asking PAS to abandon its Islamic agenda is like asking the PAS leadership to commit harakiri. That’s why Kit is between a rock and a hard place.

    He isn’t helped by this constant harping of “PAS, please give up your agenda, or else….”.

  86. #86 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:02 am

    BTW, we are all dhimmis, so we have no right to demand anything.

  87. #87 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:04 am

    Godfather claims that my comment contains a doublespeak because he does not see the obvious distinction between a party rights when it is operating alone and its rights when it is part of a coalition.

  88. #88 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:08 am

    Do the rights of a coalition before the elections change after the elections ?

  89. #89 by HB Lim on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:08 am

    Lee Wang Yen,

    Is there a third alternative for the DAP in the situation that it faces now?

    It is to my mind not possible to persuade PAS to give up its Islamic ideology. And I think t is foolhardy for DAP to leave the PR now that it has a chance to prove that it can govern well and perhaps by so proving, it can change the perception of Muslims and Malays about it and become acceptable to and even popular among them. This I think is the sensible and realistic third alternative.

    Staying away from PAS now would steer DAP away from the kind of criticisms now levelled by MCA and Gerakan but would it help the non-Muslims in the longer run? One agenda of the DAP to thwart the achievement of a political environment whereby PAS can push further forward its Islamic State agenda has to be the persuasion of Malays and Muslims that there is really no necessity to have an Islamic State and the most effective way to do that is for the DAP to prove that they can govern as justly and conscionably on values similar to Islamic ones.

  90. #90 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:08 am

    I fully agree with Godfather that it is pretty unlikely to persuade PAS to give up its agenda of Islamic State. I’m merely enumerating some of the logically possible options. I have always argued that DAP should not form an alliance with PAS.

  91. #91 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:09 am

    Dear Godfather,

    ur onli right is to put the right party in place. The problem is we have the right state not the right federal in this chaotic time.

  92. #92 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:09 am

    If there is doublespeak now, after the elections, was there doublespeak before the elections ? Were the voters duped into making wrong choices ?

  93. #93 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:10 am

    oops…’a party’s right’

  94. #94 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:15 am

    If DAP leaves Pakatan now, it should also withdraw its support of the state governments in Perak and Selangor. It should also agree with BN a timetable for federal elections because the voters were disenfranchised at the last elections through this doublespeak, and the next time around, the voters will have a clearer picture of what they should vote for.

  95. #95 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:15 am

    PR came into existence after the election. Lim Kit Siang has repeatedly claimed that DAP did not form any alliance with PAS prior to 8/3. The only form of co-operation is an agreement to avoid 3-corner fights.

  96. #96 by novice101 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:16 am

    If one looks deep into the desperate situation the MCA and Gerakan are in, one can understand why the 2 parties are so bent on playing the race card. It is a desperate act for survival, as they are at a total loss as to what they can do to stay relevant in this new political scenario. They have no clue as to what they should and must do, so they resort to the old art of stirring fear of the Islamic state. They know this is no longer acceptable to the rakyat but they lack the courage to make a clean break with the BN.

    MCA, which is communal-based, requires an even greater effort and determination, from its leaders if it were to change course.

    Both parties know they have to change course if they want to change their destinies. To change to some new destinies they must be prepared to break off their old association with UMNO!

    To stay relevant in this new Malaysia, they should seriously study the possibility of breaking off the long, and, now, irrelevant association with UMNO. MCA and Gerakan (with invitations to the East Malaysian parties) can set up a new mutliracial party and be an alternative to the PR in the new 2-party system.

    They must be prepared to think outside the box. Demise needs not happened!

  97. #97 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:16 am

    There was an Opposition manifesto, in case you have forgotten.

  98. #98 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:21 am

    Godfather,

    Lim Kit Siang’s article on 15/3 in this blog shows that DAP did not have any relationship with PAS prior to 8/3.

    http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2008/03/15/time-to-move-on-into-the-uncharted-political-waters/
    ‘Time to move on into the uncharted political waters’

    I was asked how DAP’s support for a DAP-PKR-PAS coalition government headed by a PAS MB could square with my repeated
    assurances in ceramahs during the campaign trail that the DAP had no relationship or understanding with the PAS for the 2008 general election.

    I was speaking the truth in the election ceramahs. Up till March 8, 2008, DAP had no relationship or links of any nature with PAS in connection with the general election, as our relationship was only with PKR.

    The 2008 general election had produced a new political landscape which forced the DAP to immediately review the political situation…

  99. #99 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:22 am

    If (Lee Wang Yen’s options were to apply), it is PAS and not DAP that should stay away from coalition since agendas “Y” (Islamic State) are not part of the common policies/agendas of that coalition, if the Opposition’s Manifesto of 2008 mentioned by Godfather were the reference.

    This is because common policies/agendas of that coalition expressed in the “People’s Declaration” as common Opposition Manifesto (to which PAS was party) are entirely consistent with DAP’s secular state and pluralistic Malaysia – and not PAS’s Islamic state!

  100. #100 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:23 am

    Is there a joint PKR-DAP-PAS Opposition manifesto in the 2008 election?

    I know that there was a joint BA manifesto in 1999.

  101. #101 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:25 am

    Ideally, PAS should leave. But if DAP can’t make PAS leave, it has to leave.

  102. #102 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:28 am

    Wang Yen, see this link onthe “People’s Declaration” as common Opposition Manifesto : http://chinhuatw.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/peoples-declaration-a-common-manifesto-for-all-democratic-forces/

  103. #103 by Adolf_Napoleon on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:30 am

    Dear All,

    Have anyone gave a thought, why Malaysia cannot be like Indonesia? (since Malaysia always wanted to establish similarity with the neighbour). Religion is a very personal matter and cannot be won by forced. Obviously the God also dont like to force any followers to believe & have faith in him if is not out of the heart?

    Is just so simple thing that now it become a huge political issue. Freedom of Religion is the most basic right that any human being could have. It must be ranked No.1 ahead of all rights!

  104. #104 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:30 am

    Jeffrey is right that, in principle, PAS should leave. But it seems that asking PAS to leave PR is as hard as asking it to abandon its agenda of Islamic State.

  105. #105 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:31 am

    Pakatan Rakyat is not a must! PKR, DAP and PAS can just stay as PKR, DAP and PAS, it is still very convenience.

  106. #106 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:32 am

    But I think this common opposition manifesto does not mean that DAP allied with PAS prior to 8/3, since Lim Kit Siang has repeatedly denied such an allinace prior to 8/3.

  107. #107 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:34 am

    Is it possible to get rid the taboo of PAS and its Islamic state agenda. Malaysia is made up of Malay, can Malay seek religion freedom of their own? if not, then what’s wrong for PAS to promote/proposed Islamic state for the Malay? the PAS leaders has stated clearly that the rights of other religion are accepted. Why are we still harping the old taboos beside PAS its bittersweet memory cooperating with UMNO.

  108. #108 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:35 am

    What i mean is majority of 26 millions Malaysian, are made up of Malays.

  109. #109 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:35 am

    Godfather’s argument about ‘the coalition rights’ before and after 8/3 hinges on the existence of that coalition prior to 8/3. However, as Lim Kit Siang’s statement on 15/3 has shown, there wasn’t such a coalition before 8/3.

  110. #110 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:41 am

    What matters is whether the current opposition coalition was formed before 8/3. We can make sense of Godfather’s question ‘Do the rights of a coalition before the elections change after the elections ?’ ONLY IF the current opposition coalition was formed before 8/3.

  111. #111 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:45 am

    Why get a marriage certificate when there is no love? Everyone know this. Years down the road you get a divorce what others are going to say? What is wrong with the current arrangement?

  112. #112 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:47 am

    By the way, I have taken a look at the People’s manifesto using the link provided by Jeffrey. Is that a joint PKR-DAP-PAS election manifesto? It doesn’t seem like one.

  113. #113 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:49 am

    Forget about forming Pakatan Rakyat until the next general election.

  114. #114 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:51 am

    The only party that’s winning if Pakatan Rakyat is formed is PKR but the one sure to lose is DAP. PAS can always join UMNO.

  115. #115 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:04 am

    We are not there for a two party system yet, probably never will be. Reasonably, a three party system ( 2 democrats + 1 religious conservative a.k.a Ketuanan Melayu) will be possible after the next general election.

  116. #116 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:10 am

    Wan Azizah unveiled a five-point manifesto which focused on anti-corruption measures pushing for free and fair judicial institutions and equality for the various races in Malaysia on or about March 26, 2008 : see link http://justice4allkuantan.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/malaysiakiniopposition-leader-wan-azizah-unveils-bold-agenda/

    Regarding the date Opposition parties agreed and inked it, I’m not sure but it was likely after 8th March.

    Likelihood, there was just a loose pre-election pact of no 3 cornered fights prior to 8/3, and only after electoral victories of 8/3, Opposition parties agreed on a formal five-point manifesto as the way forward.

    It appears to me that it is PAS is the party that clearly reneged and breached the five-point manifesto when it unilaterally revived the Islamic state based on statements by Kelantan MB’s, press secretary to Pas president Roslan Shahir Mohd Shahir and PAS deputy spiritual leader Datuk Dr Haron Din, not contradicted by its top echelon leaders.

  117. #117 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:11 am

    for all those who likened pas to iran, please hold on for a while.

    can u all not see what iran did NOT have that we have ? or saudis have for that matter ?

    and forget not what ayatolah khomeni decreed,…

    do ur own research….

  118. #118 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:26 am

    I am not an UMNO or PAS member. But as a Malay Muslim, I can assure you that PAS will never drop their objective on the Islamic State. At the most, PAS can always say that it’s not mentioned, but they’ll never drop it out. Trust me. Even for me, not as a PAS member, I will never say NO to the proposed Islamic State.

    I am not provocating anyone here. As a sane muslim, one can never say NO to Hudud Laws if being asked. For us it should be the law of all the other laws. A the most, muslims will have to ensure that it’ll be implemented according to the Quran. I’m not an expert in Hudud’s Law. So I cannot really explain about Hudud’s Law.

    I’m not sure about the Hudud’s Law as proposd by PAS in terengganu few years back.

  119. #119 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:31 am

    qoute:
    # wargamalaysia Says:

    I am not an UMNO or PAS member. But as a Malay Muslim, I can assure you that PAS will never drop their objective on the Islamic State. At the most, PAS can always say that it’s not mentioned, but they’ll never drop it out. Trust me. Even for me, not as a PAS member, I will never say NO to the proposed Islamic State.

    I am not provocating anyone here. As a sane muslim, one can never say NO to Hudud Laws if being asked. For us it should be the law of all the other laws. A the most, muslims will have to ensure that it’ll be implemented according to the Quran. I’m not an expert in Hudud’s Law. So I cannot really explain about Hudud’s Law.

    I’m not sure about the Hudud’s Law as proposd by PAS in terengganu few years back.

    —what would u do *if* the proposed law becomes evidently unfair to the “others” ?

    would u standby and just wait and see ?

  120. #120 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:35 am

    dawsheng,

    I think u still living in the past. The current PAS, YB Haji Hadi Awang already made it very clear, PAS will never join back UMNO. It is not becos they never cooperate with UMNO before, but they tasted the bittersweet before.

    For the Malaysian Chinese, there’s a chinese school, for the Malaysian indian there is an indian school, for malay there used to be a jawi school, but UMNO has betrayed the malays by destroying Jawi. The real betrayal of Malays, and marginalization of the poor Malay is UMNO.

    Under UMNO, majority of malays are send to work in factory as operator earning less than 700-800 salary, Indian are forced to work as labourer in palm estates. UMNO has covered the press, radio and tv channels so that majority of the malays can be controlled.

  121. #121 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:41 am

    Muslims believe that it should be fair to ALL. From what I learn, Islam should be progressive thru times. If PAS says that we need 4 witnesses for any rape incident, I believe it shouldn’t be literally 4 good witnesses just standing to watch. When I mention progressive, I mean probably that any tested evidence will be witnessed by 4 good trustworthy witness. This is my guess. Definitely Islamic Law has to be progressively developed or interpreted.

  122. #122 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:42 am

    You all must get the facts updated, the current PAS is not the previous one during BA time. Try login Harakah to check the update. It is much better than the DAP website, there’s more debate and articles as well.

    I’ve went to the ceramah, I don’t see DAP leaders can’t sit together and work with PAS, even YB LGE attended the ceramah where Haji Hadi Awang, Mat Sabu, Ahmad Fairuz, Abd Malek all willing to spend their time to shows the Rakyat a strong alliance.

    According to Mat Sabu (not sure is a joke), when YB LGE is in detention, Mat Sabu used to cook before for YB LGE. Although both of them are from different party but both has enormous will to fight for the people.

    Our common enemy is not within it is the Barisan Nasional, or Barisan Liar. At this early stage, all should focus how to reduce federal govt. power rather than picketing that PR won’t work due to facts obtained 4 or 5 yrs ago.

  123. #123 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:49 am

    In respond to warganegara,

    that’s not true, let’s take a look at Kelantan today, is Kelantan the state with highest rape cases?

    What you are trying to interpret is BN propoganda, a mere statement to intimidate the general public to vote for Barisan Nasional.

    BN tried many cheapskate way to scare ppl. to vote for or sympathize opposition. In Johor, they even threatened to blacklist class F contractors who support or sympathize opposition. That’s why Johor remain one of the strong supporting state for BN after all these years, the people in the south been denied the rights to make the right decisions for their children.

    By the way, PAS is now matured enough and ready to accept others.

  124. #124 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:53 am

    The real “pengkhianat” bangsa is the UMNO leader. If you don’t believe look at “Islam Hadhari” that’s not even a true religion. Look at Sharizat, the lady with dyed hair, don’t even know how to wear a proper tudung, and look at Azalina who encourage Mat Rempit, worst of all, she’s the modern Malay lady don’t have to wear anything.

    Well, are these lady leaders respectable and deserve to represent the grassroots of Malays?

  125. #125 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:57 am

    qoute:
    # wargamalaysia Says:

    Muslims believe that it should be fair to ALL. From what I learn, Islam should be progressive thru times. If PAS says that we need 4 witnesses for any rape incident, I believe it shouldn’t be literally 4 good witnesses just standing to watch. When I mention progressive, I mean probably that any tested evidence will be witnessed by 4 good trustworthy witness. This is my guess. Definitely Islamic Law has to be progressively developed or interpreted.

    —however,in todays modern law, rape for example,often happened due to lack of the 3rd party around…and therefor,…only the pepertrator[s] and the victim knows what really happened. modern science, such as “crime scence investigation” can only prove the crime based on the evidence gathered,….most likely in the form of scientific papers/reports….are they admisable in court under hudud laws ?

  126. #126 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:03 am

    That’s the main setback for UMNO, I guess. As for Hudud’s Law, It depends on PAS leaderships. If they are in power and not implementing it (at the most for muslims), they’ll answerable in the afterlife. So do to all the UMNO leaders.

  127. #127 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:12 am

    qoute :
    # wargamalaysia Says:

    That’s the main setback for UMNO, I guess. As for Hudud’s Law, It depends on PAS leaderships. If they are in power and not implementing it (at the most for muslims), they’ll answerable in the afterlife. So do to all the UMNO leaders.

    —then they will have no choice but to implement it, and you will have no choice not to follow,as u hav no choice,least u go “down stair” according to the teaching…..and as u had said earlier you would follow it anyway,…and that’s the big question among us, “the others”.

    still,… do u agree with the implementation of the hudud law and ruling this country according to your “the book of books” ?

    that’s what i’m curious about…

  128. #128 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:13 am

    allasstra, I believe all that kind of modern techniques will be acceptable. Probably, they have to interpret certain section of Quran and relate to the issue. It has to be progressive.

    For example, during prophet time, there is an issue of the travel distance (by camel – approx. 60 miles) where muslim can break their fast or postpone their prayer. But nowadays, we cannot use the same distance coz’ of the modern transportations.

    But I doubt thay can change the punishment part. Even the current syariah court is wrong by imposing the fine with few thousands RM only.

  129. #129 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:15 am

    “There is no question everyone says it works “for a better future for all Malaysians” but the question is whose version of better future for all Malaysians will prevail?” Jeffrey

    Hence the need to look at what some choose to describe it as “creeping Islamization” as being a human rights issue, a process of attrition if you will which constantly threatens our fundamental liberties or what’s left of them. We should cease looking at it in Islamic terms, as an ‘Islamic state’ problem which is a polarizing and divisive issue.

    When you ask which version, you’re putting it exactly in those terms. When you say to the DAP leadership that extending cooperation to a party like PAS is a betrayal of the Party’s commitment to a secular state period, you’re putting it in exactly those same terms. The issue is not only about a secular state. What about meritocracy, equal opportunities in education, equal opportunities in employment, an independent judiciary and a return to the rule of law, police reforms and corruption etc. Who among the partners are saying that the precondition to all these is the establishment of a secular state?

    It is time to get passed the rhetoric and get on with the real issues that may bog down the administration under the new coalition. If PAS leaders are saying that they no longer give priority to their objective of an Islamic state, let’s find strength in unity where unity exists and not continue the debate on the credibility of their leaders.

    To say the DAP has no right, as one commentator has put it, to criticize MCA and Gerakan in the manner it did and to imply that DAP is no better than MCA and Gerakan when it comes to the issue of an Islamic state, is not only misleading but it is to miss the wood from the trees.

    Jeffrey has rightly placed a caveat on the statement attributed to him – wrongly in my opinion. To advocate a position that mandates the departure of the DAP from the coalition is a display of political naiveté.

  130. #130 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:18 am

    ooops correction

    “Who among the partners are saying that the precondition to all these is the establishment of a secular state?”

    should read “Islamic state”.

  131. #131 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:22 am

    As I believe it will be fair, definitely I’ll support it, but I won’t support it blindly. I’ll have to make sure that it’s being interpreted and implemented truthfully. I’ll not follow it blindly. To date, I’ve yet to study in detail about hudud law. Probably I just have some rough ideas.

    Actually hudud law is just part of our life as a muslim. Just a small part actually.

  132. #132 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:23 am

    quote :# wargamalaysia Says:

    allasstra, I believe all that kind of modern techniques will be acceptable. Probably, they have to interpret certain section of Quran and relate to the issue. It has to be progressive.

    For example, during prophet time, there is an issue of the travel distance (by camel – approx. 60 miles) where muslim can break their fast or postpone their prayer. But nowadays, we cannot use the same distance coz’ of the modern transportations.

    But I doubt thay can change the punishment part. Even the current syariah court is wrong by imposing the fine with few thousands RM only.

    —yes,i know your current opinion on the law of book-of-books , but i want to know if u agreed that the law of book-of-books applied to those who didnt follow the book,…and what would u do if those laws of the book-of-books were imposed to those that didnt follow the book….forcecibly…

  133. #133 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:28 am

    Hudud law is just the criminal law. To impose it on the non-muslim, I really have to check and do some research.

  134. #134 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:35 am

    quote:
    # wargamalaysia Says:

    Hudud law is just the criminal law. To impose it on the non-muslim, I really have to check and do some research.

    —well,wargamelaysia,….research on it and get back to me,…and give us too,an imformed estimate of how many people out there that think like u,..

    should be interesting….

    btw,…if u are really opinionated,u wouldnt have to do a research 1st…u can say it in a hart beat.

  135. #135 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:37 am

    From what I heard, PAS mentions that it shall be imposed to Muslims only. But I can’t confrimed whether it has to that way if the formed government is a muslim government. Probably yes probably no.

    Personally I don’t mind if it being imposed only to muslims. My personl opinion only, as I believe it’s the best for muslims.

  136. #136 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:39 am

    undergrad2,

    I didn’t say that DAP had no right to criticise MCA and GERAKAN on the Islamic State issue.

    I said that DAP was not well-placed (i.e. not in a good position) to criticise….,given its current co-operation with PAS.

  137. #137 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:44 am

    I didn’t attribute the view that DAP should leave PR to Jeffrey. I know that his view is that PAS should leave PR. I also know that he doesn’t share my view that DAP should leave PR.

    By the way, I agree with Jeffrey that, in principle, PAS (not DAP) should leave PR. However, given that it is practically unlikely for DAP to make PAS leave PR, DAP should leave PR (unless it can do the unlikely thing of making PAS leave PR).

  138. #138 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:45 am

    quote:
    # wargamalaysia Says:

    From what I heard, PAS mentions that it shall be imposed to Muslims only. But I can’t confrimed whether it has to that way if the formed government is a muslim government. Probably yes probably no.

    Personally I don’t mind if it being imposed only to muslims. My personl opinion only, as I believe it’s the best for muslims.

    —still havent answered my question…

    WHAT WOULD U DO IF THEY ARE FORCED ONTO “THE OTHERS”

    would stand up against it or just step back and relax,cos it’s not ur problem,,…

    and that’s “our” main concern….

    will there be a protection from “the tyrany of the majority” ???…

  139. #139 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:46 am

    allasstra, honestly, in my heart, I truthfully it’s the best for me and other muslims. Hudud law is more on preventive.

    Not to scare you allasstra. I believe if anyone can interpret and implement it truthfully, 99.99% of us muslims will support it as we believe in our heart that it should be fair to all.

    It’s not that easy to be implemented as they really have to study it thorughly.

  140. #140 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:47 am

    …truthfully believe it’s the best….

  141. #141 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:52 am

    If they can prove to me that it has to be imposed to non-muslims, definitely I’ll support it but still they have to be fair. If it’s not MANDATORY to be imposed to non-muslims, I will not support it to be imposed to them, if non-muslims do not want it.

  142. #142 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:53 am

    quote:

    # wargamalaysia Says:
    allasstra, honestly, in my heart, I truthfully it’s the best for me and other muslims. Hudud law is more on preventive.

    Not to scare you allasstra. I believe if anyone can interpret and implement it truthfully, 99.99% of us muslims will support it as we believe in our heart that it should be fair to all.

    It’s not that easy to be implemented as they really have to study it thorughly.

    —oh,…ok i see it now. u had clearly stated that u would support the application of hudud law onto “the others”…even if it was done by means of force…

    thank you for your information…and have a nice day…

  143. #143 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:57 am

    can I say that you are a “muslim”, allasstra?

  144. #144 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:58 am

    can I say that you are a “muslim”, allasstra?

    —nope,..

  145. #145 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:02 am

    okey. Read my earlier comment – If they can prove to me that it has to be imposed to non-muslims, definitely I’ll support it but still they have to be fair. If it’s not MANDATORY to be imposed to non-muslims, I will not support it to be imposed to them, if non-muslims do not want it.

    All law is done by means of force, even civil law.

  146. #146 by leeann on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:06 am

    I read Quran, n actually it is pretty good for your soul. Just like any religion.

    If one day the sky falls apart n there is hudud law, if u do nothing wrong, there is nothing to be afraid of.

    How many of u actually read a Quran before?

  147. #147 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:12 am

    wargamalaysia,

    in my question,there aint no [if]s, and no [when]s

    needless to say,u had answered my question well.

    again,thank you for your participation.

  148. #148 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:15 am

    # leeann Says:

    I read Quran, n actually it is pretty good for your soul. Just like any religion.

    If one day the sky falls apart n there is hudud law, if u do nothing wrong, there is nothing to be afraid of.

    How many of u actually read a Quran before?

    —and bible and torah…

  149. #149 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:20 am

    I see. The [if]s and [when]s becoz’ hudud law is derived from the Quran and to date I’ve yet to learned what the Quran stated about the implementation part.

    Anyway, take good care allasstra.

  150. #150 by wargamalaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:22 am

    I believe you guys are not in malaysia, coz it’s 4.21am now!!!

  151. #151 by leeann on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:39 am

    warga,
    we r not.
    we r on the moon.
    lol

  152. #152 by ChinNA on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:38 am

    Killer,you made a good point.

    I have mixed up the concept of Islamic state and Islamic nation.

    However, on further thought, I still believe that Malaysia will become an Islamic state, albeit a politicised version. Having said that, I don’t believe that it will remain an Islamic state forever because I don’t expect an Islamic state to be a sustainable entity.

    There was an lesson in history. What started as a Christian state, is today a secular state. This proves that any ‘religious’ state is not sustainable on the current form of this planet.

    Today, we have to face the challenges of losing our freedom in the future. I will oppose Islamic state it takes away religious freedom if implemented 99.99%.

    A secular state based on broad principles of equality, common morals and justice is better. This gets us back closer to DAP’s model.

  153. #153 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:23 am

    Warga,
    What if I don’t want to be a muslim anymore?
    I am a Malay but I feel that Islam has made me a victim simply because I am a Malay.

    To Malays, why have you let these mullahs trample your rights? Are we that stupid to be told what to do?

    I am so disappointed that you let go of our rights to freedom, to speak and to ask questions.

    Sometimes all thee “hoohaa” about Malays and Islam makes me feel alienated. I don’t belong here nor there.

    You see that the Malays have rich and beautiful culture but from the way I see it, these mulllahs are more than happy to destroy them. Just like Killer said during his uni experience.

    Look guys, we are not Arabs and we will never be. We are the Malays who are known to be kind, gentle, always humble and smart. So why do we need to listen to these mullahs.

    Some try to say that look at this Malays Muslim engineer or doctor or scientist and he has the right to condemn a secularist Malay simply because he and most Malays think that he has the right to do so.

    Come on Malays, look at what we would have become in 20-50 years? The Malaynistan and Arabisation and Islamisation is creeping deep into our minds that today it is not acceptable for Malays not to jawab salam or go to Friday prayers.

    Most wil look down on that individiual especially women who did not wear the tudung. The women’s right here is clearly denied but still nobody makes noise.

    Well actually there is a lot more I wanna to say as a Malay but I will conclude my comment as : The Malays have truly lost their identity. It is not wrong to be Muslims but it is WRONG not to question and challenge something that would make us look very stupid!

  154. #154 by allasstra on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:35 am

    *note to “the others”

    [civil laws ARE laws of men[women],and therefore subjectionable to question/debate/ridicule……]

  155. #155 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:27 am

    Dear znita07,

    Unfortunately, as a Malays “religion freedom” are forbidden; hence, you have less option. Otherwise, you will be another Lina Joy.

    The ladies UMNO Exco Azalina and Sharizat are two very distinct product of Islam Hadhari (moderate islam), not compulsory to wear tudung, or can dye the hair & put a plain cloth rather than the complete tudung. Even Rafidah Aziz was not wearing tudung most of the time. BN using this weaknesses to go against PAS, therefore, PAS should be aware of this point.

    Long time ago when Parasmeswara set foot on Malacca, the Malays are not Islam, it is after a few years, when Islam started to spread, when the empire has grown. The thing is, once the Sultan has declared Islam as the primary religion, it will be hard to change or get rid of it, meaning all Malays must practice & defend Islam.

    Whereas for Chinese & Indian migrants taoism, buddism, hinduism, muslim, christianity, confuciusm are already long established and common practice depend on locality. There’s no record in buddhism as the sanskrit did not forbid individuals from practicising other religion. Buddhism is not a religion, it is enlightment “the one who attained great wisdom”

    Hence, majority of the chinese are allowed to choose their religion freely without any constraints.

    Those who believe & pray spirit in a statue are taoism, a separate branch from buddhism. If you notice during “Qing Ming” chinese are burning the effigy like car, petrol station, etc for ancestral worship. It is taoism, to remind & acknowlege there’s deities above, ancestor above, and evil etc.

  156. #156 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:37 am

    ///civil laws ARE laws of men[women],and therefore subject to question/debate/ridicule/// -allasstra, hence, may I add, they are subject to ‘sovereignty’ of men[women] making laws through their elected representatives within the institution of Parliament (legislature) subject to interpretation by judges within another institution called the judiciary that we believe ought to be ‘independent’ from both Legislature and the Executive (government). Within this scheme of governance, there is separation of powers, hence check and balance against human tendency to abuse power by those in power.

    Religious laws by definition not laws of men [women]. Their source is from the Almighty and hence subject to His sovereignty divined only by those few “learned” scholars and clerics familiar with the sacred holy books, whose interpretation then cannot be subject to question/debate/ridicule….In the premises, Parliament has no ultimate relevance, a Council of learned Mullahs and Clerics familiar with divine laws would be qualified to do the job of both promulgating and interpreting these laws, their applicability and ramifications in relation to both Muslims and Non Muslims….The concept of separation of power between 3 branches of government (Legislature, Executive and Judiciary) to prevent abuse of power also ceases to be relevant…..

    For the governed, (1) piety – and the Hereafter – are more important than (2) material and economic development and the present (should both 1 and 2 clash), and religion being Way of Life governs every aspect of it completely and fully, there being absolutely no separation, as I said before, between morality and the public law, public sphere and private sphere (hence the justification for enforcement of public morality by morality police)…..

    What PAS stands for & DAP, represent in each an amalgam of values, interconnected in a seamless way, one logically leading to the other, mutually exclusive of the other and that is what the Clash of civilization is all about, so explained Samuel Huntington in his book the Clash of Civilization, a struggle for mastery between the two systems of thought or ideologies if you will as being played out in large swathes of the world leading to conflicts, and beginning here too in our own Homeland, starting with the arguments between DAP and PAS…..

  157. #157 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:44 am

    Good morning to those who resides in Malaysia and Good Night to those Oxford and Cambridge residents and LSE too.

    The Subject matter in bloglimkitsiang was and i think is still “MCA/GERAKAN TO STOP BEING HYPOCRITES” . but as usual, we , including myself , tend to stray away from the subject matter.

    Since, straying is genetic, i too will stray a little.

    ISLAM IS A RELIGION. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ISLAM IS NON OTHER THAN BAGINDA NABI MOHAMMAD S.A.W (pbuh) THROUGH DIVINE INTERVENTION.

    saudara nik aziz , hadi , abdullah badawi, are muslims. they are not ISLAM.

    BESIDES THE HOLY KORAN, THERE ARE THE HADITHS , books written on the teachings and way of life of Baginda Nabi Mohammad s.a.w. ( pbuh ).

    lets make clear on this matter.

    HOLY KORAN IS THE WORD OF GOD. period. NO SELF PROFESSED INTERPRETATION IS NEEDED, AND THERE ARE 114 SURAS ( CHAPTERS ) . THE OPENING CHAPTER ” AL- FAATIHAH ” is very short indeed and very simple . GOD IS GRACIOUS AND MOST MERCIFUL. PRAISE BE TO GOD. GOD JUDGES US. WE WORSHIP GOD, WE SEEK GOD’S HELP. PLEASE GUIDE US TO THE STRAIGHT PATH.

    now , i had stated that niz aziz, hadi, abdullah badawi are muslims.
    they are not in any position to implement ISLAM as they so wish. they can be practisng muslims, or non practising muslims.

    what is practising muslims and what is non practising muslims?

    it is a name. only a name. muslims try to emulate the ways and styles of living of BAGINDA NABI MOHAMMAD S.A.W. (pbuh). it is almost IMPOSSIBLE, because THE HOLY PROPHET IS AN ANNOITED ONE. and it was 1429 years ago.!!!!. i hope it is clear.

    Prophets are special human beings, with Gifts of God in performing miracles and kindness, humility, integrity, beyond the level of muslims and non muslims.

    back to 2008. lets be real. the motor vehicles have replaced the camels as the main mode of transport. airconditioning is a comfort even in certain mosques, whereas, the first mosque built by BAGINDA NABI MOHAMMAD S.A.W. (pbuh) WAS MADE OF MUD, AND THE SIZE IS NO LARGER THAN A SINGLE STORY HOUSE. to muslims scholars, i would like to pose a question here. How would the kiblat be pointed than AT THE FIRST MOSQUE ? THATS WHY, I AM EMBARASSED WHEN ABDULLAH BADAWI BUILT A MOSQUE THAT COST RM300 MILLION, AS REPORTED. ( i dont know the real cost). abdullah badawi, it is not necessary.

    so, the point is, i would not be having sleepless nights to worry about pas, umno, Implementing Islamic laws and hudud laws, till muslims ARE NOT STRAYED FROM THE RIGHT PATH.

    SUICIDE BOMBING IS NOT ISLAM.

    IN ISLAM IS SUBMISSION TO THE WILL OF ALLAH SWT.
    SURAH AN-NISAA PART 4, VERSE 78.'” wherever you are, death will find you, even if you are in towers build up strong and high”‘.

    it is not a difficult explaination, it is so very simple. not all muslims will go to heaven. but like all human beings, we did strayed. once and more than once.

    Back to the subject matter. YES. I AGREED THAT MCA AND GERAKAN ARE HYPOCRITES IN THIS MATTER OF ISLAMIC STATE.
    YES. I THINK THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS TO CAUSE A SPLIT BETWEEN PAS AND DAP, WHEN THEY WERE IN CAHOOT WITH UMNO. YES.I HOPE THAT PAKATAN RAAYAT WOULD ERADICATE CORRUPTION , ABUSE OF POWER, WHICH DOES NOT CONFORM TO ISLAM.

    and until we see a better Malaysia for all Malaysians, we are putting the cart before the horse. and if nik aziz, najib, hadi, abudllah,sabu, and so called leaders are still trying to IMPLEMENT ISLAMIC LAWS, i humbly hope they asked ALLAH SWT FIRST. INSYAH ALLAH. ( the will of God ).

    thank u. muslims are servant of God. not masters of others.

  158. #158 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:45 am

    whats up now modeator?

  159. #159 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:45 am

    moderator has Islam phobia!

  160. #160 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:49 am

    MISS MODERATOR. MR.MODERATOR.

    please provide a guideline as an act of being transparent what subject matters are taboo to you madam/sir.

    thank you very much.

  161. #161 by ALLAN THAM on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:57 am

    Is any one really believe PAS will go for Hudud law? Will there get sufficient 2/3 votes in Parliament to pass the Law? So this MCA guys just want to fool those common folks. If non Malay are supporting PAS,as it has shown in the 8.3.08 election,do you think PAS still need to push for Islamic State? No. PAS are very happy now, at least after the 8.3.2008. There were comments made by PAS’s leaders which have been very moderate and without any Race and Religious tone, but the main stream media are not publishing them. The Star remain the mouth piece of MCA leaders, who still chose to play the racial and religious cards.

    Folks please be careful, don’t fall into their trap. Do fall into the Hudud Law trap as claim by the MCA guys, who are remain reluctant to change their attitude.

    All BA components parties please face up to the reality, understand what the Rakyat want. Stop the corruption, stop the wastefulness, stop your arrogance ( your leader has admitted it), and serve the rakyat.

  162. #162 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 8:55 am

    Today is Black 14 too bad today is my weekly close, else i will drive down to KL for Anwar’s gathering. Anyone going there please post some pictures, ok!

    I just attended the Penang forum yesterday at Disted College, it was fun, certain points are not mentioned or discussed. You can view the NGO speakers at my sites, jbozz23.proboards105.com

  163. #163 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:09 am

    “Is any one really believe PAS will go for Hudud law? Will there get sufficient Is any one really believe PAS will go for Hudud law? Will there get sufficient 2/3 votes in Parliament to pass the Law? the Law?” – ALLAN THAM

    PAS does not need 2/3 majority votes in Parliament to pass Hudud.

    This is because Hudud governing creation and punishment of offences by Muslims (like Khalwat) is Islamic law authorized by Federal Constitution to be promulgated by state government/state legislative assemblies as per 9th Schedule State List II – and not by Parliament ie legislative assembly at Federal level.

    So if state government or state legislative assembly is controlled by PAS majority it can pass Hudud as law (as it did in Kelantan & Terengganu when latter was under its control). Such a law though passed is not enforced because BN Federal Government does not support enforcement on grounds that it conflicts with secular Penal Code applicable to both Muslims and non muslims. Federal Govt does not oppose enforcement of other syariah offences like Khalwat made by the State governments and so these are enforced though not uniformly as regards how active or inactive the enforcement.

  164. #164 by Toyol on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:15 am

    Why do we still dwell on religion in the 22nd century?! If we continue with our pre-occupation with religion, where will we be economically in the years from now. Why can’t we accept that religion is one’s choice and not something that can be imposed on.

    WE must move away from this and focus on development and a better standard of living for all. Religion only strives to tear us apart and that’s has always been a BN trump card. MCA knows it is already irrelevant. Come next election, lets bury them forever.

  165. #165 by lchk on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:25 am

    Godfather wrote:

    “Here we go again…the anti-PAS guy living in the UK giving us dire warnings about the future of Bolehland and of Pakatan Rakyat. Guess we are now inviting anti-Islam comments as well.”

    Eh, I thought this anti-PAS guy stated that he spends half his time in Singapore?

  166. #166 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:28 am

    PAS aims to be part of Federal Govt and to influence as first step coalition partners (with Anwar/PKR on its side) to support changing Federal Constitution to provide that where there is conflict between Syariah state laws and Federal secular, the former will prevail. PAS banks on the premise that UMNO in Opposition will not oppose any amendment to promote primacy of Islam. This dove tails with its position that Islamic laws including Hudud as applicable to Muslims only will be implemented in only states of majority Muslim population in which state assemblies are controlled or otherwise influenced by PAS. As Muslim population increases more in all states, until it is a clear majority of over 80%, then it would advocate a blanket change of the Constitution to be superseded by Islamic Sharia Constitution with certain provisions to safeguard minority non muslim rights. Because PAS’s first step and prerequisite to advance its long term agenda is to put a foot into Govt at Federal level, PAS is willing– for time being – to be moderate to win Non Muslim confidence and electoral support, of which Kelantan and Kedah will be showcased. Other strategies are to have 2nd echelon leaders reaffirm every now and then the Islamic state agenda, with 1st tier leaders talking about more about common themes of accountability, good governance etc to push BN out, and to justify this move, allay its detractors’ concerns by saying and distingusihing the talk about Islamic state is merely for Party’s purposes and not for Pakatan Rakyat’s purposes of planning for the take over of Federal government. A good strategy I would say.

  167. #167 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:31 am

    Hello all, don’t anti-pas, try go to their site, understand them, in Malaysia majority of the ethnic group are Malays, now, i don’t see UMNO can give Malay wisdom, that’s the result u have Pak Lah misdemeanour, RM 4.6 Billions bailout, Angkasawan, Submarines & shukoi jet, PGCC, Iskandar project. Sharizat wasting rakyat money in the election campaign inviting singers & artist & rich cooperate figure like Tony Fernandes CEO of Air Asia to rally rich people votes. All these, only PAS can help make Malays strong by injecting moral values, and religion wisdom.

    Haji Hadi Awang has stressed very clear, that Islam will not be used to control others religion, it is others ppl. rights to practice religion, that’s their rights.

  168. #168 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:44 am

    That is why PAS is patient and is assured of success in its agenda because:-

    1. UMNO’s behaviour outlined by Lakilompat will help swing Malay – and some Non Malay – support to it;

    2. Its sympathisers are already ensconced in civil service, unifiormed services, tertiary and other establishments, and infrastructurewise (Islamic banking & Insurance) all in place due to TDM’s Islamisation of 20 over years;

    3. The Federal Constitution of which PAS’s lawyers have studied through and through have gaps and provisions allowing its agenda to be implemented piece meal;

    4. Because religion is part of majority cultural identity, most of majority race will not resist and moderate Malays will not openly resist but merely leave the country if they wish;

    5. Moderate face is shown now but slowly changed, pace dependent on circumstances and how much power it slowly harnesses.

    I would say based on several advantages, its victory is almost assured, it is only a question of time, how long and when only and not so much of “if”.

  169. #169 by helpless on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 10:06 am

    All human being who believed in God shall understand that any argument on superiority of any religion will definitely meet a dead-lock.

    The argument will definitely create more harm than good. Any nation leader shall have the wisdom in neutralize any argument on religion issues eventhough individual might have the preference of choice in their belief.

    Malaysia has been voted for model-country on its people with multiracial life style but not its corrupted politic. This is much attributed to the success of its “social contract”. It will be much regretted if it turns into extremist commentary.

    Instead of turning corruption politic into “efficient people wealth development”, it just continues to go backward sad to say.

  170. #170 by gofortruth on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 10:25 am

    Uncle Lim
    I feel some thing bad is brewing. It all looks to me some one is trying very hard to cook up racial discords either by racial issue or religious issue to pit the Malays against the non Malays. And I think you know who. If he can succeed in stirring up any kind of unrest, it will be used as an excuse to invoke ISA on all the PR leaders & hence turn the whole political table.
    So beware of this old fox and not fall into his deadly trap.He is using even the most unexpected people to help to achieve this end.
    PR should keep promoting a Malaysian Malaysia & stay clear of this racial & religious trap.
    Take care uncle & PR!

  171. #171 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 10:30 am

    Hi helpless,

    Do you know the problem is not with Islam, but it is with the interpretation & uses of Islam by certain individual to enrich their family pocket, such as the infamy UMNO in Malaysia. Looks how rich these Malay leaders are in power while majority of the Malays are been marginalized, while they spent billionth of dollars to their childrens, Mokhzani (Tun Dr Mahathir) Kamaludin (Pak Lah), Khairy (Pak Lah) everyone will praise them that they practice good islam. Islam does not marginalized its people, it is the manipulation of Islam to benefit these UMNO leaders that make majority of Malays vote swing in the GE12.

    You’ve to understand, all religion are supreme to their followers, hence do not marginalize the Islam for been the only supreme religion, although it may sounds supreme in non Islam eyes. Islam allowed and respect the rights of other religion.

  172. #172 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 10:49 am

    Dear helpless,

    PAS is not arguing abt. Islam supremacy, it is trying to unite the Malays by establishing an Islamic state, such action will enable injection of WISDOM to them, not CORRUPTIONS, IGNORANCE, and DENIAL the current UMNO manifest to the Malays.

    Would u prefer Corruptions, paying higher to these “Islamic Betrayal – UMNO leaders” rather than a solid Islamic state where laws & orders are in place to protect the welfare of all the religions in Malaysia?

  173. #173 by Bigjoe on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 11:43 am

    I don’t think anyone is fooled to believe that DAP will trade power/benefits for Islamic state. The most cynical could believe that individuals within DAP could do it but as a party, no one is that dumb because it would ultimately lead to the end of DAP eventually.

    However, at issue that Ong brothers and Gerakan is trying to do is create doubt that DAP is capable of dealing with PAS if they get an advantage over PKR – not an impossible but an unlikely event.

    The truth is if you ask Malay Muslims while majority want an Islamic state, overwhelming majority don’t want Hudud either. UMNO knows this which is why it challenges PAS to implement Hudud all the time. So the truth is what Malay Muslim in this country want is nothing to do with traditional idea of Islamic state.

    DAP tactic should question of Islamic state comes up again and strong is to respond that PAS have to ask whether Malaysian would vote for hand-chopping, stoning etc… The answer is no and will always be so…

  174. #174 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 11:56 am

    lakilompat,

    Please dont try to brainwash ‘helpless’ and others who read this blog that only solid Islamic state will ensure laws and orders (anyway, how many on earth has done this successfully??? but failure in the name of their God) and to protect the welfare of all the other religions in Malaysia!!! other religions dont require Islam to protect them, the true God will prevail and all others will parish by end time!!! why not let other religions be the state religion and to protect the welfare of Islam instead???

  175. #175 by sotong on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 11:59 am

    Decades of narrow, short sighted and damaging poltics of religion had done a lot of permanent and long term damage to a multi religious country…..it is the responsibility of Muslim leaders at all levels to stop using religion for narrow and damaging political purposes.

    As politics affect everyone life – with most Malays actively in politics, one cannot say that non Malays should not interfere…..this is arrogant and intolerant to the extreme.

  176. #176 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:11 pm

    PAS may have its Islamic agenda, but it is in no hurry to push for it. It realises two things: (1) it cannot achieve it in present circumstances because on a federal level, it isn’t having sufficient support – even from the Muslims; and (2) if it is patient enough, the demographics for the future would suggest that the Muslim proportion of the population would grow to 90 pct in another 50 years. In short, PAS can afford to wait.

    For the time being, there are of course the usual rumblings at the second echelon of PAS leaders about Islamic state and hudud; the top echelon tries very hard to mollify the non-Muslims in order to preserve their “sympathy” support. These rumblings get played up by the mainstream press and by MCA and Gerakan – obviously to prey on the fears of the non-Muslims.

    DAP is being cornered by its hardline supporters – the extreme view being that it should get out of Pakatan Rakyat. The more moderate view is that it should stay within Pakatan Rakyat but continue to be vigilant and continue to fight for non-Muslim rights.
    What will Kit do ?

    My sense is that he will take the moderate path, and agree to “park” the Islamic vs secular issue for a while. I think he senses that we are at the crossroad where we have a chance to change the corrupt system of governance once and for all – and that if we succeed, and that even if DAP subsequently takes its familiar role an Opposition barking dog, then at least a system of check and balance would be in place for future generations.

    Prioritisation is the keyword – and I think Kit knows it. He will continue to bark at PAS but he will not put a gun to their heads.

  177. #177 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:21 pm

    The only sensible insurance policy that the non-Muslims have in Bolehland is that the Muslim support must continue to be “split” between UMNO, PAS and PKR. If UMNO decides to “pakat” with PAS 50 years from now, then the hope is that there is a shift of moderate Muslim support for PKR to maintain the status quo.

    The reality is that if the vast majority of Muslims want an Islamic state, then it is going to happen at some point in the future and no amount of protection under the constitution can be enshrined forever.

  178. #178 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:22 pm

    The issue relating to Islamic state is not just confined to hudud, chopping hand and stoning. It is also related to the fundamental rights of non Muslims (including holding positions of authority and to supervise Muslims) and the practice of democracy in an Islamic state.

    Those supportive of Islamic state (or doesn’t mind Islamic State) must provide examples, both past and present, where Islamic governments accord equal rights to non Muslims and have manifested good governance and democratic principles. When asking for examples, I am acutely aware that many secular states too have committed wrong. However, we can make right the wrong in secular states through democratic process. My question is can we make right an Islamic state that has gone wrong? Can an Islamic state be criticised and changed once it is established. Would the proponent of Islamic states use the argument that Islamic states are established by God and therefore they are beyond reproach and are unchangeable?

  179. #179 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:25 pm

    Dont play play with religions!!! just let the people decides what they want to believe in!!! ultimately, it is between the Creator and His creations. We should not play God or thinking that we are “helping” God to eliminate sinners/sinful creatures from this earth!!! we can preach, but ultimately, it is up to the individual to decide whether he/she wanted to repent and acknowledge God.

  180. #180 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:31 pm

    It’s worth remembering that when DAP left BA in 2001 (or 2002, not exactly sure about the date), it was PAS that had breached the joint 1999 BA manifesto when it had began to publicly pursue its agenda of Islamic State. In principle, PAS (not DAP) should leave BA, given that it was PAS that breached the 1999 BA joint election manifesto. But why did DAP leave eventually? Because principles did not prevail. DAP couldn’t make PAS leave evan though it was PAS that was on the wrong side. Thus, it had to leave.

    That’s why I say that DAP should leave PR this time round if it cannot make PAS leave (the latter is, as Godfather says, pretty unlikely).

    By the way, I have never said that I spent half my time in Singapore. I spent most of my life in Malaysia, a few years in Singapore, and a few years in UK. I’m returning in a few months’ time.

  181. #181 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:32 pm

    Instead of perpetuating a debate on whether secular is better than Islamic or vice versa, can we not “park” this issue for a while ? Can we not spend the next 4 short years to see if all the malpractices of the past can be corrected to ensure good governance, transparency, integrity and accountability ?

  182. #182 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:47 pm

    I think it is not so straight forward to assume that since majority in Malaysia are Muslims, Islamic state is a natural course of event. First, not all Muslims are natural supporters of Islamic state. Second, as non Muslims, we too have our role and responsibility to argue, to convince and to challenge the wisdom of setting up an Islamic state.

  183. #183 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 12:50 pm

    Lee Wang Yen:

    It is debatable as to whether it was PAS’ fault that led to the DAP withdrawing from Barisan Alternatif in 2001. In any case, that’s history. Fast forward to 2008, and you will find that the situation is eerily similar – all parties agreed prior to elections to work as one (any assertion that Pakatan was formed AFTER the elections and that therefore there were no agreed “arrangements” BEFORE the elections is pure naivete) and having achieved significant success on March 8th, the parties now want to press for their individual agendas.

    This time around, the rakyat voted for the Opposition. As someone said in another thread, the rakyat would have voted for a chimpanzee if it had stood against a BN candidate.

    Hence in my analogy in another thread, the 3 Pakatan parties are at a public dining table, and it is not right to ask PAS to leave the table as it has not said that it cannot work with DAP. What makes the DAP think that it owns the dining table ? So the logical thing to do if DAP feels so much angst against PAS is for the DAP to withdraw. There is no need to apportion blame to justify the DAP’s withdrawal from Pakatan. The DAP can come up with the same reasons as it did in 2001 – but this time they will be cheating the rakyat who voted for change.

  184. #184 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:01 pm

    If the matter come to head, it is PKR who needs to decide who should leave PK. Between PAS and DAP, who would PKR choose?

  185. #185 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:05 pm

    Lim kit Siang has said at least twice in this blog that there DAP did not ally with PAS before 8/3.

    DAP has the right to ask PAS to leave PR given that PAS has begun to talk about their aspiration for an Islamic State since this agenda violates the common principles in the people’s manifesto (IF PAS endorsed it) Godfather referred to earlier (though this is not a joint PKR-PAS-DAP election manifesto, PAS is bound by it IF it endorsed it and IF that was the basis of the formation of PR).

    If the conditionals above are not true, DAP has no right to demand PAS to leave. It can only try to make it leave by persuading it or trying to get PKR to force it out (these are merely logical possibilities – they are highly unlikely to be successful). Thus, despite the availability of several logically possible options, the only viable option is for DAP to leave PR.

  186. #186 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:06 pm

    TTDI_KL said:

    “I think it is not so straight forward to assume that since majority in Malaysia are Muslims, Islamic state is a natural course of event.”

    That is absolutely correct. This is in effect the best insurance policy for the non-Muslims. The most likely scenario where the vast majority of Muslims would vote for an Islamic state is when the country goes to the dogs – an economic catastrophe so severe that it puts the country back several decades, and people see their wealth disappear before their very eyes. At the same time, they see evidence that the country’s wealth had been plundered by a few of the elite ruling party, and the money transferred to Australia or the UK. That’s when they are the most vulnerable towards religion.

  187. #187 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:07 pm

    oops…strike out ‘there’ on the first line

  188. #188 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:13 pm

    Lee Wang Yen and Dawsheng have been very consistent in wanting DAP to leave Pakatan, and to withdraw support for the state governments of Perak and Selangor. Let me repeat my posting earlier, and perhaps elicit their reply to my questions:

    “Instead of perpetuating a debate on whether secular is better than Islamic or vice versa, can we not “park” this issue for a while ? Can we not spend the next 4 short years to see if all the malpractices of the past can be corrected to ensure good governance, transparency, integrity and accountability ?”

  189. #189 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:27 pm

    Dawsheng and I think that DAP should not be in a coalition alongside PAS – thus DAP should not join PR (if PR has not been finalised) or should leave PR.

    Jeffrey also thinks that DAP should not be in a coalition alongside PAS – thus he thinks that PAS should leave PR or should not join PR.

    If the question is whether DAP should leave PR, Jeffrey differs with me. On the question of whether DAP should be in a coalition alongside PAS, Jeffrey, Dawsheng, and I share the same view.

  190. #190 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:34 pm

    Just answer my questions in the posting prior to yours.

  191. #191 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:38 pm

    Some of Jeffrey’s comments in this and other threads have already answered Godfather’s question. I think Jeffrey’s comments on the greater danger of empowering the Islamo-facist compared to the danger of BN’s inefficiency, corruption, malpractices etc are particularly relevant.

  192. #192 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:40 pm

    So the answer is, unfortunately, ‘no’, because PAS’s agenda is a greater threat.

    For detailed reasons, please see Jeffrey’s and my previous comments on the greater danger of PAS’ agenda.

  193. #193 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:46 pm

    Dear Godfather

    I am sorry to say that the view that your are advocating (ie “parking” the Islamic state issue) is only promoting the “Ostrich-in-the-sand” mentality and prosponing the Day of Reckoning when DAP has to face this decide on this issue one way or another. There is no hiding or avoiding.

    I had said earlier than an alliance based on shared / common objectives are only tenable if these parties are in the Opposition where they can spend their time sniping at the ruling govt.

    But once you are the ruling party, this alliance no longer tenable as you need to make decisions on daily, or even hourly basic. When you have parties with such divergent political ideologies, basing upon whose interests or aims will these decisions will be taken ?

    That it is easy for PAS to sing the song of human rights and democracy before the GE as it costs them nothing. Had you followed the raging debates before the 12GE in PAS blogs and Harakah, the common position / strategy of the grassroots was to ride upon the people’s unhappiness and PR’s democratic agenda and then once in power, PAS will go to work with its hidden agenda of Islamisation.

    PAS learnt from 11GE that there is no way it can get to power without the support of non Muslims as such it has no option other than using / forming an alliance with DAP and PKR. If Kit says DAP had no pact with PAS prior to 12GE, then I am sorry, he is clearly deceiving us all.

    That by remaining in PR if PAS does not drop its Islamic State agenda for once and all it would be a betrayal of Malaysians who voted against the Islamisation policies of UMNO/BN.

    In fact PKR’s secular stance is also diametrically opposite to the Wahabbism of PAS’ Islamic State. But of course, do not hold your breath of Anwar Ibrahim leaving PR. This political Transformer is only interested in the highest office in the land even if that entails he sells his soul or principle to acheive it.

    Kit instead of asking MCA to demand a public apology from Hishammudin, please clarify your stand on the Islamic State. Please do not hide or sweep it under the carpet. The longer we wait, the bolder PAS becomes in their ambitions.

  194. #194 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:49 pm

    OK, so now you guys don’t agree to park the Islamic state issue for the next 4 years. Understood.

    Next question: Let’s say Anwar delivers another 30 parliamentary cross-overs tomorrow, either from UMNO or from the east Malaysian parties. Do you think that DAP should form a coalition federal government with PAS and PKR ? Don’t give the reason that Jeffrey has given, which is that crossovers are immoral, unprincipled and against democratic principles. Give an answer that relates to the Islamic state agenda.

  195. #195 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:53 pm

    No, for two reasons:

    1. Jeffrey’s reason
    2. Irreconcilable differences between DAP and PAS on Islamic State.

  196. #196 by Humanrace on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 1:53 pm

    Religion is based on faith, i.e. belief without proofs, solid facts or some but not sound reasonings.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith
    Religion is fundamentally a human emotional reaction.

    DAP, PKR and PAS should work together in the current context as it is necessary if we need to put BN in the bin. WE understand that PAS mentioned that the concept of a religious state in not in their agenda AT PRESENT, but the other partners should be wary and cautious if any such intention creeps in.

    Religion is good and necessary for the majority of humans as food for the human spirit and mind. Religion should not play a critical role in politics just as we do not ‘mixed’ nutrition and physical fitness into politics.

    I believe the majority of muslims are good human beings.

    Religions has their pros, but the cons of some religion are vulnerable to extreme violence and opppresion when hijacked and abused by extremists. Those who observed the ‘book cover’ of PAS should take note of this potential possibility of religious hijackers.

    The additional caution is that the holy book contains verses which extremists can twist and brainwash the gullible to violence for their own selfish interests.
    Even those with higher IQ could be brainwashed to violence, note the pilots of 911 and other bomb makers and planners of religious violence.
    This is already happening and nobody seem to be able to curtail these violence wrongly done in the name of god.

    Because religious followers are naturally and emotionally gullible, it do not take many extremists to do propogate violence. Just one charismatic (e.g. osama, Jim Jones,) and a group hardcores can do the job.

    Quote:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070223143009.htm
    University of Michigan psychologist Brad Bushman and his colleagues suggest that scriptural violence sanctioned by God can increase aggression, especially in believers.
    UnQuote

    It is for the above reason that we need to be wary and cautious at any suggestion of the formation of a religious state.

  197. #197 by octo61 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:34 pm

    We can’t just “parked” this islamic state issue because if it becomes a reality, there will be no turning back. If.. I’d say if they manage to change the constituition and make Msia an islamic state (PAS’s style), there will be a council of ulamaks above the parliament and everything that is passed through the parliament will need a nod from the council.
    Look at Iran, the President who is ELECTED by the people is powerless against its islamic council which is controlled by the Ayatollah. His reforms never saw the light of day due to the rejection by the council. So there is NO turning back if the constituition is ammended. Whereas the islamic country as stated by Tun Mahathir is still ruled by the parliament. Correct me if I’m wrong.

  198. #198 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:39 pm

    My opinion is, it is much easier to get BN to change their corrupt ways than to convince PAS to change its ultimate objective of creating pure Islamic State in Malaysia!!!

  199. #199 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:46 pm

    I agree that the danger from PAS’ Malaynistan is far greater than the “Ketuanan Melayu” / Corruption of UMNO.

    The reason is simple. With BN you still have the power of ballot box and press (under AAB) to make your voice heard and kick them out of office or force them change their policies. But under the Islamic Malaynistan, this process is irreversible. Once the country adopts this Wahabbist model, then the loss of democratic, religious and cultural rights are permanent. Under the Wahabbi model the Mullah interprets, decides and has the final say on every aspects of the people’s lives, be it legal, political, social, cultural, religious, economic, etc. Criticisms of the Ulama are considered an act of blasphemy.

    Imagine the economic destruction that this will bring upon the country. But the Mullahs will tell you that materialism is a sin, just like what they have ingrained into the head of the Kelantanese still living in the state.

    lakilompat’s argument that only an Islamic state ala-Iran would ensure justice has a logical hole that even the Titanic could sail through. Just observe the countries which have implemented the Wahhabi model of governance. The excesses and injustice perpetuated on the people are even worse than in totalitarian states. Observe the endemic corruption, trampling of human rights, cultural rape and shameful treatment and subjugation of woman and minorities.

    I would like to challenge those promoting the Malaynistan model as the best choice for a multi-religious,multi-cultural nation such as Malaysia to give just one example of an Islamic state (past or present) that has upheld the rights of women and minorities, personal liberties, human rights, clean and transparent administration, efficient management of economy and respect for other religions and culture. Can you ?

  200. #200 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:46 pm

    In respond to this:-
    “other religions dont require Islam to protect them,
    (Islamic state for Islam only, other religion are eligible to practice their own religion as it is their rights)

    the true God will prevail and all others will parish by end time!!!
    (is it proven? how many god has prevailed? is it written by someone to dramatised the scene)

    why not let other religions be the state religion and to protect the welfare of Islam instead”
    (Because in Malaysia, Malays is the largest or dominance race almost 60% of the 26 millions are malay) Without a single religion such as the Islam to unite the Malays, there will be profit maker like Pak Lah who try to introduce Islam Hadhari (Attempt to manipulate Islam to disintegrate Malays from Islam).

  201. #201 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:47 pm

    See the arrogance of Nik Aziz, the MB of Kelantan! Just one small concession to non Muslim, i.e. before converting to Islam must inform family members he also wants to challenge saying that was not necessary. No matter how “alim” he is, it only shows he does not care about the problems and misery that may cause family members who are not Muslims. He said, convert first then inform. But then he forgets that conversion is one way street! Just give PAS more power and those supporters of Islamic state may just have many regrets.

  202. #202 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:52 pm

    What Pak Lah is doing is to mend and bend Islam so that younger generation Malays will go against the tradition way & values taught by PAS, and to prefer its own brand Islam Hadhari which you don’t have to wear tudung, it’s ok for Khairy to flirt with Maya Karin, It’s OK for Pak Lah to embrace his hand on Michelle Yeoh waist. Also it’s fine with Mat Rempit.

    The chinese are able to defend their wisdom and value thru chinese education. The Indian are able to defend their wisdom and value thru tamil education. Now, what happen to the Malay in Malaysia? what happen to the wisdom and value in Jawi? do we still have Jawi? what happen if govt. use that as political tool to go against PAS?

  203. #203 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:52 pm

    Kakilompat,
    With due respect and if i understand you correctly, are you saying the Islam as practised by PAS will be more “alim” and subjected to less abuse as in the case of Islam hadhari promoted by BN. Wonder where you get such idea?

  204. #204 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:58 pm

    Godfather

    The answer to your question is simple. Just do not put yourself in a mental straight jacket and the solution will be simple.

    DAP has never been in the ruling Federal govt and its objectives for the last several decades always been to fight for its principles of socialist democracy and human rights. Forming the Federal government or ejecting the BN govt from power never been its main objective at all.

    The choice is simple in the scenario that you had given :

    1. Be part of the ruling govt and sacrifice your principles and betray the Malaysians who voted for them, or,

    2. Stay out of the Federal govt and stay true to your ideals.

    So, now you tell me which Option DAP should choose…!!

  205. #205 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 2:59 pm

    If DAP continues to sit side by side with PAS in PR (how many people will know whether DAP is not in support of PAS’s ideal Islamic State???) , sooner or later, DAP will be in trouble with non-muslims support. DAP should understand PAS’s final objectives and should not be peggy back by PAS to establish its ideal Islamic State!!!
    My suggestion is that DAP should think of getting PAS out from PR sooner than later!!! else DAP may have to join BN or by itself one day when PAS raise its ugly head!!!

  206. #206 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:01 pm

    TTDI_KL Says:

    What is democracy?

    In local university, if you wanted to form more than 5 people to perform some discussion you need to request from the Dean students are not allowed to discuss politics.

    In overseas univeristy, you can arrange discussion group without bothering the Dean.

    What Pak Lah said on tv or press is just an advice to avoid problems of religion conversion in the future. What Nik Aziz said is just his personal point of view, he think human has the freedom to choose their wisdom and valor, nobody can prevent not even your relatives. In buddha, each human is born in this world alone and left this world alone, now tell me why you need to consult?

    If Khairy or Kamaludin are going to convert to monkey god instead of islam since he’s a Kuwaitian, sure Pak Lah will be interested to give approval to such move.

  207. #207 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:02 pm

    Becos Pak Lah care abt. his daughter not the infamy monkey in law.

  208. #208 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:07 pm

    lakilompat

    What made you to think that PAS’ Malaynistan model is superior to Islam Hadhari ? While moderate Muslim leaders are trying to mend the image of Islam and try to show as a progressive and compassionate religion, PAS and its Wahabbists are determined to bring the religion and Muslims back to the Dark Ages.

    There is nothing wrong is not wearing tudungs and that does not make someone less Islamic. And also for your information Jawi script was a recent import from the Middle East and not a part of the Malay culture. In fact all govt schools are still teaching Jawi for the Muslim students for Agama class.

  209. #209 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:07 pm

    i_love_malaysia, u re wrong, and outdated.

    There are chinese, indians, and non malays voting for PAS, as long as it is not Barisan Nasional candidates. People are not voting for whether it is islamic state or not islamic state that is yesteryear history.

    Today, ppl. want to see change. If ppl. can see the change been quickly transform to the marginalized group. Hallelujah! next term opposition will still get the votes.

    To those who have fear, go read bible, al quran, buddhist wisdom, and some books abt. world religion & history. You will fill that fear with wisdom.

  210. #210 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:09 pm

    Also i would encourage u guys to attend ceramah held by PAS, DAP or PKR, try to absorb the essence from the speakers.

  211. #211 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:27 pm

    lakilompat,

    Today, they can say that it is our rights to practice our own religions, tomorrow, they can reverse that by a verdit that all other religions are against Islam and must be destroyed in no time!!! you dont have to look far to see these examples.

    Now, you want proof to show what is going to take place, I want you to prove that Islamic State will create heaven on earth and not hell on earth!!! can you?

    Why need a religion to unite a race? go by your arguments, you will use Islam to unite the whole Malaysian of various religions!!! those who are not in line with you will be penalised for the slight different in look, attire or other things that the Ulamak may think is the instructions from God!!!

  212. #212 by cheng on soo on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:27 pm

    No need worry, PAS alone can nvr get 2/3 in parliament, neither can PAS get 2/3 sokongan from other MP to get 2/3 vote in Parliament before 1.1.2040, on Hudud or Malaynistan issue. Who want to bet? (I =poor man, just RM99/ . ok?)
    After 1.1.2040 ?? , I no worry, probably I’ll be united with my ancestor already!

  213. #213 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:28 pm

    Wa!Habis!!!

  214. #214 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:42 pm

    i_love_malaysia, the spelling is Wa-habbi’s! :)

  215. #215 by Short-sleeve on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:42 pm

    I am a chinese Malaysian and as a chinese, we must make it loud and clear to these MCA running dogs that they are no longer relevant. We must make it loud and clear that we accept PAS and that PAS have dropped their Islamic State thingy.

    We, chinese must send a clear message to Ong Ka Ting that his party is now redundant.

  216. #216 by mysn1st on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:43 pm

    This remind me Sir you had been handcuff and detain by the police during the DAP “Say No to 929” campaign few year back.

  217. #217 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:45 pm

    Yes, ppl voted for PAS, including me, because we are desperate for change in view of the rots in BN!! But if this was construed by PAS that we are supporting its aim to achieve Wa!habis! in Malaysia!!! No way man, yesterday, I might support PAS out of the above reason, tomorrow, I will support any one who is against PAS!!! Dont be arrogant because PAS is the boss in few states now!!! I wonder how long will this PR lasts with PAS in there!!!

  218. #218 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:50 pm

    Jeffrey,

    There’s nothing wrong with my spelling, I just want to emphasize that Wa-habbi’s will becomes Wa!Habis!! if implemented!!!

  219. #219 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:54 pm

    i_love_malaysia,

    “Why need a religion to unite a race?”
    Look what the female Malay has become without religion (Rafidah Aziz, Azalina, Sharizat are product of UMNO – the arrogant Malays who marginalized the poor Malay). Lies are everywhere, corruptions as well due to lack of moral commitment by these fat ladies.

    Hence, it is a godly mandate given to PAS leaders to use & impart the good within Islam to unite the malays who has been disintegrated & marginalized by UMNO.

    go by your arguments, you will use Islam to unite the whole Malaysian of various religions!!!

    Nope, as per the al quran, there is no such thing as uniting the various religion but it is written that the religion of other races should be allowed as it is their fundamental rights. This has been constantly stressed by the PAS leader.

  220. #220 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 3:56 pm

    UMNO leader has become a shelf where there is no longer spiritual soul within that body. What PAS is doing is injecting the great wise souls, so that all Malays can enjoy it.

  221. #221 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:06 pm

    ///What PAS is doing is injecting the great wise souls, so that all Malays can enjoy it/// – lakilompat. What about Non Muslim/Non Malays, what do they enjoy? :)

  222. #222 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:13 pm

    lakilompat,

    Why use Islam to unite them and not other religions? where Islam has shown its shorcomings in many fronts!!!

    you can say anything according to whatever holy book, the fruits will tell about the tree that bears the fruits!!! just look at the world today, God has blessed all the muslim countries with oil according to His promise and see what happens to them and to others???

  223. #223 by dawsheng on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:23 pm

    Separate ques for man and woman? No thanks! I have to be frank, I get turned on when I see “mei mei” wearing less, may I know what’s wrong with that?

  224. #224 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:29 pm

    Kakilompat says……but it is written that the religion of other races should be allowed as it is their fundamental rights. This has been constantly stressed by the PAS leader.

    With due respect, what you said is not very right. Only religions of the books (the monotheistic faiths), such as Judaism and Christianity are allowed in Islamic state and that also they must accept lower status. Other religions and pagans must convert to Islam.

  225. #225 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:36 pm

    kakilompat, please answer us, are you saying only PAS leaders are capable of imparting and practising “right” Islam? Others like BN all cannot. Are corruption and abuse of power in BN purely due to lack of proper Islamic faith being practised. If so, if BN practises Christianity or Hinduism, can corruption and abuse be reduced too. Really in shaky ground lah.

  226. #226 by ngahc on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:44 pm

    Can we have more non-muslims from Kelatan as to enlighten us how was ordinary life under PAS’s goverment? Do you feel threaten for religion worship, Chinese school, entertainment etc?? Your experiences will provide us with some clues about PAS. Do you think PAS’s way of governing could bring social and economic progress to the state? We want a modern and advanced islamic country like Dubai and not one of those backward islamic countries in the world.

  227. #227 by PSM on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:44 pm

    Be very careful!
    UMNO is now using its Lapdogs, i.e. the MCA & Gerakan (the Lapdog MIC is almost dead & can’t do much) to cause “conflict” among the Muslims & Non-Muslims!
    The Malays have not taken UMNO’s bait concerning the May1969 “threats” so now they are using “religion” to cause problems.
    These sore losers will not give up. They will do whatever they need to do, no matter who gets hurt to achieve their dirty, corrupted ends!

  228. #228 by sotong on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:58 pm

    Like other true religions, true Islam will benefit the Malays and a multi religious country.

    The decades of violent religious conflicts in the Middle East is caused by politicians.

  229. #229 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 4:59 pm

    ///I have to be frank, I get turned on when I see “mei mei” wearing less, may I know what’s wrong with that?/// – dawsheng

    What’s wrong with that is that “mei mei” should be protected from your lustful ogling. If it is any consolation it is Ok for a man like you, wearing less, to catch the eye of a woman. That is because women are by nature less lustful as compared to you as a man. Don’t tell me you think that lust or your lustful thoughts are a good thing or that women don’t need protection from acts emanating from lust including ogling? :)

  230. #230 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:09 pm

    What about moderate Malays like me who unfortunately have a very Islamic arabic names but I never practise it?

    The Chinese must help these Malays as they feel trapped and helpless. many have been suffering in silence,lost friends and have been ridiculed among relatives and colleagues.

    Please help us… DAP. Who else can help us? where do I go from here? Who am I? where do I belong?

    Please help me !!!

  231. #231 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:14 pm

    I am scared, so scared that if PAS won, I will have to become refugees in 1st world countries.

    Do not think that all malays support malaynistan,there are many out there who are very modern, sophisticated and forward thinking.

    they either keep quiet or just ignore and pretend as if nothing is going to happen to them.

    I thank god for giving me a clear conscience and good mind to have prepared me for the worse. it will happen sooner or later.

    I think Killer understands my feelings as from what he had written, I can tell that he also felt uncomfortable.

    So have you ever thought how a malay who have felt when they tried to impose strict islamic law which very different from what the Malays have been practising?

    Look at Hadi’s jubah. is that malay?

    To all malays, please,please think of this issue and never let the malays lose their culture and identity forever…

  232. #232 by Jeffrey on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:17 pm

    znita07, we hear you, why do you think some of us are arguing so strenuously here?

  233. #233 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:30 pm

    thanks Jeffery.

    I am grateful to the Chinese and Indian who actually helped us indirectly. That is why I feel that Malaysia is quite fortunate.

    But not for long if we do not defend our freedom and the Malays who follow blindly and never asked questions.

    many are afraid of the repercussions and many also are not bothered as long as they can hide and becarefuk when they talk .

    This is called hyprocrisy and living in denial. I hate this kind of life.

    DAP is my only hope.

    I hope LKS will live forever to help us.

  234. #234 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 5:37 pm

    I want to make my point clear to PAS or Malays who think that Islam is the way of life:

    I DON’T WANT TO PRACTISE WAHABBI ISLAM and I REJECT ISLAMISATION , ARABISATION, MALAYNISTANISIZATION and HUDUD.

    I am a Malay and I am proud of it.

    If you ask me to choose between islam and Malay, I would choose the latter as this is what I am.

    I am saddened that the young malays are being taught that we have to choose islam over who we are.

    These ustazs do not realize that they are being used and manipulated by the wahhabis idealism to poison the young minds.

    I am afraid when these young Malays grow up, they would think that Malaynistan is an ideal world to live.

    By that time, it is too late and Malaysia that we know today will be forever gone.

    Think!

  235. #235 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:10 pm

    lakilompat. What about Non Muslim/Non Malays, what do they enjoy? well, they can join Islam, and there will always have the rights to practice their religion.

    Why use Islam to unite them and not other religions? where Islam has shown its shorcomings in many fronts!!!
    It is this weakness that UMNO exploits so that it can develop it own regime of cronies who is a shelf without any spiritual souls. Go to Kelantan have a look at the amount of crime rate, rape cases etc.

    you can say anything according to whatever holy book, the fruits will tell about the tree that bears the fruits!!! just look at the world today, God has blessed all the muslim countries with oil according to His promise and see what happens to them and to others???
    They have been massive exploitation by the western. This happen if a liar become the president, how many widow, orphan, and opportunity it has caused this world? UMNO is manipulating Islam just like the terrorist does to incite fear & uncertainties into the hearts of the people who does not have strong religion belief.

    What you see today is not the Islam, the marginalized Malays has pray for. The media, the press, the radio has create or dramatized Islam as evil as failure this is not true and should be condemned.

  236. #236 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:12 pm

    OK, OK, let’s not go down the path of religion.

    What we are clear of, based on the comments of the various DAP supporters here, is that (1) DAP should get out of Pakatan (2) DAP should withdraw from state governments of Perak and Selangor and (3) spurn any opportunity to form the federal government.

    My next question to those who support this view is this:

    Should the DAP parliamentarians and state assemblymen also resign their positions to allow for by-elections so that those who voted for them on March 8th based on a combined elections manifesto could have the opportunity to re-consider who they should vote for ?

  237. #237 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:30 pm

    Not so simple. If DAP’s Parliamentarians and ADUN must resign because of combined manifesto, then PAS must do the same.

    I think some have totally confused that corruption and abuse of power in BN is purely due true teaching of Islam not being practised. Kakilompat, i am still waiting for you answer. May I know who would practise the true teaching of Islam? Would PAS and its leaders practise a “better” form of Islam? If so, how so?

  238. #238 by cheng on soo on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:40 pm

    No know why so much talk on PAS, as if Pakatan oledi take over fed govt, even then, who is this PAS to pass this hudud / islam law?? wait another 15 years, PAs also no such power lah,
    All this PAs scare is the work of BN to trap ppl to vote for BN again!, wake up lah, BN = Be End !
    All those to ask DAP Adun n MP to resign or leave pakatan, think lah properly, that is exactly what BN want!

  239. #239 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:42 pm

    As what Sotong said, “The decades of violent religious conflicts in the Middle East is caused by politicians.” . This is very true whether you are UMNO or PAS, they are politicians and politicians are very good in twisting and turning the religion to suit them instead of the actual teaching of their faith. If the followers of the faith is not questioning or refuse to question the teaching of their faith, they are going to end up living in hell on earth first and real hell after life due to ignorant!!! Check it out the Truth and it will prevail.

  240. #240 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:50 pm

    Corruption & Abuse of power can happen to anyone ir-regardless of their religion!!!! so PAS supporters dont try to tell the whole world that only Islam works and all others will fail!!! more often than not, those claim to be guided by Islam failed to run their country well and ended up without any ranking in the world ranking!!! be it in education, economics and others!!!

  241. #241 by miketan142 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:50 pm

    Godfather Says:

    Today at 18: 12.29 (30 minutes ago)

    What we are clear of, based on the comments of the various DAP supporters here, is that (1) DAP should get out of Pakatan (2) DAP should withdraw from state governments of Perak and Selangor and (3) spurn any opportunity to form the federal government.

    Why can’t DAP just get out of Pakatan but still support the various state governments as power brokers? In a way it’s more effective like the democracy in Japan, Italy and Israel

  242. #242 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:50 pm

    It is nice to see civility returning to this blog. Don’t you think?

  243. #243 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:53 pm

    If it is not the religion that got problem, then it is the people that got problem. If it is not the people that got problem, then it is the religion that got problem!!! Got it!!!

  244. #244 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 6:55 pm

    Ah, but to many hardline supporters of DAP, to remain in the state governments as power brokers is akin to sleeping with the mortal enemy. Hence they would rather see the states of Perak and Selangor revert to BN rule than to have DAP enter into ANY sort of understanding with PAS.

  245. #245 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:07 pm

    Godfather

    What DAP has become is not different from what we accused MCA and Gerakan of before 12GE. We voted MCA/Gerakan/MIC with our feet for not defending the rights of the rakyat and selling their soul for power and position. Is this any different from DAP’s position now ?

    How Uncle Kit and DAP going to behave in these weeks and months will reveal their true self. [deleted]

    I feel if PAS refuses to drop their demand for Islamic state then DAP should withdraw their support and participation in the state governments. But I don’t think they should resign and vacate their seat.

    But you can bet your farm that PAS and PKR will not give up their seats or positions.

  246. #246 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:11 pm

    Is the People’s Declaration a joint PKR-DAP-PAS election manifesto?

    From what I read in the blog whose link was provided in one of Jeffrey’s comment, that sounds like a document written by someone, and later got endorsement from some NGOs and political parties, including PKR.

    In any case, given that DAP did not ally with PAS before 8/3, as reiterated by Lim Kit Siang, DAP MPs and SAs don’t have to resign. But I think they should not ally with PAS to form state governments.

  247. #247 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:13 pm

    Ah, but i thought you guys have projected yourselves to have more principles than others, that you are whiter than white. So if you have principles, you should take the lead and resign and not wait for the other parties.

    Furthermore, those who understand politics will not use words like “…if PAS refuses to drop their demand for Islamic state….”. Their Islamic state agenda is enshrined in their charter and there is ZERO chance of them dropping their objective (the word “demand” is perhaps a little too strong here). So just go straight to the point and “demand” that Kit stop his perceived cooperation with PAS.

  248. #248 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:14 pm

    The People’s Declaration is a joint Opposition manifesto.

  249. #249 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:15 pm

    I agree with you on this, Godfather. This is what I have been saying: DAP should not be in a coalition alongside PAS.

  250. #250 by Godfather on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:16 pm

    Maybe you should ask Kit whether the consensus before the elections to have only one-on-one contests is regarded as “cooperation” or “allying oneself to another”.

  251. #251 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:17 pm

    I meant I agree with Godfather’s comment published at 19:13.35, not the one about People’s Declaration.

  252. #252 by miketan142 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:21 pm

    Quote
    znita07 Says:
    Today at 17: 37.13 (1 hour ago)

    ” I am a Malay and I am proud of it.

    If you ask me to choose between islam and Malay, I would choose the latter as this is what I am.

    I am saddened that the young malays are being taught that we have to choose islam over who we are.

    These ustazs do not realize that they are being used and manipulated by the wahhabis idealism to poison the young minds.

    I am afraid when these young Malays grow up, they would think that Malaynistan is an ideal world to live.

    By that time, it is too late and Malaysia that we know today will be forever gone. ”

    If there anything we can do to reverse this problem?
    Are these are the fundalmentals that are moving us towards an Islamic state?

  253. #253 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:22 pm

    The co-operation involved in an agreement to avoid 3-corner fights is acceptable since irreconcilable ideological differences are somewhat irrelevant.

    The co-operation involved in a coalition government is problematic (as Jeffrey and Killer have explained) because irreconcilable ideological differences will come into play in policy planning and decision making.

  254. #254 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:27 pm

    This morning around 11.30am. saw the launch of the People’s Declaration or simply translated Piagam Rakyat by a group of concerned citizens calling themselves Barisan Rakyat at the Blog-House in Bukit Damansara !

    The Piagam Rakyat, in a nutshell, calls for efforts to create a Malaysia for all Malaysians, to kill corruption, eradicate poverty, bring back genuine democracy, free Press, and an independent judiciary.(see here for rocky’s updates)

    Endorsing the the Declaration formally and with anticipated approval and continuous applause from a crowd of about 120 “like-minded” and deeply concerned citizens, were representatives from DAP, MDP, PKR, PAS and Pasok a party based in Sabah.

    Haris Ibrahim- dubbed the “wild man of apolitics”- was as usual as passionate and vocal about the realisation of his pet project “Bangsa Malaysia” together with other “marked” friends in the Malaysian blogging scene like Raja Petra, Rocky, Zorro, Nuraina, Malik, Tony Yew, AminIskandar and Shar101 put on a alot of effort working diligently “behind the scenes”. There were other bloggers, spouses and friends too giving their Saturday time, voluntarily to make things as comfortable for the guests in the scorching heat in Blog-House!

    Everyone from Wee Choo Keong to Chegubard, Nurul Izzah, Ronnie Liu and Dr Siti Maria spoke for a few minutes about the People’s Declaration and their committed stand in implementing this as best as their party’s stand for a really “united Malaysia” with Tony Yew as emcee !

    By 1.10 pm. the attendees gave another thunderous applause to the “People’s Declaration bringing the event to a close and were then treated to a sumptuous “briyani” lunch and satay……..

    My kudos to the organisers of this really memorable day and my special thanks to all party representatives present, for working together for the Barisan Rakyat dream !

    Long live Bangsa Malaysia and the People’s Declaration ! Your vote has to be the one smartest thing you do for this country or otherwise “stop bitching” and forever hold your piece or peace (whateveeeer ) !!!!……. cos you deserve the government you voted for !!

    Now the citizenry and I are watching you as you walk what you have talked…………..Cheers !

    *latest up-dates( 3.40pm) with all photos courtesy of Raja Petra;
    (left to right)Wee Choo Kiong (torso only), Haris Ibrahim, Ronnie Liu and CikguBard
    Cikgu Badrul (PKR)-Rembau
    Wee Choo Kiong(MDP)-contesting Wangsa Maju
    Dr. Siti Mariah(PAS)-contesting in Kota Raja
    Wee Choo Kiong and Haris Ibrahim
    Nurul Izzah Anwar and husband Raja Shahril
    Malik Imtiaz
    women power…and guests….below onwards
    last but not least…. Zorro and SK Tiew
    Cheers !

    Posted by shanghaistephen at 1:58 PM
    1 comments:
    Cruel Angel said…
    good good good

    12:15 PM
    Post a Comment

    Links to this post
    People’s Declaration launched today
    The People’s Declaration was launched today by a group of concerned citizens calling themselves Barisan Rakyat at the Blog house in Bukit Damansara. The launch was attended by Opposition candidates contesting in the March 8 general …
    Posted bymaria a samad (kak ton) at2:15 PM
    Create a Link

    Newer Post Older Post Home
    Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

    http://shanghaistephen.blogspot.com/2008/02/launch-of-peoples-declaration.html

  255. #255 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:27 pm

    The People’s Declaration doesn’t sound like a joint election manifesto.

  256. #256 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:48 pm

    We should congratulate leaders in the DAP like Kit who has matured politically over the years he has been in politics. Who would have thought that DAP could be working with PAS?

    Since when anything problematic is sufficient ground to abandon anything?

    To succeed ideology must give way to pragmatism.

  257. #257 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 7:56 pm

    “….irreconcilable ideological differences will come into play in policy planning and decision making.” Lee

    It’d be naive to expect less.

    Let’s deal with the issue in more specific terms rather than limit the discussion to general statements on policies.

    What do you think will happen when PAS asks for the construction of more mosques in the state of Perak?

  258. #258 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 8:00 pm

    How do you think the DAP leadership should recieve proposals for the building of more mosques in the states PR is in control?

  259. #259 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 8:12 pm

    miketan142 Says:

    Today at 19: 21.43 (46 minutes ago)
    Quote
    znita07 Says:
    Today at 17: 37.13 (1 hour ago)

    ” I am a Malay and I am proud of it.

    If you ask me to choose between islam and Malay, I would choose the latter as this is what I am.

    I am saddened that the young malays are being taught that we have to choose islam over who we are.

    These ustazs do not realize that they are being used and manipulated by the wahhabis idealism to poison the young minds.

    I am afraid when these young Malays grow up, they would think that Malaynistan is an ideal world to live.

    By that time, it is too late and Malaysia that we know today will be forever gone. ”

    If there anything we can do to reverse this problem?
    Are these are the fundalmentals that are moving us towards an Islamic state?

    We can start by removing all the our media who always write about Islam this and that and always islam as the best way to live.

    Christians and Hindus and Buddhas too have a way of life but they are not allowed to write about them publicly much less on TV.

    On the other hand, Indonesia is well forward regarding this. Their TV stations have a slot for christians and praying slots. They even showed a lady who converted to christianity after being saved from being abused by her husband and the other saved from brothels by a church group.

    What a beautiful country Indonesia is..but look at us? What have we become?

  260. #260 by carkrazy on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 8:43 pm

    “I am grateful to the Chinese and Indian who actually helped us indirectly. That is why I feel that Malaysia is quite fortunate.”-znita07

    Yes, I am grateful to them too, but don’t forget the other progressive and educated Malays who also champion your reasons, such as me. Though I was borned a muslim, I strongly object to the Hudud law or any type of law that involves the dismemberment of a person’s bodyparts or skull cracking from fast moving stones. And I don’t buy this talk of “its only for muslims”.Why have two laws for muslims and non-muslims? This is a democratic country, and if they want to talk equal this and equal that, how about all citizens of Malaysia are the same regardless of race and religion and therefore be subjected under one law that is based on modern ideologies and not a 14th Century one?

    Like you, I am also aware of my Malay culture and heritage, and they were around long before the coming of Islam into this region nor were they influence by Islam in anyway,shape, or form.For some people to say that Malay identity is based on Islam is a joke.

    I know some of you say this issue of Islamic state should be put aside for now.And although I agree with you, I am also aware that the threat is real.We must be ready for any possibility as we may have to deal with this issue sooner than we would like.

  261. #261 by TTDI_KL on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:07 pm

    ……To succeed ideology must give way to pragmatism

    ideology give way to pragmatism…. is that opportunisism? Ideology gives way to pragmatism, is that opportunism?

    How long can pragmatism override ideology when they jointly administer a state or the country?

  262. #262 by miketan142 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:19 pm

    Quote YB Kit today,

    “One important message of the March 8 “political tsunami” is the consciousness of Malaysians, regardless of race, religion and political beliefs, that 50 years after Merdeka, the priority concern of Malaysians is not the competition between Malays and non-Malays but between Malaysians and the rest of the world.

    It is for this reason that the recent speech by the Regent of Kelantan, Tengku Mohammad Faris Petra that non-Malays should not ask for equal citizenship rights cannot find resonance or support among progressive Malaysians, whether Malays or non-Malays – as it is the global focus of international competition that should engage our primary attention.”

  263. #263 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:36 pm

    To succeed ideology must be tempered by pragmatism.

  264. #264 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:37 pm

    oooops tempered with

  265. #265 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:42 pm

    If YB LGE can work together with Mat Sabu, and Haji Hadi Awang i don’t find it impossible or difficult to promote Islamic State. Islamic State here is only applicable to the Malays.

    The root values of the Malays has been deterioting since independence. Look at the young Malay these day, they become forgetful of their roots, spending arrogantly, indulging in materialistic gains, and the leaders has been creating lies one after another. Fortunately, we still have PAS who has been preserving whatever is good left for Malays.

    Under UMNO:-
    1) There are many illegal or legal Malay Karaoke license been given to the Malay, these spots enable liberalize Malays for sexual activities, drugs abuse etc.
    2) Good and Young Malays are known as Mat Rempit whenever they ride on the road, the ppl. and police abuse them.
    3) Malay leader such as Rafidah Aziz are described as proud, and arrogant, “iron lady” this is not islam it does not portrayed greatness & respect.
    4) Malays ladies after high school certificate were forced to work as factory operators, only a few made it to the University.
    5) The young Malays have to compete with cheap overseas workers in job market such as hotel industry, food industry, manufacturing and construction because the current Malay leader only care about their pocket and interest such as buying a RM 1.2 billion Scorpene Submarines, this can provide more jobs for the Malays instead.
    6) Younger generation of Malays are lost, because they don’t know and confuse why others can have freedom of everything but they are been restricted. Lost of direction.
    7) Majority of the incest, adultery, gang rape cases are by Malays, social problems are not tackle, due to lost of directions, literature to enhance or uphold principle.
    8) PAS is consider extreme, this is just a lie by the UMNO leader, this is how younger generation are been brain washed to view PAS as evil, in actual fact, thanks goodness, PAS are much cleaner and pure.
    9) Compare Nik Aziz, look at his house & properties, if got porridge he eat if got rice he eat. He don’t owned a private jet, or yacht, he is just there to serve the people.
    10) Look at PAS leaders and compare to UMNO leaders, Tun Dr. Mahathir son worth billionth of ringgit, Pak Lah son in law, and son worth billionth of dollar ringgit. Khairy owned TENC boutique at Pavillions. Nik Aziz just have simple meal, rice and some vege compare to these UMNO liars? Someone said Nik Aziz is arrogant but look a person with billionth of ringgit or a simple man who are ready and open to embrace democracy to work with PKR & DAP?

  266. #266 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:49 pm

    Those of you who still mocks abt. Islamic State will soon destroy other religion as void, is equally naive to said that the May 13 incidents will repeat. This is the last resort for BN to gain back some lost pride and glory for the next GE 13.

    Do not listen to news, radio or newspaper, look at the facts, and participate in PAS ceramah learn and understand them. If got a chance visit Kelantan, ask the local there, how was the PAS government compare to BN government.

  267. #267 by undergrad2 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:50 pm

    “We have recently read of the exchanges by PAS, through Tok Guru Nik Aziz, and DAP, through Karpal Singh. These have resulted in the media characterizing Karpal Singh as being anti-Islam in the eyes of Nik Aziz. In an article published in The Star on 07.04.2008 (MB: Karpal belittling PAS), the PAS spiritual leader is quoted as saying “I want to know what is wrong with Islam and where does he disagree with Islam.”.

    http://malikimtiaz.blogspot.com/

  268. #268 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:57 pm

    Malay deserve to have the best religions, economic status, leaders, because of the UMNO betrayal, it has lost its value, further development led to introduction of Islam Hadhari.

    Malay leader has resort to greed and lies, over the past few years. It has become more rampant to robe & marginalize the Malays. Within this UMNO system breed & promote croynism.

  269. #269 by Killer on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:59 pm

    lakilompat

    Sometimes your comments makes me speechless….

    1. First of all drug abuse and other social deviancies that you mentioned is not the exclusive preserve of the Malays. Such problems afflicts all races and all countries in the world.

    2. Drug addicts and Mat Rempits exist even in Kelantan.

    3. Kelantan has the highest cases of sexual crimes such as rapes, incest as well as sexual diseases like AIDS,etc.

    4. Young Malay girls might be working as factory workers but in Kelantan they are not even encouraged to work or can find any employment at all. That’s why Kelantanese head to KL for jobs and a better quality of life.

    5. I agree that many UMNOputras are corrupted by money and position. But PAS are equally corrupted, in their mind. You sing praises of Nik Aziz, but please do talk to the people of Kelantan on how “simple” the MB really is. You might not know (or pretend not to) that his last wife is only 20 years old. In fact when they were married she was just 18 years old. Also check out how many wives he has or the number of houses he has.

  270. #270 by lakilompat on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 9:59 pm

    Dear undergrad2,

    Don’t forget that media belong to UMNO, UMNO (betrayal of Islam) are waiting chance to benefit & confuse the Rakyat.

  271. #271 by Lee Wang Yen on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 10:56 pm

    According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index in 2007:

    Singapore ranked 4th

    Malaysia ranked 43rd (the greater number the more corrupt)

    Saudi Arabia: 79

    Iran:131

  272. #272 by znita07 on Monday, 14 April 2008 - 11:41 pm

    Quote:
    carkrazy Says:

    Today at 20: 43.51 (2 hours ago)
    “I am grateful to the Chinese and Indian who actually helped us indirectly. That is why I feel that Malaysia is quite fortunate.”-znita07

    Yes, I am grateful to them too, but don’t forget the other progressive and educated Malays who also champion your reasons, such as me. Though I was borned a muslim, I strongly object to the Hudud law or any type of law that involves the dismemberment of a person’s bodyparts or skull cracking from fast moving stones. And I don’t buy this talk of “its only for muslims”.Why have two laws for muslims and non-muslims? This is a democratic country, and if they want to talk equal this and equal that, how about all citizens of Malaysia are the same regardless of race and religion and therefore be subjected under one law that is based on modern ideologies and not a 14th Century one?

    Like you, I am also aware of my Malay culture and heritage, and they were around long before the coming of Islam into this region nor were they influence by Islam in anyway,shape, or form.For some people to say that Malay identity is based on Islam is a joke.

    I know some of you say this issue of Islamic state should be put aside for now.And although I agree with you, I am also aware that the threat is real.We must be ready for any possibility as we may have to deal with this issue sooner than we would like.

    I am glad that people like you and me still around.

    Bravo carkrazy!!

  273. #273 by miketan142 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 12:11 am

    In Europe church attendence is diminshing by the day.The church is in dilemma to convince the existence of GOD. Is it bcos “miracles” did not happen or being liberal thinking that we are less soul searching.
    Will Islam suffer the same fate? Muslim will be more moderate and secular?

  274. #274 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 12:30 am

  275. #276 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 12:57 am

    “If anyone sees a wrong, let him change it with his hands,
    if he cannot let him change it with his voice,
    if he cannot let him hate (the wrong) in his heart
    and beyond there is no faith”

    Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.

  276. #277 by kickbutt on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 4:30 am

    “The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.”

    George Bernard Shaw

  277. #278 by sotong on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:17 am

    It is the responsibility of all Malaysians to protect the unique culture and traditions of bumi and their way of life at all costs…..this is what make us unique and a way of life totally different of other countries.

    Many would leave the country to protect their culture and traditions but not when some idiot said ” M’sia negara ISLAM, tak suka KELUAR”.

  278. #279 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:32 am

    Malaysiakini 14th March reported -I understand that YB just signed with PKR leaders Dr Wan Azizah Ismail and Anwar Ibrahim and PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang a joint statement ordering PR’s members to stop airing personal views that are contradictory to those agreed by the opposition coalition…ie to “create a prosperous society irrespective of ethnicity, religion and culture and uphold human rights” and that PR also said that it would soon announce a “general declaration of principles” mutually agreed by the three opposition parties. “These will also be adopted by all PR members of parliament when Parliament is in session.”

    The Sun Daily 14th April however reported – PAS spiritual leader and Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said that he was convinced that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) would eventually accept the Islamic state ideology: see – http://news.jongo.com/articles/08/0414/121443/MTIxNDQzkJC1shrh.html

    1. Can you now ask PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang how shall PR and PAS deal with PAS spiritual leader and Kelantan MB Nik Aziz for his statement????

    2. Why is the need for a further “general declaration of principles”, unless they are a revision of the 5 point PR Manifesto earlier outlined by Dr Wan Azizah Ismail?? See: http://justice4allkuantan.wordpress.com/2008/03/26/malaysiakiniopposition-leader-wan-azizah-unveils-bold-agenda/

    3. if so, can we prior debate in this blog “general declaration of principles” to be “adopted by all PR members of parliament when Parliament is in session”?

    4. Just like the BN’s Whip, is PR going to discipline its members if they speak contrary to general declaration of principles, are there any exceptions to instances when you can speak contrary (as when it concern important national issues and consistent with individual parties’ principles) and, in any case, how to impose discipline?

    More specifically in relation to 4., if the BN introduces a bill in parliament making it compulsory for non-Muslims to inform their family before converting to Islam, what will be PR’s position, and if PAS’s MPs vote against it (following Nik Aziz’s view that it was not necessary for non-Muslims to inform their family of their wish to embrace Islam), will or can DAP’s MPS vote for and in support of BN’s bill?

    I am seeking clarification on the boundaries – and limits – if any regarding PR’s whip : should there be a whip (like BN’s) on important issues like this, can PR’s MPs vote according to their respective parties’ agenda albeit in conflict with each other, and support BN on specific issues like this???

  279. #280 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:14 am

    Lee Wang Yen posted this:

    According to Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index in 2007:

    Singapore ranked 4th

    Malaysia ranked 43rd (the greater number the more corrupt)

    Saudi Arabia: 79

    Iran:131

    Why do you think we refer to UMNO as the den of thieves ? Also, the table above merely gives BN the right to crow about the fact that 43rd ranking isn’t that bad after all, compared to -what – 170 countries in the ranking ?

    Just like the ranking of KLIA as one of the world’s “best” airports – where the chances of you being shot is about the highest in the world.

  280. #281 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:29 am

    Here you go, folks:

    http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/81361

    Let’s all move forward for a better future.

  281. #282 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:36 am

    Godfather Says:

    Today at 08: 14.20 (15 minutes ago)

    Just like the ranking of KLIA as one of the world’s “best” airports – where the chances of you being shot is about the highest in the world.

    Dear Godfather…agreed that the security is KLIA is far from satisfactory. As someone who uses KLIA almost every week, I can draw up and littany of complaints…

    But to say that “the chances of you being shot is about the highest in the world” is clearly stretching the point. Many leading airports in the world has been hit by terrorists attacks and other criminal actions including the ones in the US and the UK.

    This case of robbery at KLIA is not a simple shoot-and-grab incident but a little more complicated than that. Well, I am sure that when the investigations are over we will know the details.

  282. #283 by lakilompat on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:02 am

    In respond to Killer,

    “Many leading airports in the world has been hit by terrorists attacks and other criminal actions including the ones in the US and the UK, your statement is baseless”

    I think liars like OTK will use them as long as it can cheat the Rakyat.

    That’s why the BN boss ordered the gun robbers not to kill anyone else will be big mess for the top. They rather aim at the leg, and other non fatal area.

  283. #284 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 11:05 am

    Killer:

    “…clearly stretching the point…”? Where in the world have there been armed robberies at airports ? The last “terrorist” act at an airport in Asia was when government agents killed Benigno Aquino at Manila International Airport. That was in the early 80s.

  284. #285 by Lee Wang Yen on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 1:07 pm

    The point is, Saudi Arabia and Iran are Islamic States whose laws are based on the Quran.

  285. #286 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 1:38 pm

    Godfather

    I don’t want to divert the issue that is under discussion. However just to set the record straight I am responding to your comment.

    Let me just tell you that I am well versed in matters pertaining security and anti terrrorism. As such I know exactly what I am talking about.

    If you are interested, there have been numerous incidents around the world where people actually been killed in the airports including those in the West. Just “google” it to verify my claims.

  286. #287 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 2:28 pm

    Killed as in the wild west, where robbers actually shoot their way out of the airports ?

  287. #288 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 2:30 pm

    Killer:

    All I need is ONE recent example that is similar to the incident at KLIA.

  288. #289 by allasstra on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 4:08 pm

    quote:

    Killer Says:

    Let me just tell you that I am well versed in matters pertaining security and anti terrrorism. As such I know exactly what I am talking about.

    —killer, my boss might be interested to employ someone like you then,…just send your resume to :

    https://www.cia.gov/careers/jobs/view-all-jobs/core-collector.html

    btw, my boss is an “equal opportunity employer”

  289. #290 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 4:11 pm

    Airports are good targets. Examples:

    o Feb 2002, robbers held up a security van at Heathrow Airport and escaped with $6.5 million in American currency that had just arrived from Bahrain. Heathrow had robberies even before this;

    o May 18 2004, holdup at Swiss Port Cargo warehouse just outside Heathrow, foiled by police;

    o The 1978 Lufthansa Heist was an airport robbery;

    o In Nov 2007 Kim Kardashian was robbed of diamonds, jewelry and other items at New York City’s John F. Kennedy airport;

    o Dec 7 2007 jewelry heist in Princess Julina Airport, Great Bay, Dutch holiday islands of Saint Martin;

    o Aug 2006 armed robbers had hesit of cargo shed in Johannesburg airport (no one hurt) electronic equipment was stolen;

    o group of armed men stormed onto the airport tarmac in Brasilia (Brazilian airport) on July 6, 2000 |and made off with $500,000 worth of gold;

    o daring armed bank raid at Dublin Airport, Ireland the £100,000 taken;

    etc

  290. #291 by lakilompat on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 5:10 pm

    Malaysia KLIA made in into that world Airport heist list.

    Changi Airport is laughing!

    Killer is the BN hardcore who never admit the mistakes or put right what is wrong. Just becos other countries have it, we are exception as well.

  291. #292 by Bigjoe on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 5:23 pm

    I can’t help but add my two cents worth on the issue of DAP should/should not be part of PR because of PAS Islamic stance.

    I disagree strongly because in my books even if one is against someone elses ideas, you have to defend it constantly, be ready to engage the other side whenever. So its essential for DAP to be part of PR to engage PAS, ready to defend against it. Why should DAP leave PR because of Islamic State issue if PR is NOT for it. The standard that should be demanded of DAP is that PAS should leave PR it want its Islamic state as part of the PR.

    I have said its paramount that DAP engages Keadilan in what is the proper course of action should PAS push for Islamic state agenda within PR. DAP should not demand secularism but have PAS defend Islamic state in every aspect in every specific possible detail and voted by Malaysian with full knowledge.

    Have faith in Malaysians they are not irrational, given the details of practicality of life, they choose practicality. The election clearly shows this. Why have so little faith?

  292. #293 by lextcs on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 5:45 pm

    Is raja Pet calling for ‘jihad’ against the chinese including his lovely wife? Why make such sweeping statements that we must be hanged to the tree or be cursed a 7 generation? I’ve know people who gives and continue to give without asking anything in return for the well being of the community. These people are MCA people and to ask the ‘mujahedeens’ to murder these people are so seditious in nature. What if we call our muslim brothers a ‘dog’? Now that would be distasteful to hear would it? I beg that such unwarranted statements should not be translated otherwise.

  293. #294 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:08 pm

    I agree with Bigjoe that if PR is (based on common principles) not for Islamic State, then there is no reason why DAP should leave PR, there being greater reason for PAS to leave instead. If PAS does not, with PKR’s support, then it is paramount that DAP engages adversarially either or both of them, which is why I asked how does the PR’s Whip (discipline system) work in Parliament. On an issue touching on religion, will DAP vote opposed to PAS – and even PKR – in support of BN’s moderate proposal of (say) making it compulsory for non-Muslims to inform their family before converting to Islam (assuming PAS/PKR vote against)???

  294. #295 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:19 pm

    Jeffrey:

    I am looking for a wild wild west type shootout similar to the KLIA incident. Robberies and thefts are common at every location, not just at airports.

  295. #296 by lchk on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:29 pm

    Killer wrote:

    “Let me just tell you that I am well versed in matters pertaining security and anti terrrorism. As such I know exactly what I am talking about.”

    Just as well-versed as you are the quality of life in Singapore? After all, you believe that the quality of life in Malaysia is almost as good as what Singaporeans enjoy in the little red dot.

    LOL!

  296. #297 by Loh on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:42 pm

    The country is used to BN rule with MCA and MIC as members of BNfor the past 50 years. The latter cannot leave BN without being blamed for threatening the peace and security of the country. DAP is a coalition partner to PR, if they ever form the Federal government. When PAS insists to make the country Islamic state, Iran or Saudi style, DAP should leave PR.

    PAS and UMNO can then form the new government, if UMNO members like it. The muslims in Turkey prefer seperation of religion from the state, and I believe not all UMNO members prefer Islamic state, Iran style. They can choose PKR.

    There was suggestion that PAS would make general election a thing of the past. I suppose we can also say that there could be a third world war.

    Those who opposed to DAP working with PAS should have been in the position to advise MCA and MIC against working with UMNO for independence. At least all the locals would be second class citizens. The same argument cannot be applicable to DAP now because we are interested to jump from the pan. It could be jumping directly into the fire, and that risk we have to take. Two millions have migrated, and when the worst come to pass, migration can always continue. There might be an additional justification for migration.

  297. #298 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:44 pm

    Jeffrey:

    I am getting a little tired reading your whingeing about PAS having to leave Pakatan Rakyat, failing which DAP must leave. Read the Junaidah case outlined by Kit in his latest thread, and tell me how we are going to make changes to the corrupt and vile justice system if all you guys care about is your own little party’s agenda.

    Tell me why Pakatan should not seize on the opportunity to make changes at the federal level that would ensure that future generations are not victimised or denied justice. Tell me why BN should continue to rule and perpetuate this injustice simply because you are not prepared to be a party to Pakatan Rakyat.

  298. #299 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 6:53 pm

    Wild wild west type shootout? Sorry, I thought the discussion was about airport heists and airport security, making no difference between the robbers that wielded their firearms actually discharged them wounding people or did not have to do so as the threat was sufficient to achieve their aims of robbery in the airports. Must be my misunderstanding of the issue then.

  299. #300 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:02 pm

    Our friend Killer said that the shootout where robber fired at security guards who returned fire with passengers diving for cover was something that is “common around the world”. Since he is a terrorism expert, all I asked was where else in the world has such a similar situation happened.

  300. #301 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:05 pm

    I have never said “Pakatan should not seize on the opportunity to make changes at the federal level that would ensure that future generations are not victimised or denied justice” And also I have not said that DAP has to leave Pakatan.

    You assumed I said.

    I merely said there was greater reason for PAS rather than DAP to leave Pakatan if PAS did not subscribe to Pakatan’s common principles that have excluded the Islamic State.

    I said if PAS could not (with PKR’s connivance) be made to leave Pakatan, then even if it were part of Pakatan, the DAP should engage, contradict and dispute and vote against it on this issue whenever PAS tries to assert it because it is contrary to common principles of Pakatan.

    I said this in my last post and enquired Kit earlier how did the Pakatan whip system work in this context of ideological disagreement between Pakatan component parties.

  301. #302 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:31 pm

    Jeffrey:

    This is what Lee Wang Yen said about you:

    “Some of Jeffrey’s comments in this and other threads have already answered Godfather’s question. I think Jeffrey’s comments on the greater danger of empowering the Islamo-facist compared to the danger of BN’s inefficiency, corruption, malpractices etc are particularly relevant.”

    Like Lee, I thought the above is fairly representative of your position i.e. PAS is a greater threat compared to BN’s continuing inefficiency and corruption and therefore any cooperation should be avoided. Why the change of tune now ?

  302. #303 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 7:41 pm

    Perhaps I could also recall this posting from Lee Wang Yen yesterday:

    “I didn’t attribute the view that DAP should leave PR to Jeffrey. I know that his view is that PAS should leave PR. I also know that he doesn’t share my view that DAP should leave PR.

    By the way, I agree with Jeffrey that, in principle, PAS (not DAP) should leave PR. However, given that it is practically unlikely for DAP to make PAS leave PR, DAP should leave PR (unless it can do the unlikely thing of making PAS leave PR).”

    Jeffrey, is it your view then that it is far better to walk away from the opportunity to have federal rule, than to work with PAS ?

  303. #304 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:01 pm

    I urge DAP to engage and contest against PAS, even if its within Pakatan, if and when PAS raises or tries to advance Islamic state agenda from that vantage position. It is consistent with stand of not empowering the Islamo-facism. I have no problem with PAS if it works for common good minus its theocratic agenda. However if it does not, as it probably won’t, then DAP has to stand up for what is good for pluralistic Malaysia against it (even if to extent of voting in line with BN on the issue). If that leads to a break – and here I said PAS should leave – that benefits (say) BN, it cannot be helped. Here choice is made based on “PAS is a greater threat compared to BN”. There is on ideal situation when one has to balance on one hand advancing rakyat’s agenda and on the other having to work on common cause of rakyat with a party like PAS whose agenda, in my belief, is contrary and subversive of rakyat’s cause. So relationship with PAS has to be monitored and reviewed all the time to make sure it makes no gains to advance its traditional objective not within Pakatan’s common principles and objectives. The DAP has the moral right to do that precisely because its agenda is not agreed as common agenda of Pakatan..

    But things may or may not lead to that point. When and if Pakatan rules probably with en masse defections from even friendly pro reform factions, majority may shut PAS up if they subscribe as well to DAP’s strong stand not to acquiesce an inch to PAS’s maneuvers to advance agenda of Islamic state outside Pakatan’s common principles.

    Chances are that PAS may leave on its own accord if everyone including PKR is against it.

    If it were the other way around, then DAP will have to leave. It is not the ideal case.

    However no one will gainsay DAP has not given the Pakatan union a chance to, as you say, “make changes at the federal level that would ensure that future generations are not victimised or denied justice”.

    For DAP not to stand up against the PAS initiatives on the Islamic state whenever it rears its head (even whilst they are supposedly collaborating under Pakatan) is to court losing its traditional supporters as in earlier case of BA, and then it will have no political bargaining chip and credibility.

    I don’t see change of tune.

  304. #305 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:03 pm

    Typo: “…there is no ideal situation….”

  305. #306 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:50 pm

    Dear Godfather

    As I had mentioned, I hate to see this topic being hijacked and end up discussing about the KLIA incident. If you think the examples listed by Jeffery (thanks !) are insufficient, then here are more….such security incidents happens almost weekly, just that some people are ignorant and seek to comment on issues that they have no knowledge of…

    July 4, 2002 – Tom Bradly (LA), gunman kills 3, injures 4 in the El Al ticket counter

    Apr 27, 2006 – Cleveland (US), man shot and killed in a shootout

    March 1, 2006 – Homer (Alaska, US), man killed and his son wounded in shootout

    May 23, 2002 – New Orleans (US), 2 injured in shootings

    Sept 9, 2005 – J’burg (S.Africa), 2 killed

    July 5, 2006 – Bahamas, 1 dead

    Jan 16, 2002 – Lahore (Pakistan), 5 security officers injured in an attack

    June 25, 2007 – Rio (Brazil), 3 dead

    Feb 6, 2007 – Islamabad (Pakistan), 3 injured, gunman kills himself

    Feb 25, 1981 – Rome (Italy), 4 injured in shooting

    March 31, 2007 – Stuttgart (Germany), 1 killed

    Dec 11, 1978 – JFK (New York, US), robbery of $5 million in cash and $875,000 in jewels

    June 30, 2007 – Glasgow (UK), blazing car crashes into the airport in a terrorist incident

  306. #307 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:53 pm

    Talking about Heathrow itself, there are numerous cases of multi-million robberies and security incidents…

    Here are 2 examples :

    Millions of dollars in cash has been stolen in a security van raid at Heathrow Airport – the second in five weeks.
    The $3.2m (£2.25m) arrived in the UK on a South African Airlines flight SA234 from Johannesburg.

    It was being transferred to a security van when it was hijacked by two men at 0730GMT

    This is the second such heist at the airport this year.

    On 11 February thieves made off with £4.6m in foreign cash at Terminal Four after raiding a British Airways (BA) security van in a secure zone “airside”.

    Police believe that raid, in which two robbers were armed only with plastic wrist ties, may have been an inside job.

  307. #308 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:54 pm

    and if you cared to checkout at the wiki, you can see more…

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heathrow

  308. #309 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 8:59 pm

    Jeffrey, so as to be clear about your position, do you or do you not agree with Dawsheng and Lee Wan Yen about the DAP withdrawing from the state governments of Perak and Selangor ?

    They also said that the DAP should spurn the opportunity for federal rule if Anwar turns up with 30 BN cross-overs tomorrow. I take it that your position now is this: do not spurn the opportunity as long as the DAP continues to fight for its agenda.

    I just want to be certain of your tune.

  309. #310 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:01 pm

    I think my last posting is self explanatory.

  310. #311 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:06 pm

    I don’t think anyone wants to spurn any opportunity but where principles conflict, the principle for plural Malaysia against the Islamic state – or its furtherance in any context – ought in DAP’s case to prevail over all other competing imperatives and priorities.

  311. #312 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:07 pm

    Since you know, and I know, that PAS will never discard its theocratic agenda, you would still go along with PAS and DAP in Pakatan for federal rule. That’s excellent !

  312. #313 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:13 pm

    Oops, maybe I should rephrase my question to Jeffrey QC: As we sit here and type on our computers, do you or do you not believe that the DAP and PAS stand in clear conflict of principles ?

  313. #314 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:22 pm

    I think Jeffrey speaks like a cetain Democrat, a certain U.S. senator from New York!

  314. #315 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:25 pm

    “Jeffrey, so as to be clear about your position, do you or do you not agree …” Godfather

    ..and Godfather sounds like a prosecutor who wants to pin down witness for the Defence in his X-examination of this witness!

  315. #316 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:27 pm

    Just a yes or a no would suffice !

  316. #317 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:29 pm

    Judge: Please answer the question.

  317. #318 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:31 pm

    Judge: Will the witness answer the question or else I’ll have to lock you up for contempt of court until you answer the question.

  318. #319 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:32 pm

    Looks like we have to cite Jeffrey for contempt.

  319. #320 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:33 pm

    Judge to Prosecutor:

    Perhaps you’d like to rephrase the question. Some questions require more than just a “yes” or “no” answer.

  320. #321 by rainmankl on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:35 pm

    Whenever MCA/Gerakan come out with this type of horseshit, I will explain to my simple wife about the real true story,esp nowaday.
    Even when PAS mention about the Islamic issue 2 days ago.

    I even ask her to convince her family(mother-in-law) not to afraid of 513 and vote anyone but we-know-who.

  321. #322 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:37 pm

    Judge to Prosecutor:

    “Looks like we have to cite Jeffrey for contempt” Godfather

    That’s my job! You don’t want to take my job from me, do you?

  322. #323 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:39 pm

    Judge: OK. Bailiff please take the witness to the lock-up. Court is adjourned for the day.

  323. #324 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:41 pm

    I’ll make it easy on Jeffrey QC:

    If Jeffrey believes that PAS and DAP have irreconciliable differences, then DAP should not be part of any plans to form the federal government. If DAP refuses the opportunity to form the federal government, then justice, transparency, accountability can’t possibly occur under the old BN administration. You can see that they are not capable of reform, as in the Zunaidah case at the top of this blog. To reform, we need to boot out the existing BN government, but we can’t do this if DAP says that it has to uphold its principles which are at odds with PAS’.

    LIke a cat chasing its tail, Pakatan is then doomed to fail, no changes will take place, and we end up barking at unjust BN policies for the next 50 years.

  324. #325 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:42 pm

    The prosecution rests.

  325. #326 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 9:43 pm

    Judge: That is not a question!

  326. #327 by Killer on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 11:11 pm

    Godfather

    I think you are missing the real issue here.

    The ultimate objectives of DAP is NOT to form the Federal govt but the establishment of a social democratic Malaysia. Of course forming the govt is a possible outcome of its goal but not the goal by itself.

    That this coalition of convenience (COC) was formed by three parties with highly divergent goals, policies and philosophies, is an oxymoronic move and smacks of political expediency in my view.

    Of course they can cite shared objectives and bury their heads into sand ala Ostrich for political expediency purposes but when you are highly ambitious and want to form the ruling government, you are just postponing the inevitable – the violent falling out among them.

    We have seen that in other countries having such COC-type government that even minor differences can result in political paralysis could that bring social and economical regression to these countries.

    In case of PR, the differences are not just in approach but also in terms of policies and philosophies. Shared objectives won’t go far when they start to formulate policies and make decisions in administering the nation.

    I can understand where Jeffrey is coming from is saying PAS should leave PR. However I still in the opinion that PAS and PKR will not let go their grip on power and cling on it desperately. These parties are headed by leaders who are motivated for a desire for power and position rather than a genuine aim of making Malaysia a better place, unlike the more noble objectives of DAP and Uncle Kit.

    I am afraid by associating with PAS and PKR, DAP will be found guilty by association by rakyat, the same offence that make us reject MIC, Gerakan and MCA.

    I know some DAP members will say that it is better for DAP to stay in PR and act as a counter-weight to PAS and PKR and to ensure that they perform and administer in the best interest of rakyat.

    However the question is can they influence PR? If DAP can influence PR in policies formulation, then yes I agree it might make sense for DAP to stay and fight for us. However if PAS is adamant with its objective of setting up an Islamic Kingdom of Malaynistan and proceeds with it in states where they have the majority and DAP is helpless to stop it, then I would say DAP must stand on its ground and withdraw from the coalition. Otherwise, not only that DAP will be punished by rakyat in 13GE but they will be also perceived as a Political Judas in betraying the interest of non-Muslims to PAS.

  327. #328 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 11:21 pm

    Ha Ha you guys,

    1. Of course DAP & PAS conflict in ideologies but they agree to work on common principles of Pakatan Rakyat, so if PAS espouses Islamic state out of context, kick it publicly and in no uncertain terms as what Kit & Karpal Singh did, which I support. I don’t agree with approach to “play everything down”. Our opposition to the Islamic state is not a negotiable point at any stage of the cooperation under Pakatan, and as I said, if any one has to leave Pakatan for irreconcilable ideological differences, why must it be DAP – it should be PAS that breaches the common principles.
    2. To which the next question arises : how to kick PAS out or neutralise its agenda. In my posting Today at 18: 41.20 (4 hours ago) in the other thread “Targeting the Bigger Ass”, I suggested a certain eventuality:-

    “It is fatuous to target biggest ass within ruling firmament for blame on 8th March debacle when the ruling firmament itself can no more effectively rule when the other side controls the majority and has enough crossovers numbers to topple the government, and the only reason it is not yet done is only because the slim majority does not suffice for stability of government due to the prospects of reverse crossovers enticed by BN’s side. Time has come to face the naked truth that neither BN nor PR could effectively rule when they’re neck to neck, which means that sooner or later, and better sooner there will have to be dissolution of parliament and fresh election to get the clear and commanding mandate….PR needs not isolated but enmasse defections. I suggest the PR draws a line at those pro reform for a better Malaysia as against those within BN that are reactionary and anti reform and pro TDM. To break impasse, tell Anwar to secure and work out a deal with the beleaguered PM and those on his side favouring reform, Gerakan, Sabah and Sarawak parties to share power under an enlarged grouping – Barisan Rakyat (“BR”) – to dilute PAS’s agenda of Islamic state….After deal struck, go through the motions of getting a vote of no confidence going, dissolution and fresh election for crossovers to be legitimized and with a stronger mandate, with some “redeemable” reformed inclined ex members of present BN (but with present PR’s members dominating) form the government to govern Bolehland”.

    To be sure there are some gaps and problems in the above proposals but the general drift of the idea is there. It needs further refinement.

    In that certain eventuality, PAS will be either marginalized, and diluted within larger group (BR) if not kicked out…..

    Anwar/PKR (whose ideology is equally not in sync with PAS) goes along with PAS only to the extent it could help deliver votes to dislodge BN and install himself as puppet master or PM of Federal Govt. If PAS can help bring the situation of BN’s dislodgement to fruition where the momentum as outlined in 2 above brings other parties to join in, he and the rest of different ideology can dispense with and set afloat PAS on its own, whose ideology is out of sync with mainstream of the majority supporting the bigger BR. PAS may calculate that it could use the Opposition coalition to establish its agenda, but it may well be the other way around of being used to dislodge BN and most important Mahathir’s legacy, vested interest and supporters of same mindset who are the cause of all malaise in the country, and thereafter left to its own deliberations and dreams of the Islamic state….

  328. #329 by TTDI_KL on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 11:53 pm

    A never ending story, not because there are no merits/logic to the arguments! I think each has come here with a position that is unchangeable for whatever reasons – pride, obstinate, value, and political belief. If we find ourselves here so difficult to agree, didn’t this show that it will be very difficult for PR component parties to work together?

  329. #330 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 April 2008 - 11:59 pm

    Killer,

    Perhaps we should see it this way.

    There are these three people. The three had come from different parts of the country. One had come from Kota Baru and another had come from Sungei Siput and another from Cerok Tok Kun. All are now waiting for a bus in Penang to go to KL. But the guy from Cerok Tok Kun has a battered old guy but otherwise is still in good operating condition but does not have enough money for gas. However, with two paying passengers they could hope to pool their limited resources and make that trip. It is faster than taking a bus.

    Is it wrong for the guy from Sg. Siput wanting to take a lift from the guy from Cerok Tok Kun who has the car but not the money for the gas, and share space with the guy from Kota Baru to go to Kuala Lumpur?

    They have now reached Slim River. The fee paying passenger from Kota Baru is in no position to evict the guy from Sg. Siput because he is not in control of the car. But he could of course ask the driver i.e. guy from Cerok Tok Kun, to stop the car so he could get down at any time before reaching KL. But why would he want to do that?

    Discussion so far appears to have been focused exclusively on one issue i.e. whether the guy from Sg. Siput who does not like the guy from Kota Baru because of the way he looks (you cannot change the way you look though you can change the way you dress) should ask the driver to stop the car so the guy from Kota Baru could get down. Or alternatively, whether he should ask the driver to stop so he could get down.

    If he were to do that i.e. get down, he would have to wait for a bus to come so he could continue his journey – or walk to KL. The bus it seems may not come at all. The guy from Sg. Siput is a retiree (not a certain guy from Kg. Attap) and may not survive the walk to KL.

    Remember the three have a common destination and a common purpose.

  330. #331 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:02 am

    Politics is art of the possible. It is whether one is brave enough to think and forge new directions and think of new combinations of alliances. Ultimately it is quest of power. It is only a question whether the exercise of that power, after it is seized, is done with some welfare of rakyat at heart or just for self aggrandizement and enrichment. That quest is the constant and consistent drive – all other inconsistencies can be tolerated in politics in the meanwhile as long as any of it (inconsistencies) helps consistently in furtherance or realisation of that ultimate goal, whether for the rakyat’s well being or selfish reasons. This is something we can learn from PAS – and of course the other master Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and his nesmesis, Tun Dr Mahathir.

  331. #332 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:17 am

    I won’t just dismiss Anwar or hold his history against him. Of course he is same in many ways as what he was but he could also have matured and changed in other ways. The important fact is that the “market” (electorate) has changed in many ways and for Anwar to sell his political product to a changed market, he must come out with something better and more suited to the market’s taste and it does not mean he would peddle same product as what he did when he was in ABIM or UMNO facing a market not exactly the same as now, especially when his competitor BN is still in state of denial pedalling the old product.

  332. #333 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:25 am

    I think Jeffrey’s proposal is interesting. This proposal shows that he is more or less consistent in his views about DAP vis-a-vis PAS. If that proposal works out and PAS is marginalised in PR to the extent envisaged by Jeffrey (if not forced out of it), then there is no reason why DAP can’t be in PR.

    DAP can’t be in PR in its current form because there is no overwhelming forces of secular pluralist democracy.

    But that depends on whether that proposal will work out. DAP can try that out before deciding to pull out from PR.

  333. #334 by Killer on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:27 am

    undergrad2

    I like your analogy….well argued and articulated.

    However, the core of my argument is quite different.

    The ultimate objective of the guy from Sg Siput is not to go to KL but find a better future for his family. Going to KL might help him to find a job so that he can help his family financially. But would his conscience allow him to collaborate with the two other gentlemen in selling illegal DVDs to support his family? Or would it be better for him to stay back in Sg Siput and work his small farm, live poor but live proud and stick true to his principles ?

  334. #335 by Godfather on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:34 am

    The search for justice, truth, integrity, transparency and accountability transcends the narrow objectives of any individual party.

  335. #336 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:34 am

    I would suggest a slight modification to Jeffrey’s interesting proposal.

    In the event that an augmented PR has been formed (joined by reformist BN factions including East Malaysian parties, GERAKAN, etc), all PR parties should subscribe to a common set of principles within the ideological boundaries of secular pluralist democracy, and those who do not should not be allowed to be part of PR. In that scenario, PAS, barring from renunciation of its agenda of Islamic State, can no longer be in PR.

  336. #337 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:37 am

    oops…there ARE no overwhelming forces….

  337. #338 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:41 am

    As I said PR in present form even having majority numbers from crossovers canot and will not provoke a takeover (as Anwar realistically admitted) – but neither can BN rule at the grace of the other having majority on any issue….The situation is stalemated and has to resolve itself by another GE where there has to be a realignment of alliances, the most significant source will have to come from certain acceptable sections of the BN leaving the old guards impervious to reforms to their own deliberations. Once deal is struck, parliament dissolved for 13th election, the en masse crossovers only then begin and present PR candidates plus the defectors from BN will be fielded under a larger coalition of (say) Barisan Rakyat to win big way with possibly even with two third majority, if rakyat’s protest momentum is sustained from 8th March. It will close the chapter on the old BN forever – or maybe next few decades. With bigger participation and pluralistic content, chances are that PAS will be marginalised or shoved off. The Maestro Anwar does not need it to sustain power by then when it is at odds with others proping up the BR.

    Of course, whether or not in the longer run the new BR will serve rakyat interest or become another present BN, that as a cynic, I won’t predict and unable to say. I don’t trust politicians. But if you all want a change premised on hope for the better, even just a notch better – anything is better than now – that is the way to go…..I think.

  338. #339 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:44 am

    Jeffrey has tried very hard to work out a pragmatic approach without going against the principles that DAP subscribes to. I think his interesting proposal has successfully achieved this. I think we should opt for this rather than the unprincipled ones suggested by some other commentators.

    One might think that his proposal might not work. But, it’s worth trying out.

  339. #340 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:47 am

    //augmented PR has been formed (joined by reformist BN factions including East Malaysian parties, GERAKAN, etc), all PR parties should subscribe to a common set of principles within the ideological boundaries of secular pluralist democracy, and those who do not should not be allowed to be part of PR// – Lee Wang Yen.

    I am in agreement. It is of utmost importance as prerequisite. PAS has got to understand much as it is entitled to pursue its agenda it cannot force it down mainstream throat. If it wants to participate power, it has to agree to your suggestion or else bye bye. The fact is that by that stage, others could coalesce to form and run govt without your assistance. If you want expand base, try canvassing the old guards of TDM mindset in present BN left behind and not invited to crossover in the power shift.

  340. #341 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:49 am

    Jeffrey, what do you think about my proposed slight modification to your proposal?

  341. #342 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:07 am

    Wang Yen – Excellent, I am in agreement with what you said. It is of utmost importance as prerequisite. I said that in my earlier posting with a bit more on PAS but being under immediate moderation by Admin has not yet appeared. I wish some of you would give further refinements to the idea.

  342. #343 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:16 am

    One practical question: if some East Malaysian parties and GERAKAN etc join PR in a few months’ time, and a vote of no-confidence is passed in the parliament, are there any legal grounds against holding a general election (less than one year after the 12th general election)?

  343. #344 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:18 am

    If you agree that the present common principles of Pakatan Rakyat for good governance, accountability, judicial integrity and welfare are good enough in the sense of excluding the Islamic State then there is no reason why they cannot be adopted by the expanded Barisan Rakyat bringing within its power fold by crossovers acceptable sectors or individuals from the present BN leaving behind the reactionary elements. There should be no objection to this because many in PKR including Anwar were also from UMNO in the past : so if they could “reform” so could certain people from current crop of BN component parties. Crossovers will not violate democratic principles here because they occur when we dissolve parliament for 13th GE where they will be fielded and elected under the Barisan Rakyat ticket.

  344. #345 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:23 am

    I agree with you that your proposal can avoid the moral problem of crossover given that a fresh election will be held.

    So we agree that there is no moral problem here.

    Will there be legal problem? Is there any law that bans a new general election from being held less than a certain amount of time after a general election?

  345. #346 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:30 am

    The procedure as I understand it is:

    1. Make the secret pact and deal first and calculate the numbers. Many will go with the winning side.

    2. After that initiate the vote of no confidence on govt. which with sufficient crossovers is no problem and if carried, I think constitutionally the Agong has to dissolve parliament to pave way for 13th G elections if the present PM & cabinet do not resign. If they resign, same result.

    3. Then field all present PR candidates plus all aceptable defectors in all parliamentary and state seats throughout the land.

    4. Anwar has no problems raising funds (Maybe he is in Jeddah for that?) Opposition supporters can chip in for the higher costs of funding this crucial election intended to give the new BR 2/3 majority……

    I don’t see legal problems. Practical problems is only 3 partners (Anwar, LKS & Hadi) must first agree regarding who to take en masse from BN or else another set of problems.

    I don’t know much about this but Kit Siang would be able to think through the viability of the path proposed to be taken.

  346. #347 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:33 am

    ///Is there any law that bans a new general election from being held less than a certain amount of time after a general election?///

    Not that I am aware of. I know that the constitutional prequisite of the person heading the government must command confidence of majority of the Dewan Rakyat. Otherwise no go. He & cabinet must resign, the inevitable consequence of which is that parliament must be dissolved for fresh election.

  347. #348 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:33 am

    I hope DAP leaders will really consider this. Thanks, Jeffrey for your effort.

  348. #349 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:36 am

    There is no law that I am aware of – requiring a certain time from last election to pass before the next. The only law is that the person heading the government must command confidence of majority of the Dewan Rakyat. Otherwise he & cabinet must resign, the inevitable consequence of which is that parliament must be dissolved for fresh election.

  349. #350 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:57 am

    Killer Says:

    Today at 00: 27.15 (1 hour ago)
    undergrad2

    “I like your analogy….well argued and articulated.

    However, the core of my argument is quite different.”

    Yes, I’d agree. Perhaps it should have been directed to Jeffrey/Godfather.

  350. #351 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:00 am

    I cannot help but detect a note of condescension in the exchanges between Lee and Jeffrey.

  351. #352 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:04 am

    Killer says,

    “The ultimate objective of the guy from Sg Siput is not to go to KL but find a better future for his family. Going to KL might help him to find a job so that he can help his family financially. But would his conscience allow him to collaborate with the two other gentlemen in selling illegal DVDs to support his family? Or would it be better for him to stay back in Sg Siput and work his small farm, live poor but live proud and stick true to his principles ?”

    Very interesting!

  352. #353 by allasstra on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:05 am

    walau, nearly 2 am and 2 of u are still chatting away….

  353. #354 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:10 am

    Perhaps we should emphasise that the new, augmented PR should be formed, and a joint election manifesto that EXPLICTLY commits all member parties to secular pluralist democracy, among other things, should be drawn up and endorsed by all PR member parties BEFORE the new election proposed by Jeffrey.

  354. #355 by allasstra on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:14 am

    # Lee Wang Yen Says:
    Today at 02: 10.56 (2 minutes ago)

    Perhaps we should emphasise that the new, augmented PR should be formed, and a joint election manifesto that EXPLICTLY commits all member parties to secular pluralist democracy, among other things, should be drawn up and endorsed by all PR member parties BEFORE the new election proposed by Jeffrey.

    —no,cant do that,…

  355. #356 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:22 am

    allastra,

    It is 3.20 p.m. now over here!

  356. #357 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 6:47 am

    -no,cant do that,…- allasstra said Today at 02: 14.38 (4 hours ago)

    I think what allasstra means – correct me otherwise- is to leverage on nuance without (to borrow a leaf from PAS’s style – the ultimate objective.

    It is easier to get PAS to agree to support at this point of time the proposed enlarged entity of “Barisan Rakyat” if there were no change to BR’s professed “common principles” from that of its progenitor, Pakatan Rakyat that PAS had already agreed to. (All we have to be certain about is that present Pakatan Rakyat’s common principles subscribed to by DAP, PKR & PAS, to be extended to the larger BR exclude clearly PAS’s Islamic state. If so, the existing agreed common principles suffice for extension to the larger entity. To assert “secular pluralist democracy” into enlarged BR’s manifesto that Pakatan Rakyat’s manifesto never had, is to guarantee, at this point of time, PAS rejection of the proposed scheme….which will become still-born and will not help to evolve Pakatan Rakyat further to the larger entity of Barisan Rakyat incorporating other “pluralistic elements and parties” forming precisely the counterweight not only to push the old BN out forever but also to trigger the necessary critical mass by which PAS will be marginalized and moderated in its Islamic state agenda by the greater other entity.

    We should not go for overkill and in the process defeat our overall objective.

  357. #358 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 6:49 am

    Typo omissions rectified in capitals – “…without (to borrow a leaf from PAS’s style) – LOSING SIGHT of OUR ultimate objective (IE. SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT)…”

  358. #359 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 6:58 am

    I have nothing against PAS’s pursuit of the Islamic state because in a democracy its believers are entitled to that right. So are many of us entitled as of democratic right to fight for so called DAP’s secular pluralistic democracy” which is anathemic to PAS and to oppose and to thwart PAS for that reason of our view of greater good of the nation and the pluralistic rakyat. We have to start and continue to do that whilst we still can leveraging on what Bigjoe said about mainstream Malaysia’s common sense and rationality opposed to PAS’s agenda, which if true, will be reflected by the stand of all component parties joining the enlarged Barisan Rakyat winning the next general election.

  359. #360 by Godfather on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 7:18 am

    “Perhaps we should emphasise that the new, augmented PR should be formed, and a joint election manifesto that EXPLICTLY commits all member parties to secular pluralist democracy, among other things, should be drawn up and endorsed by all PR member parties BEFORE the new election proposed by Jeffrey.” Lee Wang Yen

    Pure naivete. After all these months of postings, he still doesn’t get it.

  360. #361 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 7:26 am

    Why the enlarged BR could open its doors to acceptable reform inclined elements from present BN is basically this:-

    1. without a major shift from this quarter, Opposition with slim majority from isolated cross overs of disparate BN opportunists making the numbers can no more rule than BN in a stalemate…..That’s practical reality.

    2. The real malaise in this country is not the depredations of all members of BN fraternity per se. (There are not so bad characters like say Zaid & Shahrir – and even Pak Lah. They are no angels but not exactly TDM’s kind ).

    The malaise is the culture of such elements within BN forming majority within BN that are set in the old ways epitomized by TDM’s rule of playing on racial and religious card to perpetuate power for self aggrandizement and enrichment without regard for rakyat’s due and nation’s interest.

    Today the fight is for reform basically to undo the depredations of TDM’s era and legacy that is the malaise. Before his rein the country was better in “intangible” terms. His rein brought material and infrastructure development and benefit at a huge intangible costs.

    TDM, after retirement, still extends his long reach to foment BN members to preserve structure of his maligned legacy : he wants to unseat present incumbent because the latter unwittingly evinces promise to undo that legacy, which if unraveled will not only upset the ego but withdraw his and his posterity’s immunity from accountability.

    The agenda of the Opposition for the good of the country is not to finish off all BN’s MPs and members.

    It is to reform and cure its ills, the first prerequisite of which is to roll back the depredations of his political legacy and sever and leave behind all BN elements that support TDM’s legacy and answer his call to depose present incumbent.

    It is trite logic is that if you oppose and blame present PM for March 8th debacle, it means you don’t blame your own ways as having caused rakyat’s rejection on that date and it also means you will not support much needed reforms to eliminate the bad intangible part of that legacy whilst retaining the good part of it.

    The greater and immediate urgency is for Opposition to cooperate and rule to unravel that political legacy without in the process help push PAS agenda (worser in my opinion than that legacy) to the forefront of fruition. To balance the competing imperatives, we have to go the general direction outlined in the postings above.

  361. #362 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 7:41 am

    I’d have to agree with my Godfather,

  362. #363 by Godfather on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 8:06 am

    “The greater and immediate urgency is for Opposition to cooperate and rule to unravel that political legacy without in the process help push PAS agenda (worser in my opinion than that legacy) to the forefront of fruition.” Jeffrey QC

    Excellent statement. Does this mean that the issue of Islamic state can be “parked” for the time being? So long as PAS doesn’t push its Islamic agenda to the forefront, and DAP doesn’t push its secular agenda to the forefront, then our priority is the help dismantle the corrupt systems that were put in place by Mahathir and perpetuated by Sleepy Head ?

  363. #364 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 8:32 am

    Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as her official religion, DAP no need to push for its secular agenda but has to constantly defends it without fail, it is not a choice, it is a responsibility, from the threat of PAS’s agenda for an Islamic State.

    There are many forms of co-operation the opposition can work on and it is not necessary to be in the form of Pakatan Rakyat where, state such as Kelantan, Kedah and Trengganu will be allocated to PAS as part of the electoral pact, is this democracy?

  364. #365 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 8:46 am

    “Parked” for time being only if during time being, PAS does not, even during this time, make manouevres or statements advancing or preaching its agenda not agreed and contradictory to and excluded in Pakatan Rakyat’s common principles for good governance, accountability, judiciary’s independence, equal welfare regardless of race and religion etc. If it does, it will be contested and resisted by DAP – even to the point of voting alongside BN against PAS – and ought to be contested & resisted by Anwar/PKR at every juncture during this time of collaboration in overarching priority over the other imperative of being seen united and cooperative within United Front. You can start a relationship – and give it a try but it must be subject to close monitoring and review that every one adheres to principles agreed – but never be afraid to end it, if it must be, if it cannot work. No one can blame you for not trying. They would however if you compromise your principles for expedience of other objectives not matter how urgent. DAP as Killer cannot afford that. It is also not good for all of us in longer run. From my personal standpoint the Theocratic state for our country is not aceptable nor negotiable (half way or quarter or fractional way). There is no need to appease PAS, it has even less parliamentary or state seats than DAP. Besides most important if it pushes its agenda it manifestly breaches the very accord and principles by which all 3 parties agree to cooperate in the first place and that is not exculpable or condonable and to take action against it, much more resist it is justified. Period.

  365. #366 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 8:48 am

    Oops….”DAP as Killer opined cannot afford that”.

  366. #367 by TTDI_KL on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 8:48 am

    So both DAP and PAS ought to “park” their agenda for the sake of dismantling the corrupt systems that were put in place by BN. After that, then what. Whose car gets to move from the parking lot first after they have cleared the BN out of the way?

  367. #368 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:00 am

    I am against keeping quiet as far as PAS’s breaches go, abiding time – as compromise just for partners Pakatan Rakyat to be seen working together. I advocate immediate and strong public response. So what if Malaysians perceive the relationship is not working that well from the public altercations and display of disunity? It is only expected – and discounted – when incompatibles go to bed for sex and see if relationship could begin and be sustained for permanent marriage instead of the reverse order. What is more important is to be seen consistent and not abandoning what one upholds as the right thing. If that leads to internecine fights and even an eventual a breakup, so be it, it is something that we have to bear with fortitude, a prtice to pay for sustenance of hope, no matter how disappointing. If you can’t stand heat of such a contest, then don’t try to go to the kitchen to behave like chef to cook food for all to eat.

  368. #369 by TTDI_KL on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:04 am

    Dawsheng, Precisely.

    DAP just have to steadfastly defend the constitution and prevent it from being amended in any form or in whatever incremental ways as happened during BN’s time. Rightly, even states like Kelantan, Trengganu and Kedah or any other state no right to form Islamic state. First, that is the not the original intend of Malaya’s and Malaysia’s Constitution and second, there is no national referendum on this.

    As I see it, many Muslim Malays are also not in agreement of Islamic state. Sometimes, I wonder why the country should let this small group of ulamak to dictate and control the national agenda. DAP and all other right minded individuals have the role and responsibility to debate, convince and challenge those who think Islamic state is the way to go. It is better to do it sooner or later.

  369. #370 by TTDI_KL on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:07 am

    sorry, last line…. it is better to do it sooner than later.

  370. #371 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:11 am

    Electorate voted for DAP, PKR and PAS in full cognisance that they are strange bedfellows so expectations that they work in unity and harmony are welcomed but bottom line not expected and hence discounted, so don’t be afraid to fight for what is right.

    Remember it is more a protest against BN’s ways, they even forgot about race and religion in this protest, and if they would vote for and give chance to a monkey standing opposite a BN candidate, you mean that they would mind monkeys (just an analogy no disrespect intended for anyone) bickering amongst themselves after that?? It is only expected – and discounted. They’re all working under constraints – not ideal but only way so far.

  371. #372 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:15 am

    I agree with TTDI_KL’s statement that DAP should publicly oppose PAS’s Islamic state in Kedah because it was asserted by it after the 3 parties agreed to collaborate under common Pakatan Rakyat’s principles excluding it (as I explained to HB Lim in earlier post) as a point of distinction from Kelantan that was under PAS for some years before that collaboration.

  372. #373 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:24 am

    Where I differ from Godfather is that I take position that whilst DAP could work with PAS on common goals, DAP must, in every breach or deviation by PAS of or from common agreed goals, draw a line in the sand (words of Godfather), stand by it, fight against such breaches, no matter what the costs and repercussions….confident in the knowledge that PAS would no more want more than DAP to have a deal breaker at this juncture especialy when it is the party in breach, and DAP is the innocent party aggrieved by PAS’s default and hence in moral vantage position, in public eyes, to resist, thwart and frustrate PAS’s moves.

  373. #374 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:42 am

    Agree with what dawsheng said at posting 08: 32.33 (1 hour ago).

    If I were DAP, I would be prepared to work and cooperate with partner PAS over common goals and fight against it on diametrically opposed goals all at the same time. You can think me schizoprenic, thats ok, I am following what Lim Kam Put once preached about holding two different variables at the same time. :)

  374. #375 by Godfather on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:44 am

    TTDI_KL:

    This “small group of ulamaks” don’t dictate and control the national agenda. They can only bark, like the small group of DAP hardliners who try to dictate the manner in which their party leadership should move. The beauty of a democracy is that everyone has their say, but it is not necessarily those that are loudest that will win. In a one-person-one-vote system, you should not be surprised that the silent majority will be the ones to dictate the national agenda.

  375. #376 by Godfather on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:47 am

    Jeffrey:

    I don’t disagree with your assertion that DAP should stand and fight for its ideals. The only bone of contention is that whilst you keep referring to PAS as the guilty or defaulting party, and DAP as the aggrieved party, I still think that both are guilty of manipulating the electorate for their own ends. My view is that both parties are equally guilty, and that therefore the pot should not call the kettle black.

  376. #377 by TTDI_KL on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 11:11 am

    Jeffrey, Lim kam Put is still reading, but he can’t get in due to moderation. Like playing field hoki, he was asked to stand behind the net, and after that the referee forgot to let him come back in, much to the delight of many in the opposing team.

  377. #378 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:17 pm

    “DAP’s stand of Malaysia as a secular state and opposition to Malaysia becoming an Islamic state, violating the secular basis and commitment of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and “social contract”, is so crystal clear and unmistakable that only the most ignorant or unprincipled can question it.”

    This is to say that DAP will even go to Kelantan, Kedah and Trengganu where PAS reigns supreme to do what it has to do, as defending the Constitution known no boundaries. Right? I hope the above statement is not only directed at leaders of MCA and Gerakan but to leaders of PKR and PAS as well. I must warn DAP and PKR that by agreeing to an electoral pact with PAS, they have failed in their duties to protect what is enshrined in the constitution by depriving the Rakyat of choice, as choosing anything between BN and PAS, will be equally damaging and put the future of this country in question.

  378. #379 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:30 pm

    ///The only bone of contention is that whilst you keep referring to PAS as the guilty or defaulting party, and DAP as the aggrieved party, I still think that both are guilty of manipulating the electorate for their own ends. My view is that both parties are equally guilty, and that therefore the pot should not call the kettle black/// – Godfather.

    My response:-

    1. Where PAS and DAP agreed to collaborate under parameters of Pakatan common principles excluding PAS’s Islamic state agenda, then the reassertion by PAS of that excluded agenda constitutes a serious infraction in respect to which PAS is the guilty or defaulting party, and DAP and PKR are the aggrieved party. The pot calling kettle black is of no application here.

    2. However the pot calling kettle black is of application between DAP on one hand and MCA/Gerakan on the other when DAP accuses MCA/Gerakan of conniving in and acquiescing with in UMNO’s “Islamic State” which though undesirable on standalone basis is however, on comparative basis, a different kettle of fish from PAS’s theocratic Islamic state thereby not providing similar parameters for valid criticisms.

    3. Regarding manipulating electorate for own ends, that is always agreed, as I have said earlier that generally politicians will always manipulate electorate for the ends of power/positions and “promise to build a bridge even when there’s no river” ( Nikita Krushchev ).

    Be that as it may, politicians like lawyers are necessary evils in sense we have to put up with them and choose one over the other or one section over the other in the hope that those elected/chosen will, despite their ingrained customary manipulation, repackage their political product and bring us a notch higher in advancement from the level the last batch left us.

  379. #380 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:35 pm

    My response to Godfather’s last posting:-
    1. Where PAS and DAP agreed to collaborate under parameters of Pakatan common principles excluding PAS’s Islamic state agenda, then the reassertion by PAS of that excluded agenda constitutes a serious infraction in which PAS is the guilty or defaulting party, and DAP and PKR are the aggrieved party. The pot calling kettle black rap is of no application here.
    2. However the ‘pot calling kettle black’ applies between DAP and MCA/Gerakan when DAP accuses MCA/Gerakan of conniving in and acquiescing with in UMNO’s “Islamic State” which though undesirable on standalone basis is however, on comparative basis, a different kettle of fish from PAS’s theocratic Islamic state, thereby not providing similar parameters for valid criticisms in logic except in thrust and parry of illogical politics.
    3. Regarding manipulating electorate for own ends, that is always agreed, as I have said earlier that generally politicians will always manipulate electorate for the ends of power/positions and “promise to build a bridge even when there’s no river” ( Nikita Krushchev ).
    Be that as it may, politicians like lawyers are necessary evils in sense we have to put up with them and choose one over the other or one section over the other in the hope that those elected/chosen will, despite their ingrained customary manipulation, repackage their political product and bring us a notch higher in advancement from the level the last batch left us.

  380. #381 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:39 pm

    Why are you guys still debating about a possible Islamic state?? It is never going to happen. PAS may dream on. The rest can sleep tight.

  381. #382 by ngahc on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:51 pm

    The current political relationship of PAS, DAP and PKR has reminded me of Singapore in 1960s. Then, Lee Kuan Yew worked along with socialist for a brief period of time in order to fight for a common enemy. When the goal was achieved, LKY fought fiercely with socialist..

  382. #383 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 12:51 pm

    1. Jeffrey suggests that requiring PAS to accept a joint manifesto of an augmented PR that explicitly commits one to a secular pluralist democracy is impractical because it will ensure PAS’ rejection.

    2. Jeffrey also thinks that the common principles of the current PR, which PAS has already agreed to, would be sufficient if we can be certain that those principles clearly exclude the Islamic state.

    I see a tension between (1) and (2). Given that accepting an agreement that explicitly commits one to a secular pluralist democracy entails (though not entailed by) accepting an agreement that clearly excludes Islamic state, there is no reason to think that if PAS will not accept the former, it will accept the latter. If someone thinks that PAS can accept the latter, i.e. a common set of principles that CLEARLY exclude Islamic state, (perhaps this can be explained by Taqiyya), there is no reason for that person to think that PAS cannot accept the former, i.e. a manifesto that EXPLICITLY commits one to secular pluralist democracy, which logically entails an exclusion of Islamic state.

    One might say that the current set of PR common principles accepted by PAS does not explicitly rule out Islamic state, and might argue that this is why PAS accepted them. This may well be true. However, notice that what is important to my point is that Jeffrey’s proposal is premised on the condition that we have to be certain that the common PR principles that PAS has already accepted CLEARLY exclude Islamic state.

  383. #384 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:10 pm

    ‘It is easier to get PAS to agree to support at this point of time the proposed enlarged entity of “Barisan Rakyat” if there were no change to BR’s professed “common principles” from that of its progenitor, Pakatan Rakyat that PAS had already agreed to. (All we have to be certain about is that present Pakatan Rakyat’s common principles subscribed to by DAP, PKR & PAS, to be extended to the larger BR exclude clearly PAS’s Islamic state.’
    Jeffrey

    In other words, Jeffrey thinks that it is a prerequisite to ensure that the set of PR common principles accepted by all member parties CLEARLY exclude Islamic state agenda before the proposed fresh election. This position is also quite clear in another comment of his, cited below:

    ‘//augmented PR has been formed (joined by reformist BN factions including East Malaysian parties, GERAKAN, etc), all PR parties should subscribe to a common set of principles within the ideological boundaries of secular pluralist democracy, and those who do not should not be allowed to be part of PR// – Lee Wang Yen.

    I am in agreement. It is of utmost importance as prerequisite. PAS has got to understand much as it is entitled to pursue its agenda it cannot force it down mainstream throat. If it wants to participate power, it has to agree to your suggestion or else bye bye. The fact is that by that stage, others could coalesce to form and run govt without your assistance. If you want expand base, try canvassing the old guards of TDM mindset in present BN left behind and not invited to crossover in the power shift.’

  384. #385 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 1:25 pm

    I agree with Dawsheng that DAP should not have any electoral pact with PAS, unless the pact is made after PAS has subscribed to a set of common principles that, as Jeffrey says, CLEARLY exclude Islamic state. Accepting this set of common principles is tantamount to a renunciation of PAS Islamic state agenda.

    Of course, PAS may later go back on its word. But in that case, DAP cannot be held responsible.

  385. #386 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:51 pm

    Pope Bededict XVI, who is by no means a liberal, thinks that secular state is a good model.

    ‘The Pope also paid tribute to the fact that there was no state religion in the US, adding that a secular state where all religions can be welcomed is a positive model from which Europe can learn, our correspondent adds.’
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7348548.stm

    Thus, one can be religious (I’m a commiitted Christian, so is Dr. Ng Kam Weng, whose articles I have cited in this blog) while advocating a secular pluralist democracy.

  386. #387 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 2:51 pm

    oops…’committed Christian…’

  387. #388 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:03 pm

    The constitution, which serves to guarantee certain rights to the Rakyat cannot guarantee when it is constantly under threats and abuses. When constitution cannot guarantee, the Rakyat will suffer, the country will fail. PAS don’t care!

  388. #389 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:34 pm

    Language is not an instrument of mathematical precision as to confer absolute certainty. The nearest to absolute certainty is when one inserts in the common principles “No Islamic State” or something to the effect that PAS renounces it. I don’t expect such explicit statement to be pragmatic. No way PAS’s leaders will ink it. Supporters won’t allow such when Islamic state is its raison de etre. It is as good as telling PAS not to join in the widened coalition of Barisan Rakyat at the outset. That too is OK, if it is otherwise feasible but is it???

    What I mean by “certainty” is that the language of “common principles” – eg. good governance, accountability, judicial independence, war against corruption and abuse of power – must be such that according to their ordinary grammatical meaning when read and understood by reasonable persons – must be certain or explicit enough for those reasonable persons to say, “of course, all these exclude the Islamic theocratic state espoused by PAS”.

    But precisely because language is not an instrument of mathematical precision, there may well be majority or all of PAS’s leaders or supporters who will (between themselves) agree and assert that “of course, common principles of good governance, accountability, judicial independence, war against corruption and abuse of power are consistent with the governance of the Islamic Theocratic state, and therefore it is not precluded”.

    Nobody can stop anyone else who wants to stretch and strain language to the point of incredulity for his or her especial agenda, if they want to do that, nobody can stop them, but I am not going to sweat over something that the other side is obviously unreasonable.

    I say “unreasonable” because knowing that the significant others –DAP & PKR’s – ideological platform exclude the Islamic Theocratic state, the onus would reasonably have to fall on PAS’s part to insist on explicit mention of the Islamic Theocratic state if it still wants to pursue it at the collaborative level with others failing which it has to be taken that it forgoes such pursuit again at the coalition collaborative level.

    It is unrealistic as well as unreasonable to give words such as “good governance, accountability, judicial independence, war against corruption and abuse of power” a special meaning of incorporating implicitly the Islamic Theocratic state that only PAS itself alone could make it out to be that, whilst the rest of the world, whether DAP, PKR, or (say) Gerakan or East Malaysian parties joining the enlarged BR think or construe otherwise…..

    As I take this position, it means that “good governance, accountability, judicial independence, war against corruption and abuse of power” if stated so in Pakatan Rakyat’s original common principles already agreed to by PAS should be good enough to be continued for the larger Barisan Rakyat entity to come. It means they are “clear enough” to exclude PAS’s agenda from any reasonable man’s point of view. That there are supporters amongst PAS who would think otherwise is not matter I can control or bother about. Whatever PAS may construe, the rest will join on basis that the common principles based on their ordinary meaning exclude PAS’s special agenda : otherwise who would join???

    I agree this may represent a shift of what I said in my posting at 01: 07.22 which I revised as an afterthought in second one at 01.18.57.

    Having regard to our Federal Constitution the onus is not on us to put exlicitly “secular pluralist democracy” in common principles. It may be an aspiration for DAP or our common aspiration but, apart from the fact that its articulation is an effrontery to PAS, the realistic fact is that our country is not and unlikely to be a “secular pluralist democracy” in the strict sense of that word having regard that majority of our peoples are Muslims and we don’t have a 100% secular Federal Constitution like that in the S’pore or (I assume) US or even Turkey’s promulgated by Kamal Ataturk. Even PKR won’t agree to this inclusion of “secular pluralist democracy”. This is not strictly a secular country – neither is it entirely and fully an Islamic one in UMNO’s sense or ought to be a Islamic theocracy in PAS’s sense. We have our own unique special blend and rojak of heavy Islamic features with some secular leanings, and it suffices we pursue and broaden democratic applications suitable for our plural and diverse peoples so that all have a place under the Malaysian Sun.

  389. #390 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:44 pm

    The omission of mention of the words “secular pluralist democracy” in common principles does not implicitly mean that Islamic theocratic state is within purview, and not excluded.

  390. #391 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:51 pm

    If “secular pluralist democracy” is by agreement of all 3 parties not in common principles of original Pakatan Rakyat, I don’t foresee that there would be agreement to include it at the wider level of collaboration under a bigger coalition of Barisan Rakyat. (same argument if Islamic state is not included in PR’s common principles, then it cannot be introduced at the next BR’s level). If DAP insists on that, it will likely have to proceed alone without PKR & PAS to try to form an alternative coalition.Can it?

  391. #392 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:56 pm

    I think whether the term ‘secular pluralist democracy’ is included in a common manifesto is not absolutely essential.

    The suggestion that this term should be included is only meant to rule out Islamic state. As long as Islamic state can be ruled out, it does not matter whether whether this term is included. On this I agree with Jeffrey.

    If the current PR common principles are sufficiently clear (it doesn’t have to be absolute certainty, just reasonable clarity) to exclude Islamic state, then it is good enough.

    However, if the reasonable parties willing to form an augemented PR (i.e. DAP, PKR, GERAKAN, East Malaysian parties) accept an interpretation A of a set of principles P which excludes Islamic state, while PAS EXPLICTLY takes an unreasonable interpretation B of P which they say do not exclude Islamic state (as it seems to be the case given the statements by some PAS leaders on Islamic state aspiration), then PR has to reject PAS.

  392. #393 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 3:58 pm

    oops… THERE IS NO NEED for absolute certainty, just reasonable clarity…

  393. #394 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:01 pm

    Your last para esp – “then PR has to reject PAS” – is something I agree unreservedly, and maybe even hope for (with no disrespect to my friends supporting PAS).

  394. #395 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:02 pm

    Malaysia is already a secular pluralist democracy, according to the constitution and the promise made to Sabah and Sarawak.

    So secular pluralist democracy is the default position to be defended.

    THere is no need for a programme to set up a secular pluralist democracy in Malaysia. What we need is a programme to defend it from Islamisation and the agenda of Islamic state.

  395. #396 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:04 pm

    So the term ‘secular pluralist democracy’ does not have to be included, not because we think that Malaysia should not become a secular state, but because Malaysia is already a secular state.

  396. #397 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:07 pm

    In any case, a common set of PR principles that CLEARLY exclude Islamic state on all reasonable interpretations is indispensable.

  397. #398 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:28 pm

    Jeffrey thinks that PAS can accept a set of principles that are so clear in its exclusion of Islamic state that reasonable people will interpret them in this way, because PAS can (unreasonably) twist the interpretation of these principles to deny that these principles entail such an exclusion. On the other hand, Jeffrey thinks that PAS cannot accept a set of principles that include a reference to ‘secular pluralist democracy’.

    I still see a tension here.

    If PAS can make an unreasonable intepretation of a set of principles that are so clear in excluding Islamic state, why can’t PAS make an unreasonable interpretation of a set of principles that make reference to secular pluralist democracy’ to make that reference compatible with Islamic state?

  398. #399 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 4:44 pm

    Because to make an unreasonable interpretation of a set of principles referencing “secular pluralist democracy” as compatible with Islamic state is so much harder for PAS to make – “secular pluralist democracy” is almost, what you call it an oxymoron of Islamic state ? – than the former ie. the unreasonable interpretation of Islamic state inclusion within a set of principles that are so clear in their ordinary grammatical meaning excluding Islamic state.

    People choose easier than a harder course in their machination but why should we bother when either cases they are “unreasonable interpretations”?

    On the earlier but related issue – what “ought” to be the case is not what “is” the case.

    In relation specifically to these two issues –

    (1) the nature and character of our founding Constitutional document (Federal constitution) and
    (2) the fact of life in Malaysia,

    on both counts, I feel that ’secular pluralist democracy’ serves best and therefore to me and you and many others “ought” to be the case but at the level of what really “is” the case, the assertion of ’secular pluralist democracy’ as a fact is highly debatable and contentious on both counts even factoring in the promise made to Sabah and Sarawak…We will find people arguing against ‘secular pluralist democracy’ not just PAS’s supporters but scholars of constitution and sociology.

    These issues require wide range of detailed discussions on both constitution and nation that this forum is not appropriate, so I won’t go further.

    Suffice to say whether we’re talking of “secular pluralist democracy” (what, to me, “ought” to be the case) or hybrid, rojak pluralist democracy (what “is” the case), I agree that it is a “default position to be defended” with a need of a programme to defend it from “Islamisation and the agenda of Islamic state”.

    Apologies to all for Islamic state fatique.

  399. #400 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:06 pm

    You’re right that according to ordinary grammatical and logical rules, secular pluralist democracy is incompatible with Islamic state – the former entails the negation of the latter.

    However, you say that PAS leaders can be so unreasonble in their twisting of interpretation that they can interpret some principles that, according to ordinary grammatical and logical rules, entail the exclusion of Islamic state as compatible with it.

    If PAS can unreasonably twist ordinary grammatical and logical rules to achieve the latter, why can’t it twist ordinary grammatical and logical rules to achieve the former? Given that both require twisting ordinary grammatical and logical rules, there is no reason to think that one is harder than the other.

    Case A:

    ‘principles P (i.e. a conjunction of propositions L, M, N etc) entails ~I (the negation of Islamic state).’
    The above is the view of reasonable people.
    PAS: according to some extraordinary grammatical and logical rules, P is compatible with I.

    Case B:
    ‘the term ‘secular pluralist democracy’, represented by S (i.e. a conjunction of propositions X, Y, Z etc) entails ~I (the negation of Islamic state)’
    The above is the view of reasonable people.
    PAS: according to some extraordinary grammatical and logical rules, P is compatible with I.

    Thus, B is not harder than A. Both requires the same type of violation of ordinary grammatical and logical rules to deny the logical entailment of a conjunction of propositions.

  400. #401 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:09 pm

    You’re right that Malaysia ought to be a secular state.

    You’re right that Malaysia is not currently a pure secular state. This is not what I denied. I was just saying that Malaysia is a secular state. I didn’t say that it was a pure one.

    But we both agree that it ought to be purer than it now is.

  401. #402 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:15 pm

    I agree that both are equally hard or easy (in terms of violation of ordinary grammatical and logical rules) for PAS to twist an unreasonable interpretation – but to 3rd party audience listening to their pitch, case A is unreasonable but case B is preposterous bordering on imbecility, so between two options of unreasonable interpretations, if one wants to be unreasonable anyway regardless, case A would be preferred to B from PAS’s standpoint. Is that not so?.

  402. #403 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:30 pm

    If 3rd party audience means reasonble people, then I’m afraid case A and case B will appear to be equally hard for 3rd party audience.
    If case A is true (i.e. if we have such a set of principles that is so clear that reasonable audience will agree that they entail ~I), then reasonable 3rd party audience will find PAS interpretation as preposterous and unreasonable as in case B.

    So the difference lies in the reasonableness of the audience, not between case A and case B. (The twistings in) Case A and Case B are equally hard/presposterous to a group of reasonable 3rd party audience and equally easy/acceptable to a group of unreasonable 3rd party audience.

    The issue is whether we should have a set of principles so clear that all reasonable people will conclude that they entail ~I. As you say in an earlier comment,
    ‘What I mean by “certainty” is that the language of “common principles” – eg. good governance, accountability, judicial independence, war against corruption and abuse of power – must be such that according to their ordinary grammatical meaning when read and understood by reasonable persons – must be certain or explicit enough for those reasonable persons to say, “of course, all these exclude the Islamic theocratic state espoused by PAS”.’

  403. #404 by Lee Wang Yen on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:30 pm

    oops…’both REQUIRE the…’

  404. #405 by allasstra on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 5:56 pm

    thanks,…jeffery, you have been blessed with a 3rd eye…

    3 profesionals;

    [a] judge
    [b] lawyer
    [c] accountant;

    a judge can easily give up it’s principle core value of upholding justice while being a practising judge,…and so can can a lawyer giving up it’s core value defending the innocent/prosecuting the guilty and resort to looking for loop-holes while being a lawyer(very common in the u.s).

    however,an accountant can never give up the application of mathematics and still being an accountant…even when it’s trying to cook up accounting iregularities….the application of mathematics are indispensable…and the moment an accountant stop using math,he/she stop being one…

    see….

  405. #406 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 7:55 pm

    Under PR, Islamization would continue. But it would stop the intrusions we now see of Islamic values into the lives and lifestyles of non-Muslims.

  406. #407 by znita07 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:11 pm

    undergrad2 Says:

    Today at 19: 55.50 (1 hour ago)
    Under PR, Islamization would continue. But it would stop the intrusions we now see of Islamic values into the lives and lifestyles of non-Muslims.

    BUT I ALSO WOULD NOT WANT ISLAMIC VALUES INTO MY LIVES AND LIFESTYLES OF MALAYS LIKE MYSELF.

    Not just non-muslims.

    I don’t practise it but why should I be harassed and forced to do things I don’t want to do?

  407. #408 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:47 pm

    “I don’t practise it but why should I be harassed and forced to do things I don’t want to do?” znita

    I’m with you on that one, znita!

    The keyword is “intrusion”. It should not intrude on our private lives – Muslims or non-Muslims, Malays or non-Malays. Your relationship with God is a personal one.

  408. #409 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 9:50 pm

    I believe PKR under Anwar will adopt a more liberal but cautious approach. It’s leaders must know that they are treading a thin line here!

  409. #410 by znita07 on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 - 11:12 pm

    I hope so but I am sure Anwar knows how to. And do not betray our trusts.
    That’s very important!

  410. #411 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 1:29 am

    “I hope so but I am sure Anwar knows how to” znita

    Should Malays expect a return to the era of Tunku (who loved whisky, poker and horses, and women – not necessarily in that order), Razak and Hussein Onn, when religion was a personal matter, when you could then eat at Chinese restaurants all over PJ Newtown and had second helpings of char koay teow, drink Anchor, Carlsberg and Tiger beer by the jars at Pines and pubs scattered all over KL and PJ, smoked weed at discos at Time Tunnel along Jalan Ampang and The Cellar in PJ, dressed in revealing miniskirts and tank tops and do whatever you chose to do including Saturday nights “kereta rosak” along Jln. Damansara with your hot boyfriend or girlfriend when the police could be counted upon to provide security, when nobody gave so much as a second look at you, and when there was no moral police around to spoil your fun. Not to forget Rose Chan and her many young and sexy apprentices, when smoking acquired a new meaning and ping pong balls had nothing to do with the game of ping pong?

    Contrary to popular belief there is only one way to skin a cat.

  411. #412 by znita07 on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 4:53 am

    undergrad2,
    How I wish those times could return…
    Tunku’s era was the era when the Malays were at its best and that was when UMNO,MCA,MIC,DAP was born.

    So you see, we all wanted the same thing then.

    I don’t know what has happened now..

    To hell with Wahhabism!

  412. #413 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 6:10 am

    ////smoking acquired a new meaningand ping pong balls had nothing to do with the game of ping pong/// at 2nd Floor Wisma Central?? :)

    Life was easier when leader (PM) easy going with a “live and let live attitude”, we don’t need too smart and devious alecs as leaders to lead us. There was this “smart” one who when young wrote a letter to easy going Tunku to step down and, when old, also wrote to easy going ‘sleepy head’ PM to step down.

    Nothing has ever been the same since his advent into the political scene, changing our lives as Malaysians forever.

    Today the great battle is to fight and try roll back his munificent bequests that had ended the good times we had and could have had.

  413. #414 by JDoe on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 8:37 am

    znita07, gua tabik sama lu… probably you are one in a million malay muslim women, with a very different and interesting perspective! unfortunately, not many of them share your views.

  414. #415 by TTDI_KL on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 10:24 am

    I think the issue is not just possibility of Federation of Malaysia becoming an Islamic State. We should also confront, debate and challenge that no state (negeri) in Malaysia, be it before March 8 or after March 8, has any right to declare itself Islamic. It is not constitutional and it has no consent of the people of the whole country. A state within a Federation is NOT completely sovereign in doing any damn thing.

  415. #416 by i_love_malaysia on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 3:28 pm

    I have a thinking out of the box solution to propose, so that Malaysia will be free from the problems of race, religion etc but it wont be free from other types of problems, but be sure of very minimum problems on race and religion and no one will be playing the race and religion games in politics :-

    1. Whole Malaysia will be subdivided into certain no. of independent states according to the majority of the people of the same race or religion of the particular location. The minority will be given the option to move to the state where they are the majority there.

    2. Why force ourselves to live with people of different thinking etc. and wasted all the energy in solving race & religion issues instead of building the country up!!!

    3. Look at Singapore, it is much better off after gaining independent (even though that was not what they wanted in the first place) than remains in Malaysia and may end up worst than Penang if continued to be in Malaysia until today!!!

  416. #417 by i_love_malaysia on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 3:47 pm

    Sit back and relax, see and enjoy the creation of God and think of His goodness!!! we are living on a lonely planet all by ourselves!!! may be 6 billion of us here and we are fighting for our right instead of working together to reach the universe and make them ours!!!

    http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080417.html

  417. #418 by znita07 on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 3:50 pm

    JDoe Says:

    Today at 08: 37.24 (7 hours ago)
    znita07, gua tabik sama lu… probably you are one in a million malay muslim women, with a very different and interesting perspective! unfortunately, not many of them share your views.

    I am not a woman.
    My nick is just a nick but I am a man.

  418. #419 by Loh on Thursday, 17 April 2008 - 7:41 pm

    If UMNO is made the only opposition party, with all the others forming the next government, it would be interesting to see whether UMNO would chose to compaign for Islamic state, or Malaysian Malaysia.

  419. #420 by lopez on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 4:30 pm

    Some people like to do it from the top, some preferred to be lying down yet some like to do it by them self, yet some even bizarre ones do it any which way in consensus with each other.

    Religion is yesterday’s world of today’s psychiatry,
    some of us are still living in the yesterday’s world. There is no psychiatrist in yesterday world….religion takes the influence.

    Wake up, there is no such thing as religious nations, behind the veil is a bunch of nut case overpowering your little brains.

    you pray every damn second, cleanse yourself with whatever..you still die and decay into mother earth while being cheated by those who advocate you did wrong and must do right.

    HECK i forgot ,,what about the soul where does it go…will it die …nobody knows still …only guess work and imaginations of man mind.

    A nation is about people, standing firmly on the ground not floating in a bunch of clouds,…dreaming away…what if and all….dream on.

  420. #421 by znita07 on Saturday, 19 April 2008 - 6:41 pm

    lopez Says:
    A nation is about people, standing firmly on the ground not floating in a bunch of clouds,…dreaming away…what if and all….dream on.

    You are right !

  421. #422 by lakilompat on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:19 pm

    Religions can be artificially manipulated to advantage the governing body.

  422. #423 by i_love_malaysia on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:37 pm

    lakilompat,

    “Religions can be artificially manipulated to advantage the governing body.” – well said. So, it does not matter what religion the governing body is i.e. Islam, Christianity etc. and they subject to the same. Just look back the human history and you will see it clearly.

  423. #424 by tangwengheng on Thursday, 24 July 2008 - 1:58 pm

    http://tangwengheng.blogspot.com/

    Is man zheng (literal translation for the people’s party in Cantonese) turning into mun zheng (mosquito party)?

    Gerakan has been losing its sense of direction. Despite claiming to be a Chinese-based multi-racial party within BN, it has lost significant support among the Chinese community due to the perceived frequent kow-tow to UMNO.

    Its standing among the Indian community is even worse. Lack of Indian representation in its party leadership, its pre-March 8 silence on issues concerning Indian community (including HINDRAF) and failure to field any Indian candidate in the recent general election count among the reasons.

    Ironically, DAP, used to be seen as an opposition Chinese-based party known for championing communal cause, now has the most number of elected representatives from the Indian community. In fact, it has the first Deputy Chief Minister and State Assembly Speaker from that community.

    Gerakan has been wiped out from its power base in the Penang state following the March 8 political tsunami. Without any elected representative in Parliament/State Assembly from the state, it does not even get a seat on the opposition bench in the assembly hall.

    Without any platform to work on, the party will spend the next few years in political wilderness. Gerakan’s absence in the Cabinet (essentially the main decision-making body in the country) only makes it worse.
    The fact that some of its members resorted to putting up road signs in Chinese language to garner publicity is a reflection of their desperation.

    Deeply wounded from its miscalcualted ‘marriage’ with PAS in 1999 and failure of a quick rebound in 2004 due to the initial popularity of PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who had just entered the office, DAP has successfully re-engineered itself as a party that promotes competency, accountability and transparency for Malaysians. And the party was duly rewarded with its greatest ever electoral success in the history on March 8, 2008.

    Gerakan now faces similar challenges or risks sinking into oblivion.

You must be logged in to post a comment.