It was a quiet Sunday today. After sending JJ to Sentral this morning because he was supposed to witness an ad shoot or something, I was home the whole day. By the way, JJ is still out there somewhere but it's OK because he is getting relevant exposure in his chosen line of work.
Sometime in the late afternoon, someone rang the doorbell and looking out the window I saw four young-looking people. At first impression, I thought they were students doing some part-time survey or promo thingy. There was a guy and three girls. They told me they had something to share (regarding Christianity of course) and asked for a few minutes of my time. On closer scrutiny, none of them looked anything above 23 (Krystyn's age) and curiosity got the better of me so I invited them in.
The group said they had just graduated. My initial evaluation after a brief introduction was through visual impression. The guy (from Sarawak) who looked typically nerdy said he graduated overseas (did not say what discipline).
The three girls had distinctly different looks from each other. A prettier one with bright eyes who had graduated from Universiti Malaya in accounting (looked to, and did have a better command of English); a born Christian. Another who looked definitely ordinary had a degree in marketing from UPM or UKM; she looked the type who would feel at home in a Christian fellowship. The third (also from Sarawak) was a graduate in finance and economics I think. She was definitely in need of professional skin care. The second and the third girls appeared more enthusiastic and they revealed later that they were not born into Christian families but had recently converted to the faith.
The guy was the leader and I prompted him to begin his "sharing". They must have been taught by their church elders some form of canned presentation; everytime he mention a seemingly "salient" point the second and third girl would chorus his words in tandem as if cued. Anyway, they were trying to sell me Jesus...
Guy: "Uncle, all you have to do is to embrace the Spirit" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "How do I do that?"
Guy: "Just say three simple words" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "Wah! So easy wan ah. Say what ah?"
Guy: "The Lord Jesus"
Me: "You sure or not? So simple only ah. Just say the words and I can go to Heaven ah?"
Guy: "No lah, you have to accept Jesus in your mind (he did say "mind") by saying the three words then the Spirit will grow in you and you are on your way".
They were obviously all reasonably intelligent kids but I suppose still very naive and vulnerable to persuasive church elders. I was of course amused by the whole thing but felt I should stop wasting their time because they were certainly wasting mine. Moreover, I was already laughing in my mind because they reminded me of Boney M singing "The Rivers of Babylon":
What concerned me was that these 4 Chinese youth who admitted to not having had any life-shaking upheavals in life yet, are so besotted and obsessed with their religion which they obviously had not sufficiently studied in depth. There they were trying to teach me about my afterlife when they had not really begun to live their own real-life!
I was thinking they should be channeling their energy and devotion towards joining hands with other youths of Malaysia in demanding a better future for themselves in THIS promised land called Malaysia.
The session ended with me advising them to study Christianity in greater width and depth, and more importantly, also study the religions of others. But most important of all; find out in wider perspective what the increasing numbers of "Non-believers" believe. Gain more knowledge before deciding to put on the blinkers!
The guy was of course not very pleased that he was made to look rather unconvincing in front of his "flock". Hope they learnt something.
Hmmm... JJ is still out in KL somewhere. I know he has the same degree of dedication as the 4 youths but his is to learn as much, in the shortest possible time by creating opportunities and at the same time, not wasting opportunities that come his way.
Watch the following video too and see what many other Malaysian youth are doing:
...and this was a prequel:
Monday, 20 September 2010
Friday, 17 September 2010
Professor Dr Azmi Sharom Being Crystal Clear
http://bfm.my/assets/files/MarketWatch/2010-09-14_CA_AzmiSharom.mp3
Monday, 13 September 2010
Be Careful Who You Call
A few months ago, we ordered pizza from Canadian Pizza. Being regular customers our contact information was on their database system.
I usually try to use such occasions to show Krystyn and JJ ways to handle telephone conversations with customer service personnel at the other end of the phoneline. To cut the story short, the person on the other end showed attitude and I put him in his place (without fuss nor profanities).
Fast forward almost the same number of months, on one Sunday I received 3 anonymous phonecalls at 4.00 am. The phone calls were obscene and the person threatened to kill me and all that shit. I merely laughed at him and he said he knew where I stay, etc. I was laughing because his mobile number was showing on my phone.
At 3.00 pm the same day I lodged a police report at the nearest station. The Investigating Officer happened to be from King Edward VII School Taiping! My alma mater too!. It was not the culprit's lucky day. He had picked the wrong guy to threaten!
By about 11.30 pm the same day, the culprit was already roped into the balai. Who says the PDRM is not doing its job? The offence is punishable with 3-7 years jail. It turned out to be the Canadian Pizza guy a few months back! He had carried a grudge for that long and he said he was drunk when he called!
Two questions; (1) What does that make Canadian Pizza? (2) What do I do with the culprit (who is 26 years old); send him to jail for 3 years?
It suffices to say the culprit did not have a good two weeks until I decided what to do with him. I believe he learnt his lesson so I sent him to his temple to make 2 vows: (1) Never to repeat such stupidity and (2) Since he was to get married the following year; vow to be good to his wife and kids. I dropped the complaint.
What about Canadian Pizza? Well, what about Canadian Pizza.
I usually try to use such occasions to show Krystyn and JJ ways to handle telephone conversations with customer service personnel at the other end of the phoneline. To cut the story short, the person on the other end showed attitude and I put him in his place (without fuss nor profanities).
Fast forward almost the same number of months, on one Sunday I received 3 anonymous phonecalls at 4.00 am. The phone calls were obscene and the person threatened to kill me and all that shit. I merely laughed at him and he said he knew where I stay, etc. I was laughing because his mobile number was showing on my phone.
At 3.00 pm the same day I lodged a police report at the nearest station. The Investigating Officer happened to be from King Edward VII School Taiping! My alma mater too!. It was not the culprit's lucky day. He had picked the wrong guy to threaten!
By about 11.30 pm the same day, the culprit was already roped into the balai. Who says the PDRM is not doing its job? The offence is punishable with 3-7 years jail. It turned out to be the Canadian Pizza guy a few months back! He had carried a grudge for that long and he said he was drunk when he called!
Two questions; (1) What does that make Canadian Pizza? (2) What do I do with the culprit (who is 26 years old); send him to jail for 3 years?
It suffices to say the culprit did not have a good two weeks until I decided what to do with him. I believe he learnt his lesson so I sent him to his temple to make 2 vows: (1) Never to repeat such stupidity and (2) Since he was to get married the following year; vow to be good to his wife and kids. I dropped the complaint.
What about Canadian Pizza? Well, what about Canadian Pizza.
 |
| Once upon a time tough guy |
 |
| "Tough guy" begging for mercy |
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Nine Years After 9/11
My blogger friend Estrelita Soliano Grosse posted this on Facebook today, "watching the 9/11 commemorations. Sad. Solemn. Where were you that night?"
I commented: "On the computer at home till I saw it as breaking news on one of the news sites. Then turned on CNN on TV and began missing Jeannie who was on assignment in Hong Kong after turning down New York where she would have been at the Marriott next to the two towers!"
What I did not add was that Jeannie decided to quit her travels after 9/11 because she suddenly realized she missed the family too much and her flight cancellations in the subsequent global airlines panic made terrorism too close to home.
She later related that she had turned on the TV just in time to see the plane hit Tower 2 and thought to herself, "What a realistic movie!".
Why am I thinking of Jeannie today? Because 9/11 affected us All.
Postscript: Just read that the moron Pastor Terry Jones has called off his Quran burning plans. I was sure his threat to perpetuate the madness was a publicity stunt. He succeeded.
What I did not add was that Jeannie decided to quit her travels after 9/11 because she suddenly realized she missed the family too much and her flight cancellations in the subsequent global airlines panic made terrorism too close to home.
She later related that she had turned on the TV just in time to see the plane hit Tower 2 and thought to herself, "What a realistic movie!".
Why am I thinking of Jeannie today? Because 9/11 affected us All.
Postscript: Just read that the moron Pastor Terry Jones has called off his Quran burning plans. I was sure his threat to perpetuate the madness was a publicity stunt. He succeeded.
Milestones
Jeannie had always looked forward to being at Krystyn's graduation and on 21st August, she was. I am sure Krystyn would have preferred Jeannie's physical presence at the convocation but it marvels me to observe the mother and daughter occasion playing out on a spiritual level from the day before, till the day after. Krystyn gives a new meaning to a Degree in Communication!
Krystyn had always been Jeannie's pride and joy, not only as a daughter that she mentored but also as great friends, especially the last two years of Jeannie's life. There was just no way Jeannie would miss Krystyn's convocation!
Jeannie and JJ. What can I say...the two are so similar in so many ways. She encouraged his interest in music and the two were often dueting on karaoke at home and outside. Jeannie was tough on JJ yet she cared for him the most. She brought him up to be a man and she would be proud that at 20 now he has the makings of a fine man. The values she taught him are intact.
I would expect that Krystyn and JJ will really come into their own in the next couple of years. There will be more milestones as they progress forth and I know the values Mummy has ingrained in their hearts will remain their beacon.
Friday, 10 September 2010
What Now?
First in The Star Paper: "Umno rejects Perkasa".
Then in the Malaysia Insider: "Perkasa severs ties with Umno"
A perceptive friend then commented: "Does this confirm the ties Perkasa had with UMNO earlier?"
Monday, 6 September 2010
Well Spoken And Charming...
Compare this...
...to this:
One talks direct and the other talks down. Who would you be inclined to trust?
...to this:
One talks direct and the other talks down. Who would you be inclined to trust?
Sunday, 5 September 2010
In The Words Of My Future Prime Minister: "Malaysia or Malaysaja?"
Checkmate! Perkasa. Nurul Izzah made an offer to Perkasa it could not accept yet could not refuse.
The "Ultimate Malaysian Debate" has become the ultimate gambit to expose Perkasa for what it actually is; a huge propaganda exercise meant to propagate seige mentality that will imprison majority Malay minds in order for the continued personal gains of the minority.
The expected Perkasa response, "Perkasa declares Malay rights not for debate" is the choice between the lesser of two evils for Perkasa in it's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. In this effort to give an impression of a stalemate and to salvage dignity and manhood, the "jantan" Perkasa has had to sacrifice its cojones. Yet the only thing stale is the increasing smell of its defeat.
And as if to balance the gender odds, it was probably instrumental in getting another woman (the vanquished ex-Lembah Pantai MP, Sharizat Jalil) to weigh in with her two sen.
Perhaps Nurul Izzah's most telling statement in her debate offer to Perkasa is the question: "...what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?". I think the answer obviously lies in the hidden agenda of Perkasa.
My own hope is that the end-game will see Nurul Izzah installed as the first woman Prime Minister of Malaysia. That would herald a new chess game which I hope will see ALL Malaysians on the same side. Please read this from the Malaysian Insider:
The ultimate Malaysian debate: Malaysia or Malaysaja? — Nurul Izzah AnwarAugust 31, 2010
AUG 31 — Perkasa claims to defend Malay rights in a multi racial Malaysia. And these Malay rights are inalienable, non-negotiable and permanent. Those that disagree with their interpretation of these Malays rights are deemed treacherous and should leave Malaysia.
In the spirit of Ramadhan and Merdeka, I would like to invite Perkasa to a Constructive Engagement for a new beginning for Malaysia with me.
I would like to ask Perkasa, several key questions to better understand, and together seek real solutions for the crisis it claims the Malays are facing.
I believe that Perkasa is the current vocal, and not necessarily the majority voice of the Malays. And by all indication, Perkasa is the alter-ego of Umno.
If Perkasa can be engaged constructively and a resolution found, then we would have answered the acid-test of Malay concerns once and for all?
To have an honest Constructive Engagement or dialogue, I suggest that we must decide on four fundamental principles.
First, we must base our dialogue on an agreed standard reference document. Should it be the Malaysian Constitution? The Umno constitution? Or the Perkasa constitution?
If we are unable to decide then our dialogue becomes futile and a monologue at best.
However, looking at how Perkasa continues to refer to Article 153 (even brandishing a copy of the constitution in media events) we can infer that the Constitution indeed is the preferred standard reference document for this dialogue.
Second, once we decide on the standard reference document, then we have to address the issue of constitutional interpretation?
For example, nowhere in the written constitution is it mentioned specifically of the existence of the term ‘Malay rights’. Instead the only term spelled out is the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays in Article 153.
The Article contains specifically, of the powers vested in the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning along with quotas in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
Another case in point is interpreting to reconcile the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays provisions with other non-Malay citizens with Article 8(1): “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.
It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues.
The role of the King is central to the issue of constitutional interpretation, as Article 153 of the Constitution states that: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”
However, it should be noted that the existing judiciary already acts as an interpreter of constitutional matters in Malaysia.
For the purpose of this dialogue, both sides can present their interpretation of the constitution to be rebutted subsequently.
Third, the dialogue be made public and presented to the people for feedback and validation.
Again, it would have been ideal if a Referendum Process is legalised whereby such fundamental issue can be decided and resolved by the citizens and made binding to all.
As an alternative, the public feedback for comments and recommendation mechanism through letters or the internet would have to do. It is not binding but it would be a measure of public participation, which can only enrich our democratic process.
Fourth, the dialogue format is suggested as follows, I shall submit my point of view in the form of this open article to Perkasa for a rebuttal, and also later for Perkasa to provide their version for my subsequent rebuttal.
The outcome shall be presented to the public for comments and recommendations.
Then as a test of sincerity I invite Perkasa to a Publicly Televised Debate.
Dialogue Safeguards
I propose both Perkasa and I will indemnify all political parties from our views.
Maybe Umno might disagree with Perkasa’s views or PR mine. And all political parties can participate at the comments and recommendations stage if it wishes.
To avoid being seditious, I propose that our views are qualified as an attempt to seek clarification and not to challenge or repeal the Constitution.
I believe that Perkasa and I are true Malaysians and Patriots, but that only our views may differ, hopefully for now.
However, if Perkasa refuses to engage on this matter at all, then it is sufficient for the people and history to judge this dialogue as my sincere attempt to reach out to them for the sake of our country.
My first question is; who is a Malay?
Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution, defines Malay as being one who “professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on the 31st of August 1957.”
Therefore, constitutionally, a Malay is one who speaks the language, practices the religion of Islam, and performs the rights and rituals of its culture.
My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?
My second question is; what are Malay rights?
Malay rights is an ideological and philosophical and not a legal and constitutional construct.
Article 153 only mentions the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays, and not the ‘Special Rights’ of the Malays.
The term Malay rights is alluding to the unwritten ‘Social Contract’ that defines a ‘Malay Agenda’ which has been extended to include the term ‘Malay rights’.
The Social Contract outlines certain privileges that the Malay community enjoys in exchange for granting citizenship rights to non-Malays during independence by the founding fathers as contained in Articles 14-18, Chapter 1 Part III- Citizenship, of the constitution.
These privileges collectively, are referred to as the ‘Malay Agenda’ which includes provisions on the status of Malay rulers to be preserved, with the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be elected from His Majesties. Islam would be the national religion, and the Malay language would be the national language. The ‘Malay Agenda’ also includes provisions of economic privileges accorded by Article 153.
It is also pertinent to note, that according to the Reid Commission that drafted the constitution, Article 153 was intended as temporary preferences to seek racial parity, subject to be reviewed after 15 years by Parliament as to its continued need.
It then should have been reviewed in 1972 but was preceded by the 1969 race riots. Efforts were made, that no sunset clause be included for Article 153, and that under the Sedition Act (1971), it is illegal to be discussed even by Parliament.
These economic privileges in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots, was then institutionalised into the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was then extended as the New Development Policy (NDP) from 1990-2000 and currently we are in the final year of the 3rd Outline Perspective Plan (OPP3 2000-2010) which also includes the National Vision Policy.
However, we welcome the announced change from a race-based to a need-based affirmative action policy as outlined in NEM, but if past practices are any indication, the initial affirmative action stance along with an affiliation-based discrimination will still remain. We will continue to find that the actual wealth distribution will still be skewed to the cronies of the ruling elite.
This has become a ‘Malay Right and Entitlement’ and the cornerstone of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, which continues to even overshadow the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by the Najib government today.
My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay Rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?
My third question is; what is the Perceived ‘Malay Anger’ about?
Can it be that the ‘Malay Anger’ built on ‘Malay Insecurities’, may appear to be racist in form, but in essence is a ‘Malay Siege Mentality’ defensive reaction, to the failure in achieving the NEP goals (reborn as the NDP in 1990, followed by the OPP3 and refined as the current NEM) after 40 years of implementation?
Can it also be that the false sense of losing Malay Entitlement and Privileges has crystallised into a political ideology of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, that further divides the nation?
Can it be that the Malays feel that they are getting poorer, marginalised and disillusioned in their own country in spite of the NEP and billions spent?
Can it really be that the ‘Malay Anger’ is conveniently blamed on the industry of the non-Malays and reformed minded Malays?
It seems that the ‘Malay Anger’ is centred on economic entitlements rather than on cultural, royalty, language, legal, educational, religious or political power deficiencies, where the Malay remains dominant and rightfully unchallenged, as seen from the official affirmative action policies, institutions and civil service population composition.
Could it be that the real question nagging the Malay psyche is, what then is the value and utility of having the Malay traditional dances, Royal institutions, Malay language, Malay medium schools, Federal and State Religious bodies, Syariah court system, civil service and the Federal and State governments remain dominantly Malay, when the Malay feels poor?
It is this imbalance of achievements that creates a dysfunctional Malay identity of being only Political Masters in name and not in wealth that keeps ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ alive.
The ‘Malay Anger’ is purposely focused on the dismal achievements of NEP goals and targets that is used as the justification to continue it ‘permanently’ at all cost and beyond reason.
Instead the angry Malays should focus on the diminishing ‘enabling’ factors to equitable and sustainable economic growth (as increasing the economic pie to achieve NEP targets is the main premise to wealth redistribution policies in NEP) caused by cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse that in reality subverts and undermine achieving the well intended NEP goals.
My questions to Perkasa are;
Where does the real blame for the ‘Malay Anger’ lie? Is it with the NEP results or is it with its selective implementation, where only the ruling elite few and their cronies benefit to the detriment of the Malay majority?
How can Perkasa explain just one example, which is the well documented NEP leakage of RM52 billion in equities originally allocated to the Malays that have been sold off?
What impact has cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse have in shaping the ‘Malay Anger’?
Who has really betrayed the ‘Malay Agenda and Malay Rights’?
My fourth and last question is; what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?
In my final analysis, only through free and fair elections that the people can decide if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ or ‘Ketuanan Rakyat’ shall define Malaysia.
Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences.
What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.
We are truly at a monumental cross-road for the soul of our nation.
As a reminder of a possible way forward out of this ‘Malay Dilemma’, a Malaysian statesman, the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once argued that “the question (of the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays) be left to the Malays themselves because as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ‘special position’.” Ismail believed the special position was “a slur on the ability of the Malays.”
After 53 years, are we Malays not educated and self-confident yet?
After 53 years, are we Malays still ignorant to the real causes of our problems yet?
After 53 years, are we not Malay enough to act as the protector and provider of justice, equality, dignity, fraternity, liberty and peace for all who choose to co-exist as partners and fellow citizens yet?
In conclusion, we the Malays must stand up and do what is right for Malaysia and our children as they face the challenges of a competitive borderless world.
Would we be so blind and selfish to risk their future for our sins of the past and our deliberately induced insecurities of the present day?
Then my last question to Perkasa is; Will you allow our country to remain in name as Malaysia or be renamed as Malaysaja?* Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai.
The "Ultimate Malaysian Debate" has become the ultimate gambit to expose Perkasa for what it actually is; a huge propaganda exercise meant to propagate seige mentality that will imprison majority Malay minds in order for the continued personal gains of the minority.
The expected Perkasa response, "Perkasa declares Malay rights not for debate" is the choice between the lesser of two evils for Perkasa in it's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. In this effort to give an impression of a stalemate and to salvage dignity and manhood, the "jantan" Perkasa has had to sacrifice its cojones. Yet the only thing stale is the increasing smell of its defeat.
 |
| Nurul Izzah just before she defeated incumbent Sharizat for Lembah Pantai |
Perhaps Nurul Izzah's most telling statement in her debate offer to Perkasa is the question: "...what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?". I think the answer obviously lies in the hidden agenda of Perkasa.
My own hope is that the end-game will see Nurul Izzah installed as the first woman Prime Minister of Malaysia. That would herald a new chess game which I hope will see ALL Malaysians on the same side. Please read this from the Malaysian Insider:
The ultimate Malaysian debate: Malaysia or Malaysaja? — Nurul Izzah AnwarAugust 31, 2010
AUG 31 — Perkasa claims to defend Malay rights in a multi racial Malaysia. And these Malay rights are inalienable, non-negotiable and permanent. Those that disagree with their interpretation of these Malays rights are deemed treacherous and should leave Malaysia.
In the spirit of Ramadhan and Merdeka, I would like to invite Perkasa to a Constructive Engagement for a new beginning for Malaysia with me.
I would like to ask Perkasa, several key questions to better understand, and together seek real solutions for the crisis it claims the Malays are facing.
I believe that Perkasa is the current vocal, and not necessarily the majority voice of the Malays. And by all indication, Perkasa is the alter-ego of Umno.
If Perkasa can be engaged constructively and a resolution found, then we would have answered the acid-test of Malay concerns once and for all?
To have an honest Constructive Engagement or dialogue, I suggest that we must decide on four fundamental principles.
First, we must base our dialogue on an agreed standard reference document. Should it be the Malaysian Constitution? The Umno constitution? Or the Perkasa constitution?
If we are unable to decide then our dialogue becomes futile and a monologue at best.
However, looking at how Perkasa continues to refer to Article 153 (even brandishing a copy of the constitution in media events) we can infer that the Constitution indeed is the preferred standard reference document for this dialogue.
Second, once we decide on the standard reference document, then we have to address the issue of constitutional interpretation?
For example, nowhere in the written constitution is it mentioned specifically of the existence of the term ‘Malay rights’. Instead the only term spelled out is the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays in Article 153.
The Article contains specifically, of the powers vested in the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning along with quotas in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
Another case in point is interpreting to reconcile the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays provisions with other non-Malay citizens with Article 8(1): “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.
It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues.
The role of the King is central to the issue of constitutional interpretation, as Article 153 of the Constitution states that: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”
However, it should be noted that the existing judiciary already acts as an interpreter of constitutional matters in Malaysia.
For the purpose of this dialogue, both sides can present their interpretation of the constitution to be rebutted subsequently.
Third, the dialogue be made public and presented to the people for feedback and validation.
Again, it would have been ideal if a Referendum Process is legalised whereby such fundamental issue can be decided and resolved by the citizens and made binding to all.
As an alternative, the public feedback for comments and recommendation mechanism through letters or the internet would have to do. It is not binding but it would be a measure of public participation, which can only enrich our democratic process.
Fourth, the dialogue format is suggested as follows, I shall submit my point of view in the form of this open article to Perkasa for a rebuttal, and also later for Perkasa to provide their version for my subsequent rebuttal.
The outcome shall be presented to the public for comments and recommendations.
Then as a test of sincerity I invite Perkasa to a Publicly Televised Debate.
Dialogue Safeguards
I propose both Perkasa and I will indemnify all political parties from our views.
Maybe Umno might disagree with Perkasa’s views or PR mine. And all political parties can participate at the comments and recommendations stage if it wishes.
To avoid being seditious, I propose that our views are qualified as an attempt to seek clarification and not to challenge or repeal the Constitution.
I believe that Perkasa and I are true Malaysians and Patriots, but that only our views may differ, hopefully for now.
However, if Perkasa refuses to engage on this matter at all, then it is sufficient for the people and history to judge this dialogue as my sincere attempt to reach out to them for the sake of our country.
My first question is; who is a Malay?
Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution, defines Malay as being one who “professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on the 31st of August 1957.”
Therefore, constitutionally, a Malay is one who speaks the language, practices the religion of Islam, and performs the rights and rituals of its culture.
My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?
My second question is; what are Malay rights?
Malay rights is an ideological and philosophical and not a legal and constitutional construct.
Article 153 only mentions the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays, and not the ‘Special Rights’ of the Malays.
The term Malay rights is alluding to the unwritten ‘Social Contract’ that defines a ‘Malay Agenda’ which has been extended to include the term ‘Malay rights’.
The Social Contract outlines certain privileges that the Malay community enjoys in exchange for granting citizenship rights to non-Malays during independence by the founding fathers as contained in Articles 14-18, Chapter 1 Part III- Citizenship, of the constitution.
These privileges collectively, are referred to as the ‘Malay Agenda’ which includes provisions on the status of Malay rulers to be preserved, with the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be elected from His Majesties. Islam would be the national religion, and the Malay language would be the national language. The ‘Malay Agenda’ also includes provisions of economic privileges accorded by Article 153.
It is also pertinent to note, that according to the Reid Commission that drafted the constitution, Article 153 was intended as temporary preferences to seek racial parity, subject to be reviewed after 15 years by Parliament as to its continued need.
It then should have been reviewed in 1972 but was preceded by the 1969 race riots. Efforts were made, that no sunset clause be included for Article 153, and that under the Sedition Act (1971), it is illegal to be discussed even by Parliament.
These economic privileges in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots, was then institutionalised into the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was then extended as the New Development Policy (NDP) from 1990-2000 and currently we are in the final year of the 3rd Outline Perspective Plan (OPP3 2000-2010) which also includes the National Vision Policy.
However, we welcome the announced change from a race-based to a need-based affirmative action policy as outlined in NEM, but if past practices are any indication, the initial affirmative action stance along with an affiliation-based discrimination will still remain. We will continue to find that the actual wealth distribution will still be skewed to the cronies of the ruling elite.
This has become a ‘Malay Right and Entitlement’ and the cornerstone of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, which continues to even overshadow the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by the Najib government today.
My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay Rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?
My third question is; what is the Perceived ‘Malay Anger’ about?
Can it be that the ‘Malay Anger’ built on ‘Malay Insecurities’, may appear to be racist in form, but in essence is a ‘Malay Siege Mentality’ defensive reaction, to the failure in achieving the NEP goals (reborn as the NDP in 1990, followed by the OPP3 and refined as the current NEM) after 40 years of implementation?
Can it also be that the false sense of losing Malay Entitlement and Privileges has crystallised into a political ideology of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, that further divides the nation?
Can it be that the Malays feel that they are getting poorer, marginalised and disillusioned in their own country in spite of the NEP and billions spent?
Can it really be that the ‘Malay Anger’ is conveniently blamed on the industry of the non-Malays and reformed minded Malays?
It seems that the ‘Malay Anger’ is centred on economic entitlements rather than on cultural, royalty, language, legal, educational, religious or political power deficiencies, where the Malay remains dominant and rightfully unchallenged, as seen from the official affirmative action policies, institutions and civil service population composition.
Could it be that the real question nagging the Malay psyche is, what then is the value and utility of having the Malay traditional dances, Royal institutions, Malay language, Malay medium schools, Federal and State Religious bodies, Syariah court system, civil service and the Federal and State governments remain dominantly Malay, when the Malay feels poor?
It is this imbalance of achievements that creates a dysfunctional Malay identity of being only Political Masters in name and not in wealth that keeps ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ alive.
The ‘Malay Anger’ is purposely focused on the dismal achievements of NEP goals and targets that is used as the justification to continue it ‘permanently’ at all cost and beyond reason.
Instead the angry Malays should focus on the diminishing ‘enabling’ factors to equitable and sustainable economic growth (as increasing the economic pie to achieve NEP targets is the main premise to wealth redistribution policies in NEP) caused by cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse that in reality subverts and undermine achieving the well intended NEP goals.
My questions to Perkasa are;
Where does the real blame for the ‘Malay Anger’ lie? Is it with the NEP results or is it with its selective implementation, where only the ruling elite few and their cronies benefit to the detriment of the Malay majority?
How can Perkasa explain just one example, which is the well documented NEP leakage of RM52 billion in equities originally allocated to the Malays that have been sold off?
What impact has cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse have in shaping the ‘Malay Anger’?
Who has really betrayed the ‘Malay Agenda and Malay Rights’?
My fourth and last question is; what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?
In my final analysis, only through free and fair elections that the people can decide if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ or ‘Ketuanan Rakyat’ shall define Malaysia.
Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences.
What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.
We are truly at a monumental cross-road for the soul of our nation.
As a reminder of a possible way forward out of this ‘Malay Dilemma’, a Malaysian statesman, the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once argued that “the question (of the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays) be left to the Malays themselves because as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ‘special position’.” Ismail believed the special position was “a slur on the ability of the Malays.”
After 53 years, are we Malays not educated and self-confident yet?
After 53 years, are we Malays still ignorant to the real causes of our problems yet?
After 53 years, are we not Malay enough to act as the protector and provider of justice, equality, dignity, fraternity, liberty and peace for all who choose to co-exist as partners and fellow citizens yet?
In conclusion, we the Malays must stand up and do what is right for Malaysia and our children as they face the challenges of a competitive borderless world.
Would we be so blind and selfish to risk their future for our sins of the past and our deliberately induced insecurities of the present day?
Then my last question to Perkasa is; Will you allow our country to remain in name as Malaysia or be renamed as Malaysaja?* Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai.
Saturday, 4 September 2010
Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah Interview On BFM89.9
A voice in the UMNO wilderness? Voicing out for the Nation. An ideal personality for Prime Ministership in these uncertain times...
Do listen to this BFM89.9 interview with TRH on 1st September 2010, a day after Merdeka Day.
Could his new NGO be the rallying point for the rakyat to take back Malaysia through the ballot box? A vehicle for Haris Ibrahim's concept of A Third Force perhaps?
http://bfm.my/assets/files/Breakfast%20Grill/2010-09-1_BreakfastGrille_ChuangNoelle_TengkuRazaleigh_FULL_Podcast.mp3
Do listen to this BFM89.9 interview with TRH on 1st September 2010, a day after Merdeka Day.
Could his new NGO be the rallying point for the rakyat to take back Malaysia through the ballot box? A vehicle for Haris Ibrahim's concept of A Third Force perhaps?
http://bfm.my/assets/files/Breakfast%20Grill/2010-09-1_BreakfastGrille_ChuangNoelle_TengkuRazaleigh_FULL_Podcast.mp3
Thursday, 2 September 2010
That Anarchist Namewee Again! Part 2
I am not particularly a fan of Khairi Jamaluddin but in the case of Namewee I seem to be in agreement with his opinion. My position on Namewee remains the same; two wrongs do not make one right.
My previous blogpost on Namewee was posted before KJ's comment on the same appeared in Malaysiakini about 2 hours later.
I concur that Siti Inshah and her other colleague must be made accountable and more importantly Malaysians at large must be told how those comments came about. They give the teaching profession a bad name and the incidents must not repeat. Are'nt all Malaysian children supposed to be 1Malaysia children?
As for Namewee, lets make an example of him as a lesson for all the Chinese racists in Malaysia.
This was what KJ said:
KJ nails down contentious line in Namewee's song
Sep 1, 10 5:36pm
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin believes that Wee Meng Chee @ Namewee's overt insinuation that Malays played a minor role in Malaysia's economic growth was racist in nature.
The lyrics to the song 'Nah' which had landed Wee into trouble with the police contains a line in Malay which reads: "You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" (Don't you know? Who made Malaysia prosperous?)
In a statement today, Khairy (right) said that Wee's assertion in attempt to criticise school principal Siti Inshah Mansor for recently uttering racial remarks against Malaysia's minorities were inapproriate.
"The implication (here is) that the Chinese are the reason for Malaysia's prosperity and as such Malays like Siti Inshah have no business asking the Chinese to 'return' to China.
"The same message could have easily been conveyed by stating that no one should be telling anyone else to 'return' because Malaysia belongs to all its citizens without suggesting that a particular ethnic group has contributed more or less," he said.
"Malays not being too sensitive"
Khairy argued that Wee's actions has instead now exposed himself as a racist.
"Now, my position on the Siti Inshah matter is crystal clear. If she did utter the words as claimed, she should be severely punished.
"But let there be no doubt, Namewee's insinuation that the Chinese are solely responsible for this country's growth is just as blatantly offensive.
"Neither is it a question of Malays being too sensitive. Hurt and anger are to be expected when one community is essentially told they play a minimal role in this country's progress," added Khairy.
Citing an example on how Wee's (left) argument was counterproductive, Khairy said others may be inclined to say that the Chinese should be eternally grateful to the Malays for their citizenship.
"He or she would be mistaken of course, but the point is we cannot allow dis-empathy to feed on itself. We cannot let this vicious cycle go on in perpetuity.
"We cannot play the game of the extremists and the racists on both sides of the spectrum if we are to forge a better path than what they offer," he said.
We know he won't vote BN, but...
"I am utterly against extremism, dis-empathy, insensitivity and racism of any kind - I have spoken out against the likes of Perkasa, Al-Islam magazine and Siti Inshah, often at great political risk.
"And today I am speaking out against Namewee, not because of his race, religion or even the probability that he will not vote BN. But because he was explicitly insulting."
Wee's latest video has sparked a deluge of complaints and slew of police reports.
Last night, he was grilled for nearly three hours at a police station in Petaling Jaya where his statements were recorded.
According to the police, Wee is being investigated for sedition.
My previous blogpost on Namewee was posted before KJ's comment on the same appeared in Malaysiakini about 2 hours later.
I concur that Siti Inshah and her other colleague must be made accountable and more importantly Malaysians at large must be told how those comments came about. They give the teaching profession a bad name and the incidents must not repeat. Are'nt all Malaysian children supposed to be 1Malaysia children?
As for Namewee, lets make an example of him as a lesson for all the Chinese racists in Malaysia.
This was what KJ said:
KJ nails down contentious line in Namewee's song
Sep 1, 10 5:36pm
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin believes that Wee Meng Chee @ Namewee's overt insinuation that Malays played a minor role in Malaysia's economic growth was racist in nature.
The lyrics to the song 'Nah' which had landed Wee into trouble with the police contains a line in Malay which reads: "You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" (Don't you know? Who made Malaysia prosperous?)
In a statement today, Khairy (right) said that Wee's assertion in attempt to criticise school principal Siti Inshah Mansor for recently uttering racial remarks against Malaysia's minorities were inapproriate.
"The implication (here is) that the Chinese are the reason for Malaysia's prosperity and as such Malays like Siti Inshah have no business asking the Chinese to 'return' to China.
"The same message could have easily been conveyed by stating that no one should be telling anyone else to 'return' because Malaysia belongs to all its citizens without suggesting that a particular ethnic group has contributed more or less," he said.
"Malays not being too sensitive"
Khairy argued that Wee's actions has instead now exposed himself as a racist.
"Now, my position on the Siti Inshah matter is crystal clear. If she did utter the words as claimed, she should be severely punished.
"But let there be no doubt, Namewee's insinuation that the Chinese are solely responsible for this country's growth is just as blatantly offensive.
"Neither is it a question of Malays being too sensitive. Hurt and anger are to be expected when one community is essentially told they play a minimal role in this country's progress," added Khairy.
Citing an example on how Wee's (left) argument was counterproductive, Khairy said others may be inclined to say that the Chinese should be eternally grateful to the Malays for their citizenship.
"He or she would be mistaken of course, but the point is we cannot allow dis-empathy to feed on itself. We cannot let this vicious cycle go on in perpetuity.
"We cannot play the game of the extremists and the racists on both sides of the spectrum if we are to forge a better path than what they offer," he said.
We know he won't vote BN, but...
"I am utterly against extremism, dis-empathy, insensitivity and racism of any kind - I have spoken out against the likes of Perkasa, Al-Islam magazine and Siti Inshah, often at great political risk.
"And today I am speaking out against Namewee, not because of his race, religion or even the probability that he will not vote BN. But because he was explicitly insulting."
Wee's latest video has sparked a deluge of complaints and slew of police reports.
Last night, he was grilled for nearly three hours at a police station in Petaling Jaya where his statements were recorded.
According to the police, Wee is being investigated for sedition.
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
That Anarchist Namewee Again!
Too much has been written about this little prick who is essentially a publicity hound. I found his previous clip on TNB revolting and attracted quite some flak from certain Muarians (residents of Muar) when I blogged about it.
Don't get me wrong, I am against racism as he says he is, but he could have applied his obvious creativity in a less vulgarly controversial but perhaps more effective way. By this I mean, he could have chosen to write a rap song as coming from the young, impressional students of Siti Inshah. The lyrics could say, depict them asking their headmistress whom they respect why she let them down? What is really in her heart? What should they learn from her? What kind of adults does she want them to become? What is 1Malaysia then? Something like this would certainly tug at the heartstrings of and resonate better with more Malaysians than his profane clip.
He posted his clip on You Tube and that made it public. I went through his clip again:
What did he seek to achieve? Was he just venting or was he trying to incite? One thing is for sure though, he was seeking attention but was he being racist? Many people do not think so but I beg to differ.
Racism is also about stereotyping and profiling. Namewee also showed himself to be a racist by just one line in his clip. See below:
Don't get me wrong, I am against racism as he says he is, but he could have applied his obvious creativity in a less vulgarly controversial but perhaps more effective way. By this I mean, he could have chosen to write a rap song as coming from the young, impressional students of Siti Inshah. The lyrics could say, depict them asking their headmistress whom they respect why she let them down? What is really in her heart? What should they learn from her? What kind of adults does she want them to become? What is 1Malaysia then? Something like this would certainly tug at the heartstrings of and resonate better with more Malaysians than his profane clip.
He posted his clip on You Tube and that made it public. I went through his clip again:
What did he seek to achieve? Was he just venting or was he trying to incite? One thing is for sure though, he was seeking attention but was he being racist? Many people do not think so but I beg to differ.
Racism is also about stereotyping and profiling. Namewee also showed himself to be a racist by just one line in his clip. See below:
"Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" Does he mean only the Chinese made Malaysia rich? Or does he imply the Malays (and others) count for nothing in adding to the nation's economy? Namewee, your arse is showing and it is on the line. I hope it gets whipped!
And congratulations! You have effectively directed the Siti Inshah racial slur limelight directly to your sorry arse and away from the main issue; what made her do what she is alleged to have done? How many are talking about what Siti Inshah is alleged to have said now? You selfish dumb ass!
Tiger Datuk Abdul Razak Musa
The first time I met Tiger Datuk Abdul Razak Musa in person was about a year and a half ago in an old boys meeting at the Curve, PJ. The OBA was looking for someone of integrity and standing to chair a committee for a proposed trust fund for the old school. I was his senior at school and therefore did not know him well personally. He was a quiet and unassuming man; did not talk very much that day. It was certainly not the first time one of our own has risen to a position of distinction but nevertheless we were proud of his achievement.
At the time, the MACC was already very much in the public spotlight and the skepticism about its impartiality was already apparent. In any case, Tiger Abdul Razak Musa is one of our own so we MUST give him the benefit of the doubt!
We did not meet again after that first time but I did notice him in the news occasionally. However, in the last couple of weeks he has suddenly shot to fame in the Teoh Beng Hock inquest for all the wrong reasons.
I followed the proceedings that fateful day (18th August, 2010) on the Malaysian Insider tweets and remember cringing at the words that were being reported almost real-time. Obviously he was doing his job by trying to discredit Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand which is supposedly as good a strategy as any. It was the way he went about doing it that was surprising. He had instead ended up discrediting himself, the MACC, our education system and worse of all the nation! I remember thinking this shit will hit the fan and with all the bad Press thereafter, I refrained from watching the video of the incident more so out of Tiger loyalty and deference than anything else!
This morning, I chanced upon the series of court videos and decided to watch them. After that, I am even more appalled by Tiger Abdul Razak Musa's performance. Maybe he would be more comfortable if he had used Bahasa Malaysia instead, but it was not all about language. He appeared clueless! Not only did Dr Pornthip's answers make mincemeat of his questions, it reminded me of an Asian Schools Rugby Tournament game I played in, in Hatyai, December 1978. Eventual champion, Thailand's Vajiravudh College beat us soundly and thoroughly!
It was a game I would want to forget and I think Tiger Razak Musa would want to forget 18th August, 2010 too.
You judge for yourself:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
Malay Rights And A Malay Woman
Not only no gumption...he has no balls to face a "small fry" who also happens to be a woman.
The fact of the matter is that the true Ibrahim/Mahathir Perkasa agenda will be laid bare in the debate. This is how Perkasa responded to Nurul Izzah's challenge:
Perkasa declares Malay rights not for debate
**********************************
Malaysia's future first woman PM, Nurul Izzah will be disappointed because Ibrahim Ali will not risk his Perkasa all in a single debate with a woman, of all creatures! Mind you this is not ONLY about Malay Rights. It is as much about the Malay Muslim Woman in Malaysia.
Come on Ibrahim! It is obvious you have the gall...let's see if you have the gumption.
This was in the Malaysian Insider:
Nurul Izzah wants clarification from Perkasa on where they are going with their agenda.
Nurul Izzah wants Malay rights debate with Perkasa By Yow Hong Chieh August 31, 2010
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 31 — Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar today invited Perkasa to a public debate on Malay rights, contending that the question of Malay special rights should be put to the King and the people of Malaysia.
Her invitation to the Malay rights group appeared to be an attempt to contain Datuk Ibrahim Ali’s growing influence on policy by locating his discourse squarely within the democratic process.
Referencing Article 153 of the Federal Constitution - which Perkasa says grants “Malays rights” in perpetuity — Nurul pointed out that the article only specified that Malays be given a special position and should, in fact, to be interpreted in light of Articles 8(1) and 8(2) by the King or a body appointed by him.
Article 8(1) states: “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): “Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.”
“It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues,” Nurul said, adding that the judiciary, which already deals with constitutional matters, would also have a role to play.
Alternatively, she proposed a possible solution in the form of a legally binding referendum, while simultaneously challenging Perkasa to both a dialogue through open letters as well as a televised debate.
Nurul argued that “Malay rights”, as envisioned by Perkasa, were an ideological and philosophical construct that was not rooted in either the constitution or law.
“My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?” she asked.
“My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?”
She added that it was important to note that the Reid Commission, which drafted the constitution, had seen Article 153 as temporary measure, subject to review after 15 years by Parliament, before it was institutionalised into the NEP following the 1969 race riots.
Arguing that Malaysia was at a “monumental cross-road”, Nurul hammered home the point that it ultimately came down to the people to decide if Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) or Ketuanan Rakyat (people’s supremacy) was going to define Malaysia.
“Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences,” she warned.
“What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.”
Nurul Izzah wants Malay rights debate with Perkasa By Yow Hong Chieh August 31, 2010
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 31 — Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar today invited Perkasa to a public debate on Malay rights, contending that the question of Malay special rights should be put to the King and the people of Malaysia.
Her invitation to the Malay rights group appeared to be an attempt to contain Datuk Ibrahim Ali’s growing influence on policy by locating his discourse squarely within the democratic process.
Referencing Article 153 of the Federal Constitution - which Perkasa says grants “Malays rights” in perpetuity — Nurul pointed out that the article only specified that Malays be given a special position and should, in fact, to be interpreted in light of Articles 8(1) and 8(2) by the King or a body appointed by him.
Article 8(1) states: “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): “Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.”
“It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues,” Nurul said, adding that the judiciary, which already deals with constitutional matters, would also have a role to play.
Alternatively, she proposed a possible solution in the form of a legally binding referendum, while simultaneously challenging Perkasa to both a dialogue through open letters as well as a televised debate.
Nurul argued that “Malay rights”, as envisioned by Perkasa, were an ideological and philosophical construct that was not rooted in either the constitution or law.
“My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?” she asked.
“My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?”
She added that it was important to note that the Reid Commission, which drafted the constitution, had seen Article 153 as temporary measure, subject to review after 15 years by Parliament, before it was institutionalised into the NEP following the 1969 race riots.
Arguing that Malaysia was at a “monumental cross-road”, Nurul hammered home the point that it ultimately came down to the people to decide if Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) or Ketuanan Rakyat (people’s supremacy) was going to define Malaysia.
“Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences,” she warned.
“What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.”
Infamy Or Esteem?
Although the senile would not recognize senility, it is still not too late for you, Che Det...
Hussein Hamid has this to say:
Mahathir : Relevant Again?
Mahathir is indeed a master of all things politics. He transcends UMNO, Barisan Nasional and possible everything political in Malaysia. Mahathir’s shameless political pragmatism is only trumped by the audacity of his use of issues, whether racial, religious or economic to further his own agenda.
But perhaps in the twilight of his years he has become frail of mind and unable to be the clever manipulator of the public as he once was. He predicted that there will be an escalation in racial tension and division should NEP-style policies be removed. This judicious use of racial and wealth division to conjure up an Armageddon that will destroy our country has only inadvertently exposed Mahathir to the public as the master manipulator that he really is. Perhaps, this time irrevocably! Let me explain why I say this!
Even at 84 Mahathir wants himself to be relevant. Consistently from the time he left government that has been his holy grail. The appointment of Pak Lah as his deputy was a decision made by Mahathir and Mahathir alone. At its simplest level this decision was his prerogative as Prime Minister then. At its worse it was a decision Mahathir took to have someone to succeed him whom he thought he could control and do his bidding when asked.
When the man he chose to succeed him did not (for whatever reason) meet his expectations Mahathir set out to make himself relevant to the process of removing Pak Lah from the office of Prime Minister. How did he do this?
He knew where to look and understood what had to be done and did it. In the name of saving UMNO and Malaysia he worked tirelessly to remove Pak Lah from office. There is no need to go into the intensity of his efforts – suffice for us to reprise his personal attacks on Pak Lah and Pak Lah’s family, on KJ and his ability to even harm UMNO in the process by leaving the party he was once President of – not forever but only until such time as Pak Lah was removed – then he returned as the prodigal son. What can be observed is the single mindedness of this evil man to have his own way no matter what. He had something he wanted to do (remove Pak Lah from office) and how he chose to do it did not matter as long as the end justifies the means.
And now he is at it again. He judges that the racial divide and the unequal division of wealth are issue the public wants resolve. Yes he is right in this assumption! But the words and phrases he uses to frame these issues are chosen not to resolve or manage these issue in a responsible manner but more to incite the people to take sides and formed rigid division amongst the races - at precisely the time when we have no need for these divisions.
Mahathir is not bound by any of these sensibilities. He sees an opportunity to use race and distribution of wealth as a means of making him relevant again - if not to all Malaysians – to enough Malaysian as to create unease within our country. And so Mahathir emerges as the new prophet who skillfully frames the question of race and wealth distribution as the question that must be addressed NOW – over and above anything else. Recklessly he has issued the clarion call – and so he is relevant again.
An UMNO and Barisan Nasional with its back against the wall is torn between trying to decide if what Mahathir is trumpeting is indeed the most important issue of the day.
Of course it is not. Corruption is. Nepotism is. Racial divide is. Politicians who abuse their power is. You eliminate these issues and all will fall into place. That these issues are the problem is already known to all and Mahathir cannot gain enough traction from these issues to establish his relevance in the political arena where Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat are doing battle.
And so he comes up with this :
Dr M warns NEP removal could lead to revolution.
And he now has the attention of the Malays, the non-Malays, UMNO, Barisan Nasional and almost everybody else because we all want to know who is this idiot talking about Ketuanan Melayu and keeping the non-Malays as second-class citizens? Who is waving the specter of revolution and a May 13th over the whole country if these issues are not addressed immediately? Who would do this? Mahathir of course in order to be relevant!
So don’t you all think that it is time we just ignore this man who wants to be relevant in a time when he is no longer relevant? Mahathir has cried wolf too many times in the past to be believed. This man manipulates friends and eliminates enemies. He is not a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He is the wolf through and through. Be wary of this wolf called Mahathir.
The wolf was sick, he vowed a monk to be - But when he got well, a wolf once more was he... Walter Bower
Friday, 27 August 2010
Mahathir According To Seth Godin
This is from Seth Godin:
Senior management
A newly-retired executive takes a job as an adjunct professor and really shakes things up. Both the school and the students are blown away by her fresh thinking and new approaches.
A forty-year old internet executive who has been running his company for decades misses one new trend after another, because he's still living in 1998.
One thing that happens to management when they get senior is that they get stuck. (As we saw with the new professor, senior isn't about old, it's about how long you've been there).
If you've been doing it forever, you discover (but may not realize) that the things that got you this power are no longer dependable.
Reliance on the tried and true can backfire (Rupert keeps missing one opportunity after another, and keeps misunderstanding the medium he works in) or it can (rarely) pay off (Steve Jobs keeps repeating the same business model again and again--it's not an accident that Apple has no real online or social media footprint. Steve believes in beautifully designed objects, closed systems and evangelizing to developers and creatives).
Worth quoting--one of Arthur C. Clarke's lesser known three laws: "When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is probably wrong."
The paradox is that by the time you get to be senior, the decisions that matter the most are the ones that would be best made made by people who are junior...
As they say, if the shoe fits...wear it!
Senior management
A newly-retired executive takes a job as an adjunct professor and really shakes things up. Both the school and the students are blown away by her fresh thinking and new approaches.
A forty-year old internet executive who has been running his company for decades misses one new trend after another, because he's still living in 1998.
One thing that happens to management when they get senior is that they get stuck. (As we saw with the new professor, senior isn't about old, it's about how long you've been there).
If you've been doing it forever, you discover (but may not realize) that the things that got you this power are no longer dependable.
Reliance on the tried and true can backfire (Rupert keeps missing one opportunity after another, and keeps misunderstanding the medium he works in) or it can (rarely) pay off (Steve Jobs keeps repeating the same business model again and again--it's not an accident that Apple has no real online or social media footprint. Steve believes in beautifully designed objects, closed systems and evangelizing to developers and creatives).
Worth quoting--one of Arthur C. Clarke's lesser known three laws: "When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is probably wrong."
The paradox is that by the time you get to be senior, the decisions that matter the most are the ones that would be best made made by people who are junior...
As they say, if the shoe fits...wear it!
Thursday, 26 August 2010
The Man From La La Mancha; Don "Mahathir" Quixote And His Squire, Sancho "Ib Ali" Panza
Unlike Najib who is said to have too much baggage when he became PM, old Tun retired as PM in 2003 with too much baggage. He had possibly hoped that his "Vision 2020" would be enough to set the nation on its way and cement his name in history as the greatest PM ever and ever will be.
Now it appears history will not be too kind to him and being quixotic in his twilight years reduces him to a farce. His latest outburst says it all; labelling those who advocate meritocracy racists is enough said. Tun, just be history ok? You're pathetic.
Read: Vision 2020
Sunday, 22 August 2010
Wednesday, 18 August 2010
Tangkap!!!
No need for too many words. Just watch the Saifuddin Nasution video first:
Disruption of Batu Pahat PR ceramah.
Disruption of peaceful anti-ISA candlelight vigil at Amcorp Mall.
What public gathering will they next declare illegal? These?
Disruption of Batu Pahat PR ceramah.
What public gathering will they next declare illegal? These?
Monday, 16 August 2010
Stating The Obvious, But There Are None So Blind As Those Who Will Not See...
SUNDAY, AUGUST 15, 2010
The NEP and the rich Chinaman - time for the Malays to wise up
Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle
If one good thing results from the Chinese Economic Congress held a day ago and attended by the country’s top political and economic leaders, it would be that the open discourse that took place will force the Malays to confront the fact that the New Economic Policy does not protect or benefit them.
From the speeches made by top Chinese captains of industries on Saturday, especially those with a hot-line to the Umno elite, it is clear they are not bothered if the NEP stays. Although, of course, they were also quick to hedge their bets by pointing out that the New Economic Model, if it comes, may also bring along new opportunities.
But the bottom-line is just like the rich Umnoputras, they stand to gain enormous wealth – beyond the imagination of the ordinary Malaysian – if business continues to be conducted behind closed doors along the corridors of powers in Putrajaya.
It is the ordinary people, the Chinese, Indian, Kadazan-Dusun-Murut and especially the Malays – because they form the bulk of the population – who will suffer the most if the covers built through the years in the name of the NEP to hide corruption are not dismantled soon.
This is what the phrase the rich get richer and the poor get poorer means.
“Have we fared badly? One Chinaman want to build a bungalow of RM40 million!” Malaysian Insider quoted Liew Kee Sin, president of SP Setia, as saying. His property firm is among the main beneficiaries of the huge development in the Putrajaya and Cyberjaya corridors.
What Perkasa and Mahathir do not say
And this is the point that has been glaringly lacking or perhaps intentionally ignored by ultra-Malay rights groups like Perkasa and MPM.
That while the NEP was originally meant to help the poor regardless of ethnicity, it is the rich especially amongst the Malays and the Chinese who have benefited the most by far.
Yet the NEP's original benchmark was simple – to qualify for government aid, all you needed was to be poor. The poorer the easier. But now to secure big government contracts, you have to be Malay or have a Malay front-man, and the richer and more powerful you are, the easier it is to get the deal!
Is Ibrahim Ali, the Perkasa president poor? What about Perkasa patron Mahathir Mohamad? And Mahathir’s well-known friends Halim Saad, Tajudin Ramli, Syed Mokhtar al-Bukhari, Vincent Tan, Francis Yeoh, Ananda Krishna, etc – are they poor?
If most of the rich prefer the NEP to stay - even when the son of its founder has called the current shape of the policy a bastardized version of the original - then who wants to see it go?
Well, the Pakatan Rakyat would. So too would foreign investors, Malaysians who have not been brainwashed by Umno, Perkasa or Mahathir, and also those in the BN government who would prefer to see the NEM implemented for reasons of their own.
"I have strong opinions about how the NEP has been bastardised over the years. At that time, no one knew what the outcome would be. It was a social engineering experiment that no one had ever done before in any country,” said Nazir Razak, whose father Abdul Razak Hussein had introduced the NEP in 1971.
“So they gave it 20 years. And they felt that after 1969, they had to give it a try. But now it is so embedded in everything that we do - in every part of the government, in every part of businesses that it has become a problem.”
This is what the CIMB CEO said during a question-and-answer seesion at the Chinese Economic Congress.
But sadly, pundits may be right in believing that despite Nazir's openness, the fact that his brother is Prime Minister Najib Razak and that both men think the time has come for the NEM to be implemented, at the end of the day the brothers are out-powered by Perkasa’s Ibrahim Ali and his patron Mahathir Mohamad.
All eyes are now on what outrageous reply Ibrahim Ali will make to Nazir. Tragically for Malaysia, its national and economic future may now be in Ibrahim's hands or rather in Mahathir's - not Nazir's or Najib's, going by the way the PM has chosen to talk his talk but not walk it.
Ibrahim Ali's reply to Nazir Razak: Here
Sunday, 15 August 2010
I Love This. From My Favorite Running Dog
This is self-explanatory. I can already imagine some of my Malay friends shaking their heads in disgust.
Utusan columnist tells critics to ‘go home’
By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 15 — Controversial Mingguan Malaysia columnist Dr Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah continued his weekly diatribe against non-Malays, saying today that minorities who cannot respect the special position of Islam and the Malays should return to their homeland.
The Muslim convert also sneered that Malaysia should be renamed “Cinasia” or “Indiasia” if every demand by non-Muslims was accommodated when commenting on Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) columnist Helen Ang’s recent piece “Enforcing NEP on minority religions.”
“Will the practice of prayer (doa) cause the heart of the non-Muslims to melt and embrace Islam? She really (Helen Ang) hates Islam. Prayer (doa) is part of the Malay Muslim culture.
“Why would we want to delete all of our identity for merely wanting to accommodate others. If that’s the case, just change the name of Malaysia to Cinasia or Indiasia. How strange it is this species, never cease trying to challenge the position of Islam and Malays,” he wrote in his Sunday column headlined “Jangan terlalu berani mencabar” (Don’t be so brave to challenge).
In her piece, Ang questioned why non-Muslim religious societies were banned in national schools.
Ang added that the restriction on non-Muslim fellowship in schools has stopped many Chinese parents from sending their children to national schools.
“If I were a mother, I would never wish to subject my vulnerable child to a bellicose environment where my race, and the traditions and faith beliefs I’ve imparted to my son or daughter are disparaged,” she said.
In response, Tee said that the country does not want Ang’s children, whether legal or illegitimate, a favourite line he continually implies about the Chinese.
“She does not need to send her ‘children’ (if any were legitimate) to national school, if she is not confident with the national school or she is scared that her ‘children’ will become Malays. Her ‘children’ are not needed here.
“Just send her ‘children’ to schools in her homeland or overseas. The presence of ‘children’ are not needed here,” he said in a personal attack on Ang, who has also had two police reports lodged against her over her article.
Tee also said that Ang should migrate to the West if she is obsessed with their culture.
“I suggest that she migrate to another country, if this country does not provide her with any freedom. She should go to her country of origin or to the West because there is more ‘freedom’ there to build the biggest church and the highest statue in the world and have vernacular schools as well as having free sex.
“I do not think that she is proud of her ancestors because she prefers to use a white man’s name even though her eyes are sepet,” he said.
Tee stressed that non-Muslims should be grateful because the Malays have been very tolerant.
“Let us compare how the situation of Muslims living in countries where non-Muslims are the majority. Tolerance is very high. Muslims do not pose a problem for non-Muslims, except when their rights taken and exploited like in southern Thailand, Philippines and Palestine. Malay Muslims in Singapore do not make any noise when their land was stolen. They just sat quietly even though their Islamic and Malay rights are slowly taken away by the Chinese community.
“See our tolerance here. For me because the Malays embraced Islam 600 years ago, non-Muslims can live comfortably in this blessed land. The Islamic values have taught the Malays to protect the rights of non-Muslims and to not oppress them,” he added.
On Monday, Malay right-wing group Perkasa today lodged a police report against Ang for allegedly questioning the rights of the Malays and the position of Islam in the country.
COMMENTS
Comments (9) at at 1.30 pm 15th August 2010
btg kali · 58 minutes ago
Doesn't mean you are a convert you can treat others like dirt. You are a traitor to your race and now your words run foul of every human tribe in the word! Ridhuan Tee Abdullah!
************************************************
Dan · 53 minutes ago
You had pushed us into a corner. You had threatened us, ISAed us, sent us live bullets, even pushed us down to death. This piece of yours is nothing compare what we had gone through like 513. We are also prepared that you will not give up power even you lose GE13. Keep barking and hope elder Tee hears it. You are getting too personal meaning you are losing!
************************************************
GenuineMalaysian · 53 minutes ago
Ok, try to do an experiment. Ask all the chinese and indians to leave the country. I can guarantee in 3 months time, the country's economy will be in a meltdown and will be bankrupt.
See you guys dare or now?
************************************************
Old Malaysian · 52 minutes ago
Wow! How much more right does he have to remain in Malaysia then the other non-Malay? This is the kind of running-dog that most people execute during the wars.
This guy is shameless!
************************************************
seberang · 48 minutes ago
We are going home or to places we are welcome. We do send our kids to independent schools so that our kids will be able to go overseas for future studies and hopefully stay at places that appreciate them,. Brain drain will worsened but that is not my problem because we are going home. Our tax money is just a rental payment to feed the natives.
************************************************
old malaysian · 48 minutes ago
Lets hope he is not representative of the muslims in this country? If so, don't blame Islam for getting a bad name. He has failed Islam as well as his race...... or is he what Islam is really all about?.
************************************************
Eric · 42 minutes ago
This is the reason why Malaysia still remains as it is today. It is not about the religion but the people's mindset that will shape our country today and here we have people barking up the wrong tree. Grow up and learn english before you even try to understand implication if any.
************************************************
TheOrion · 40 minutes ago
Is this the way to understanding, transparency and meritocracy? Is this the proper way of dialogue? No substance at all, useless piece of dead wood!
************************************************
cleeman · 39 minutes ago
Coming from him? What else to say!
We are talking about Malaysia as one progressive country where all races are respected and he is taking on narrow racial politics which I believe he is trying very hard to emploit for his selfish personal gain.
I don't think any real Muslim will even consider him as a brother with all his radical and unjust views. Converting to one is easy, practise as one, not him! One thing for sure, he should try getting rid of the Tee in his name, if he ever could, before he talks anything along racial line and put on a racial skin.
************************************************
By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 15 — Controversial Mingguan Malaysia columnist Dr Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah continued his weekly diatribe against non-Malays, saying today that minorities who cannot respect the special position of Islam and the Malays should return to their homeland.
The Muslim convert also sneered that Malaysia should be renamed “Cinasia” or “Indiasia” if every demand by non-Muslims was accommodated when commenting on Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) columnist Helen Ang’s recent piece “Enforcing NEP on minority religions.”
“Will the practice of prayer (doa) cause the heart of the non-Muslims to melt and embrace Islam? She really (Helen Ang) hates Islam. Prayer (doa) is part of the Malay Muslim culture.
“Why would we want to delete all of our identity for merely wanting to accommodate others. If that’s the case, just change the name of Malaysia to Cinasia or Indiasia. How strange it is this species, never cease trying to challenge the position of Islam and Malays,” he wrote in his Sunday column headlined “Jangan terlalu berani mencabar” (Don’t be so brave to challenge).
In her piece, Ang questioned why non-Muslim religious societies were banned in national schools.
Ang added that the restriction on non-Muslim fellowship in schools has stopped many Chinese parents from sending their children to national schools.
“If I were a mother, I would never wish to subject my vulnerable child to a bellicose environment where my race, and the traditions and faith beliefs I’ve imparted to my son or daughter are disparaged,” she said.
In response, Tee said that the country does not want Ang’s children, whether legal or illegitimate, a favourite line he continually implies about the Chinese.
“She does not need to send her ‘children’ (if any were legitimate) to national school, if she is not confident with the national school or she is scared that her ‘children’ will become Malays. Her ‘children’ are not needed here.
“Just send her ‘children’ to schools in her homeland or overseas. The presence of ‘children’ are not needed here,” he said in a personal attack on Ang, who has also had two police reports lodged against her over her article.
Tee also said that Ang should migrate to the West if she is obsessed with their culture.
“I suggest that she migrate to another country, if this country does not provide her with any freedom. She should go to her country of origin or to the West because there is more ‘freedom’ there to build the biggest church and the highest statue in the world and have vernacular schools as well as having free sex.
“I do not think that she is proud of her ancestors because she prefers to use a white man’s name even though her eyes are sepet,” he said.
Tee stressed that non-Muslims should be grateful because the Malays have been very tolerant.
“Let us compare how the situation of Muslims living in countries where non-Muslims are the majority. Tolerance is very high. Muslims do not pose a problem for non-Muslims, except when their rights taken and exploited like in southern Thailand, Philippines and Palestine. Malay Muslims in Singapore do not make any noise when their land was stolen. They just sat quietly even though their Islamic and Malay rights are slowly taken away by the Chinese community.
“See our tolerance here. For me because the Malays embraced Islam 600 years ago, non-Muslims can live comfortably in this blessed land. The Islamic values have taught the Malays to protect the rights of non-Muslims and to not oppress them,” he added.
On Monday, Malay right-wing group Perkasa today lodged a police report against Ang for allegedly questioning the rights of the Malays and the position of Islam in the country.
COMMENTS
Comments (9) at at 1.30 pm 15th August 2010
btg kali · 58 minutes ago
Doesn't mean you are a convert you can treat others like dirt. You are a traitor to your race and now your words run foul of every human tribe in the word! Ridhuan Tee Abdullah!
************************************************
Dan · 53 minutes ago
You had pushed us into a corner. You had threatened us, ISAed us, sent us live bullets, even pushed us down to death. This piece of yours is nothing compare what we had gone through like 513. We are also prepared that you will not give up power even you lose GE13. Keep barking and hope elder Tee hears it. You are getting too personal meaning you are losing!
************************************************
GenuineMalaysian · 53 minutes ago
Ok, try to do an experiment. Ask all the chinese and indians to leave the country. I can guarantee in 3 months time, the country's economy will be in a meltdown and will be bankrupt.
See you guys dare or now?
************************************************
Old Malaysian · 52 minutes ago
Wow! How much more right does he have to remain in Malaysia then the other non-Malay? This is the kind of running-dog that most people execute during the wars.
This guy is shameless!
************************************************
seberang · 48 minutes ago
We are going home or to places we are welcome. We do send our kids to independent schools so that our kids will be able to go overseas for future studies and hopefully stay at places that appreciate them,. Brain drain will worsened but that is not my problem because we are going home. Our tax money is just a rental payment to feed the natives.
************************************************
old malaysian · 48 minutes ago
Lets hope he is not representative of the muslims in this country? If so, don't blame Islam for getting a bad name. He has failed Islam as well as his race...... or is he what Islam is really all about?.
************************************************
Eric · 42 minutes ago
This is the reason why Malaysia still remains as it is today. It is not about the religion but the people's mindset that will shape our country today and here we have people barking up the wrong tree. Grow up and learn english before you even try to understand implication if any.
************************************************
TheOrion · 40 minutes ago
Is this the way to understanding, transparency and meritocracy? Is this the proper way of dialogue? No substance at all, useless piece of dead wood!
************************************************
cleeman · 39 minutes ago
Coming from him? What else to say!
We are talking about Malaysia as one progressive country where all races are respected and he is taking on narrow racial politics which I believe he is trying very hard to emploit for his selfish personal gain.
I don't think any real Muslim will even consider him as a brother with all his radical and unjust views. Converting to one is easy, practise as one, not him! One thing for sure, he should try getting rid of the Tee in his name, if he ever could, before he talks anything along racial line and put on a racial skin.
************************************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)