No Room For A Secular Malaysia

By Admin-S Last updated May 18, 2018

The majority of Muslims voted in the current government to improve their impoverished socioeconomic status, but have no problem with the foundations of Islam being part of governance. They did not vote in Pakatan Harapan to implement secularization but rather, one of the reasons why it is likely that change took so long was the fear that Malaysia would be secularized under a new government.

Dr Rafidah Hanim Mokhtar

Change is necessary.

But changes which are abrupt and not thought through, may bring undesirable consequences; just as the inaccurate diagnosis of a disease will result in the wrong treatment.

More so if these changes are not made based on sound foundational knowledge.

The calls for a ‘secular Malaysia’ reverberate through the media, even whilst the dust has yet to settle, and whilst the nation is still awaiting the full cabinet line-up. 

These calls are unfortunately made as a result of failing to understand that the majority of Muslims from the middle class and rural areas, and a rapidly growing number of professionals hold the religion of Islam as the foundation of their life. Those who made these calls for secularism, barely represent the majority of Muslims in this country. The majority of Muslims voted in the current government to improve their impoverished socioeconomic status, but have no problem with the foundations of Islam being part of governance. They did not vote in Pakatan Harapan to implement secularization but rather, one of the reasons why it is likely that change took so long was the fear that Malaysia would be secularized under a new government.

The structure of the society must be well understood before we implement policies that are made out of incorrect assumptions. Thus, for example, the call for JAKIM to be limited or abolished1, 2 in order to reflect a secular government is a short-sighted one and completely overlooks the bigger roles that religious institutions play. JAKIM provide allowances for more than 15,000 imams and 33,000 religious and Fardu Ain (KAFA) teachers nationwide. In Johor alone, there are about 1,800 teachers with 184,000 children in religious and Fardu Ain classes (KAFA) from the ages of 7 to 12 years, that complement the regular schools that children go to.

JAKIM also runs the Malaysian Islamic Training Institute (ILIM) that trains state and federal government officers on Islam, and the Darul Quran Institute that serves as a higher education centre for Muslim missionaries, and the hafiz and hafiza (those who have memorised the Quran). These cater mainly to students who cannot afford private Islamic schools.  Muslim parents have every right to ensure a balanced education for their children, and they should not be forced to accept the secular worldview which is being promoted by many in the media today.

In short, we cannot and should not deprive 61% of Malaysians, of their rights to religious education.

Recently, we have been appalled by the news of the church bombings inflicted by a family of 6 in Indonesia, where a husband and wife used their four children in a string of deadly suicide attacks on three churches in the city of Surabaya. This is an extremely tragic incident which illustrates a profound lack of understanding of the very basic tenets of Islam in the world’s most populous Muslim country. The Islamic tradition is a deeply scholarly one, with much importance placed on chains of evidence and consensus expert opinion, much like the field of medicine. Many are not aware of how rigorous Islamic scholarship is. With so many ‘Islamic groups’ coming out with their own misguided, haphazard interpretation of Islam due to the lack of structured, foundational knowledge, and unsupervised by a national Islamic institution to boot, it will be more common to see these rogue sects committing acts of violence which have no basis in Islam. The role of JAKIM as an institution to standardize the correct understanding of Islam and to give explanations to combat heresy and extremism, should be thus appreciated rather than condemned.

There were also calls to the new government to ensure our policies are on par with international human rights standards, especially in terms of respect and tolerance of sexual diversity3. In principle, no one should be subjected to abuse or mistreatment, and be robbed of their rights to live, in accordance to Article 1 of the United Nation Declarations of Human Rights (UDHR) that says “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”. However, many agree that these should not be absolute rights, as it has to be balanced with duties and obligations. In fact, the cultural relativist approach to human rights; that is, an approach that views human rights as prima facie and universal, but recognizes culture as a limited source of exceptions and principles of interpretation, is more in accordance with Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. In addition, this is also in line with Vision 2020 which says Malaysia should be a developed country in its own mould and should not be developed only in the economic sense. It must be a nation that is fully developed along all the dimensions: economically, politically, socially, spiritually, psychologically and culturally.

The case of gays, bisexuals and transgenders illustrates this point.

The accorded human rights to gays, bisexuals and transgenders to not be discriminated, abused and harmed should not be mixed with our duties and obligations to ensure the health of the population is taken care of. Oftentimes, these two issues are wrongly viewed as two sides of a coin and mutually exclusive, when they are not. This misunderstanding gives rise to much paranoia such that even discussing epidemiological data of HIV/AIDS from a medical perspective elicits accusations of persecution and discrimination where there is none.

It is of concern that there is a rising trend of HIV infection through sexual intercourse amongst key populations in Malaysia. In the recently published “Global AIDS response progress report Malaysia 2016 in ending AIDS by 2030” (Malaysia Global AIDS 2016) it has been revealed that apart from people who inject drugs and female sexual workers, two other groups that represent populations most affected by the AIDS epidemic (with HIV infection rates exceeding 5%) are men who have sex with men (MSM), and transgender people (TG). To be exact, it was 8.9% in MSM and 5.6% in TG (Malaysia Global AIDS 2016)4. A worldwide meta-analysis study showed that transgenders, carried 48.5 times more risk of getting HIV/AIDS as compared to the general population, which is a very high risk indeed5 . The 2017 data in Malaysia showed that despite being in a minority group, there were 1553 new cases of HIV among gays and bisexuals, as opposed to 1311 new cases among the majority heterosexuals6. These rates are alarming. In fact, the United States of America which has very robust and comprehensive medical approaches to gay, bisexual and transgender health is also showing similar trends where the majority of new cases of HIV infection come from minority groups rather than heterosexuals7.

Is the religious approach, including religious law, such an anathema to the betterment of health amongst gays, bisexuals and transgenders? Epidemiologically, UNAIDS Data 2017 showed that in the Middle East and North Africa, where most Muslim countries are located, and where the majority uphold criminal law with regards to homosexuality, there were an estimated 230,000 people living with HIV (PLHIV) which gives an adult HIV prevalence of 0.1%8. The United States of America as a single country has 1.2 million PLHIV with 0.4 to 0.9 % adult HIV prevalence in 20139. Closer to us, Thailand has 450,000 PLHIV with 1.1% prevalence10. In research, the role of religion has been shown to be beneficial. In a paper entitled The Influence of Religion in HIV Risk11, it was reported that 31 from 51 studies showed that affiliation with religion reduces sexual risk. Another study specifically on transgenders showed that belief in religion helped to facilitate risk-reduction in inculcating responsibility to not transmit the virus to others12.

An aggressive campaign to remove hypersexuality from the environment in the form of abstinence driven by religious, moral, legal and medical perspectives, should take precedence over human rights arguments as far as health is concerned. Wrongly utilising the human rights perspective whilst disregarding the consequences to health will preclude our youths (who constitute 40% of those newly diagnosed with HIV amongst gays and bisexuals13) from being well-informed and will not enable wise decision-making.

On the eve of 14th General Election, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said: “Pakatan Harapan (HARAPAN) percaya kepada hak asasi manusia tetapi tidaklah begitu liberal sehingga tidak ada had kepada kebebasan sama sekali. Segala tuntutan nafsu yang keterlaluan tidak dibenarkan.” (Pakatan Harapan believes in human rights but it is not so liberal as to give total, unlimited freedom. Unconventional forms of sexual appetites or desires will not be allowed14.)

In Western secular liberal societies, people are inculcated with a selfish conception of self-entitlement that puts the satisfaction of one’s own desires as their prime concern (individualism). Leaving individualism to automate people’s affairs is what has resulted in chaos, with human appetites being pursued in unacceptable, often perverse, ways. There is no room for a secular Malaysia. There is much room for improvement, but improvement should be made within the mould of the religious and cultural aspects of our society.

A  prescription is needed for our country, but a prescription that is not based on the correct diagnosis, can be as deadly as poison.

 

References

https://www.malaymail.com/s/1629579/ge14-rejoice-rejoice-rejoice…-and-then-reflect

https://www.malaymail.com/s/1629585/dos-and-donts-for-the-new-pakatan-government

https://www.malaymail.com/s/1629994/a-prescription-for-the-nation-adeeba-kamarulzaman

Malaysian Global AIDS reference

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(12)70315-8/fulltext

https://www.bharian.com.my/berita/nasional/2018/01/375392/seks-bebas-antara-penyumbang-peningkatan-hivaids,

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/group/msm/index.html,

https://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world

https://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/western-central-europe-north-america/usa

https://www.avert.org/infographics/hiv-and-aids-thailand-2016

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10461-014-0714-2

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2935511/

https://www.bharian.com.my/berita/nasional/2018/01/375392/seks-bebas-antara-penyumbang-peningkatan-hivaids,

https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/423807

 

Associate Professor Dr Rafidah Hanim Mokhtar
President
International Women’s Alliance for Family Institution and Quality Education

Malaysia never supported UN declarations protecting LGBT, claims activist

Published 1 month ago on 06 September 2018

By Loghun Kumaran

Dr Rafidah Hanim Mokhtar speaks during the 'Wacana Kesejagatan Ummah' discourse in Ipoh September 6, 2018. — Picture by Farhan Najib

IPOH, Sept 6 — Malaysia has never signed United Nations (UN) declarations that prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, a conservative Muslim rights activist said today.

Dr Rafidah Hanim Mokhtar, who is president of the anti-LGBT WAFIQ women’s group, claimed that UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which Malaysia signed, did not specify sexual orientation or gender identity as a characteristic protected from discrimination.

However, Article 2 of the UDHR clearly states that everyone is entitled to human rights regardless of their “sex”, race, or religion, among other traits.

“People say that we have signed the declarations and we must follow everything in it. The only thing we signed was the 1948 declaration,” Dr Rafidah said during a “Wacana Kesejagatan Ummah” discourse at the Ipoh Town Hall here today.

“We always opposed the subsequent declarations which called for additional rights. We didn’t agree to them because they must deal with our cultural sensitivities and our own domestic law,” added the head of the academy of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) study at Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia’s World Fatwa Management and Research Institute.

Dr Rafidah said that in 2011, a resolution was passed by UN’s Human Rights Council against violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity, which she claimed was the first resolution touching on sexual orientation and gender.

She said 23 countries supported the resolution while 19 countries were against it — including Malaysia. Three countries abstained from the vote.

“And in 2016, the UN adopted a resolution to mandate the protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation, and gender identity,” Dr Rafidah said.

“Some of the things in the resolution were not a problem, like protecting individuals against violence from homophobia and transphobia. 

“But the resolution also urged UN members to abolish criminal laws related to homosexuality and transgenders. It also called on members to guarantee the LGBT community’s freedom of expression and association.”

Despite this, Dr Rafidah said the LGBT community still had unalienable rights.

She said the LGBT community should not be victims of violence or denied access to healthcare, adding that they also deserved job opportunities — with the condition that they follow the necessary dress codes.

“But to me, even if we say they should not be discriminated against, this must be done in accordance with the law,” she told reporters after her speech.

“If they enter a ladies’ bathroom, I will oppose that. We don’t know who is an actual transgender person or an impostor. We need to also think if the ladies in the toilet are comfortable with this.”

Tun Dr Fitnah

Wednesday, 7 December 2016

Tun Dr Fitnah

Mahathir just issued a statement to attack MCA today. As usual, he recycles his allegations and laces it with lots of lies. Let's count these lies.

Tun Dr M's statement in italics and my replies in blue:

1. The MCA President has expressed his disgust at what he calls the lack of principle on the part of DAP.
2. He seems to think that DAP’s working together with me is all wrong.

LSS: Mahathir seems to have completely misunderstood the "disgust" from MCA. It was not aimed at Mahathir but rather at DAP.

MCA had taken issue with DAP's lack of principles as DAP had accused Mahathir of all sorts of mismanagement, racism, scandals and abuse for 22 years but suddenly, the DAP Secretary General says Tun M has managed the country well for 22 years and has not resorted to racist dirty tactics.

This disgust is at the unbelievable flip-flop of DAP which means that DAP had been lying to Malaysians for 22 years if those allegations against Tun M is no longer true.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 1.

3. But MCA’s working together with a known kleptocrat who has stolen billions of Ringgit is the worst example of a lack of principle. Or is the MCA unaware of what Najib has done to UMNO, BN and the nation. If he is not, I would like to tell him that under Najib Malaysia has been classified as one of the ten most corrupt country in the world.

LSS: This is a lie. Where was it that said Malaysia is one of the ten most corrupt country in the world? Malaysia is listed in the top 3rd (54th out of 167 countries) in terms of least corrupt in Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 2.

4. The American Dept. of Justice has reported that Najib, who is Malaysian Official 1 (as confirmed by Cabinet Minister Abdul Rahman Dahlan), has stolen billions of Ringgit of the Malaysian people’s money, and 2.6 billion Ringgit of this is in Najib’s personal bank account. Of course the MCA thinks this is okay. That is the MCA’s principle which it must cling to. It must be proud that it is supporting Najib who is involved in the world’s biggest fund case as alleged by the Department of Justice.

LSS: Again Tun Mahathir is lying. the American Dept of Justice did not report that Najib stole money. In fact, like the dozens of unnamed individuals in the suit, MO1 is not a party of the civil suit of the USA's DOJ kleptoracy - that is exactly why it was MO1 listed and not Najib Razak.

Among those with code-names include:

1MDB OFFICER 1, 1MDB OFFICER 2, 1MDB OFFICER 3, PETROSAUDI CEO, PETROSAUDI CO-FOUNDER, 1MDB’s Chief Financial Officer, Hollywood Actor 1, SINGAPORE BANKER 1, LOW EMI Partner, Goldman Managing Director, Chairman of IPIC

The reason why MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1 is not named is the same as why those other people are not named.

Because they are not the subjects of the suit.

Is that so hard to understand?

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 3.

5. Now Najib considers the contest is between UMNO and DAP. This means Najib believes in racism because to him Malaysian politics is about Malays versus Chinese. Towards that end he has redrawn constitutional boundaries to separate Malays from Chinese.

LSS: What does Tun Mahathir mean when he says this contest is between UMNO and DAP is equal to racism? Is Tun Mahathir now saying that DAP is a Chinese-only party?

And just because BN, the party with the most number of seats, is saying that the battle is now agaisnt DAP, the party with the second most number of seats, does this mean that Najib said the battle is now Malays versus Chinese? Najib never said that. 

What is wrong with the party with the most number of seats declaring that the party with the second most number of seats is their main rival? Isn't that logical and expected?

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 4.

6. Perhaps this accords with MCA as an ethnic Chinese Party. DAP is a multi-racial party which supports all the provisions of the Malaysian Constitution.

LSS: But in just the point above, Tun M claimed that DAP is a Chinese-only party and now he says DAP is multi-racial?

Please be consistent lah.

7. Accordingly the DAP celebration of its 50th anniversary was conducted completely in the national language. 

LSS: This is a lie. Lim Guan Eng himself broke into Mandarin in the middle of his pengullungan speech. The video of the speech proves this. Listen to 7 minutes 16 seconds of Guan Eng's speech. 

Does this sound like our national language to you? 

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 5.

8. The DAP Secretary General categorically stated in his speech that DAP had never asked to have a Chinese Prime Minister in answer to Najib’s claim that if the DAP wins the next election Kit Siang would be P.M. DAP’s choice is Anwar Ibrahim, a non-Chinese.

LSS: Again, Tun Mahahir is lying. Najib had never said that if DAP wins, Kit Siang would be PM. When did Najib say this? It certainly was not said in the recent UMNO General Assembly.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 6.

Muhyiddin had also confirmed that DAP has given their consent and agreement to him that a Malay will be PM if Pakatan wins.

9. MCA obviously supports Najib’s racist play by saying that if UMNO loses to DAP, there would be a Chinese as PM., or maybe MCA just wants to bodek Najib, principle be damned.

LSS: MCA also never said this. Mahathir is lying again. Why would MCA even object to having a Chinese as PM? It defies logic! Please lah, Mahathir.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 7.

10. MCA should not talk about principle as it is just opportunistic. It is not the MCA of Tun Tan Cheng Lock. It is just an appendage of Najib’s racist UMNO now.

LSS: Fuhh.. Najib's racist UMNO. Let's hear what Mahathir says about racism and extremists.

Or here:

And isn't DAP the party whose main ceramah expert told tens of thousands of voters to use a Malay to screw their own Malays and that this would be the most enjoyable show of a lifetime to watch?

11. I am with DAP and the other opposition parties because I don’t want to be associated with Najib and his kleptocratic government. Until he can prove beyond reasonable doubt he did not steal 1MDB money, I will still say he has stolen money from the people of Malaysia.

LSS: When Tun M withdrew support for Najib in Aug 2014, it was never about 1MDB. In fact, the top reason Tun M listed down why he withdrew support was that Najib had abolished ISA which Tun M does not agree with. In fact, Tun M first attacked UMNO in October 2013 when his son lost in the party elections for vice-president. 

Nevertheless, we congratulate Tun M's son for now being deputy president for his his new party where Tun M himself is the Chairman.

So Mahathir lied again saying he withdrew support for Najib because of 1MDB.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 8.

12. For MCA everything that Najib has done is okay. So stay with him. And that means MCA has no principle. DAP has upheld its principle to have clean election, to have democracy and to fight for a clean Government. MCA is as kleptocratic as Najib.

LSS: DAP Clean Government? Wait, isn't the DAP Secretary General himself the one who has to spend 34 days in court next year to fight two corruption charges?

Upheld principle? As in point 2 above where 22 years of DAP's continued allegations against Tun Mahathir has now vanished because DAP now says Mahathir has managed the country and economy well for 22 years?

What about the principles where a civil servant who is formally charged with corruption should step down from public office until they are cleared by the courts? 

 
But Guan Eng is still Chief Minister and refuses to resign. That is principle?

What about the party, when they were in alliance with PAS, went all over to convince the Chinese to accept Hudud but then later on attacked PAS for wanting to implement Hudud even though DAP had given a secret written agreement signed by the DAP Secretary General himself that PAS has the right to pursue an Islamic state govt?

That is also "principles"? No way.

DAP has no principles as what Mahathir said.

THIS IS LIE NUMBER 9.

13. Shame on you MCA.
LSS: Shame on you Mahathir, for repeatedly lying and twisting.

NINE CLEAR LIES in just one 13 point statement from Mahathir.

Please don't let your legacy be known as Tun Dr Fitnah.

Posted by Lim Sian See at 02:59 

Mahathir's replies were full of self-delusion and outright lies.

Thursday, 22 December 2016

Mahathir: "It’s almost like free money. If you didn’t borrow, then you are stupid. So, I borrowed."

There was an interesting article yesterday where Mahathir tried to rewrite history when trying to defend himself. As usual, Mahathir's replies were full of self-delusion and outright lies.

Mahathir: Economic woes not from my time

Dr Mahathir Mohamad denies the state of the Malaysian economy today is due to the lack of economic reforms when he was in power, iMoney reported. 

He was responding to an opinion piece written by the University of Chicago’s Dan Slater, who had said that the road toward Malaysia’s economic ruin started when he was prime minister and not with current Prime Minister Najib Razak. 

Slater had also accused Mahathir of not making the adjustments needed to pull the country out of its crisis, but instead burdening the state with more borrowing and spending. 

“That is not true. If the crisis was caused by me, I would have, during my 22 years, faced the problem of debt payments, recession and all that.

No recession problem?  Hello, there were multiple recessions and slow-downs during your 22 years - the 1985 recession, the 1998 recession, the 2001 slowdown all happened. 

How is it even possible for Mahathir to deny this and say that with a straight face?

If he is still forgetful, all he needs to do to is to go visit Plaza Rakyat, Lembah Beringin, Duta Grand Hyatt and Bandar Wawasan (Vision City), which were among dozens of developments abandoned due to the 1998 crisis.

The still abandoned Plaza Rakyat - otherwise known as Kuala Lumpur's largest inner-city fish-pond -cum-Aedes mosquito breeding project

After almost two decades of being abandoned during Mahathir's time, Plaza Rakyat is only now being rescued and revived.

This would be similar to the rescue of Bandar Wawasan, which has now become Quill City Mall in 2012 after DBKL had ordered that all abandoned eye-sores in Kuala Lumpur be rescued..

Mahathir left Vision City like this.

Revived in 2012 during Najib's time to become like this. Open's today.

From abandoned developments, neglected development of Sabah, Sarawak and the east coast of peninsular, tolls, capital controls to IPP power plants, public transportation and economic rebalancing, the current Najib government has to continue correcting all of Mahathir's mistakes and wrongs.

Mahathir continues defending himself and said this:

On the issue of borrowing, Mahathir denied having made extensive borrowings during his 22 years as prime minister. 

Mahathir admitted he had even tried to borrow when the country faced the currency crisis in the late 1990s but failed to get the funds needed. 

“Otherwise, everyone can see my record of borrowing. Very little. Even during the currency crisis, we did try to borrow but failed

Did not borrow much? 

How about a 235% jump of our debt-to-GDP ratio within the first 5 years of taking over?

Yup.. In 1985, thanks to Mahathir our Debt-to-GDP ratio more than doubled to 103.4% from just 44%. Worse was that, unlike today, much of those borrowings were in foreign currency.

That year, if our country's income was RM100, we owed RM103.40 - the so-called technically bankrupt then. 

How did Mahathir forget this?

Compare this with our Debt-to-GDP ratio today of 53.6% - meaning if our income is RM100, we comfortably owe RM53.60.

Also, remember earlier when Mahathir said "no recession"?

Well, if no recession then why did you have to go beg Singapore, Japan and others to borrow?

And of course Singapore rejected your request since for decades you had been whacking them.

Mahathir then goes on to say this:

On the issue of borrowing, Mahathir denied having made extensive borrowings during his 22 years as prime minister. 

“Please show when did I borrow money. I only borrowed money from the Japanese because their offer was at the low interest rate of 0.7%, and it was repayable over 40 years. 

“It’s almost like free money. If you didn’t borrow, then you are stupid. So, I borrowed,” he told iMoney.

On June 1, 1981, 100 Japanese Yen was equal to RM1.06.

By the time Mahathir left on 31 Oct 2003, 100 Japanese Yen had shot up almost 3 1/2 fold to RM3.49

Since ALL of the borrowings that Mahathir borrowed on behalf of Malaysia from the Japanese (and he borrowed a lot) were all denominated in Japanese Yen, the 3 1/2 fold appreciation of the Yen during his time made the borrowings super expensive since Mahathir neglected to hedge or manage this currency rate.

For example, a RM50 billion borrowings in yen would end up costing RM150 billion. 

Our economics minister Rahman Dahlan confirmed this recently:

Rahman claimed that Mahathir had borrowed substantially from Japan, with loans denominated in yen. However, the subsequent appreciation of the yen’s value had caused significant losses to the country. 

“The current government is determined not to repeat this mistake. That is why the government’s debt is denominated in ringgit and is only marginally affected by foreign currency exchange movements.”

Yes. We learned - thanks to Mahathir. Malaysia now have very small amounts of foreign-currency denominated loans.

Mahathir even admitted this :

The yen's ascent to record levels is straining the finances of East Asian governments that have borrowed heavily from Japan and now must pay Tokyo back in a now more expensive currency. 

"We tried to renegotiate the loan in order to reduce slightly our debt burden to Japan," Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohammad of Malaysia said in a recent speech in Japan. But, he added, "We were not given even one yen reduction."

“It’s almost like free money. If you didn’t borrow, then you are stupid. So, I borrowed,” said Mahathir.

And Mahathir said the above only yesterday - not many many years ago.

Now that history has shown otherwise, who the stupid now?

The only stupid ones are those who still believe in your never-ending lies and denials.

An equally insane statement was this in Lim Guan Eng's closing speech on Dec 4th 2016at the DAP annual conference which Mahathir attended

Umno resorting to racial games is a sign of desperation, says DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng. 

He said unlike Umno’s current president Najib Razak, Dr Mahathir Mohamad had never resorted to such a “dirty tactic” in all his 22 years leading the party. 

“Mahathir, at the Umno general assemblies in his time, never painted DAP as his number one enemy. 

“He didn’t have to do this as he was able to manage the country and its economy well.

Oh wow!

It is as if we were all in coma for 22 years or we all completely forgot what DAP had been saying about Malaysia - the time-bombs, the failed states, the mega-scandals, the economic crisis of 1985 and 1998. No RM30b Forex scandal, no crony IPP, no Bumi policy "stunting" our economy, no PKFZ mega scandal approved by Mahathir. Nothing. 

And also Mahathir never called Lim Kit Siang or DAP as racist. Never before.

Suddenly, just because Mahathir is now on their side, Lim Guan Eng now says Mahathir was never racist and had managed the country and economy well for 22 years.

How much more unprincipled can you be?

I pity those DAP supporters forced to listen to his blatant lying.

LGE and DAP are devoid of principles. 

That means whatever you all have been saying for 22 years in the TENS OF THOUSANDS of ceramahs, statements, interviews were total lies, right?

So, why should anyone want to trust DAP anymore?

DAP also assumes we are stupid?

Posted by Lim Sian See at 20:04 

Did Lim Guan Eng really go to jail for defending a Malay girl?

Thursday, 7 January 2016

Did Lim Guan Eng really go to jail for defending a Malay girl?

A common line used by DAP is that "Lim Guan Eng went to jail for defending a Malay girl who was raped".

Unfortunately, it is not exactly all true - not even by half. Maybe 10% true.

Did you know that Lim Kit Siang and Lim Guan Eng used to hate the guts of Gopal Sri Ram, Anwar's lead counsel in the Sodomy II final appeal?

This is what actual happened.

In 1997, Lim Guan Eng (LGE) was sentenced by the Malacca high court for maliciously printing false news under the Printing Press and Publications Act 1984 and under the Sedition Act 1948.

LGE was found to have been guilty of spreading allegations that the then Melaka Chief Minister Rahim Tamby Chik had raped an under-aged girl.

His original sentence was just a fine of maximum RM5,000 fine for the sedition charge and RM10,000 fine for "false news" charge  but no jail term.

At this point, LGE could have paid the RM10k fine now and need not go to jail. But to do so would mean he would be barred from contesting for 5 years and more importantly, be seen as lying which would destroy his and DAP's reputation.

Thus he did not pay the fine and choose to appeal.

The case then went to the Court of Appeals.

In 1998, the Court of Appeals' head Judge Gopal Sri Ram then said "It is time that the court sends a clear message that it cannot tolerate any attack on the judiciary" 

(Interestingly, years later Gopal Sri Ram was also the head counsel for Anwar Ibrahim in the Sodomy II Federal court case in early 2015 - which he lost and Anwar went to jail.)

Probably unhappy at the alleged contempt of how LGE and his lawyers defended the case, Judge Gopal thus increased the sentence from the total RM15,000 fine to 36 months in jail.

And thus LGE went to jail. But not for 36 months.

After a series of appeals, Lim was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment. He was, however, released after 12 months on 25 August 1999.

Therefore LGE went to jail for distributing false news and sedition for using the case of Rahim Tamby Chik to incite the people.

But was the rape case real and should Lim Guan Eng have pursued it then?

DAP continued to paint this picture of Lim Guan Eng being in jail because he defended a Malay girl who was raped.

Thus Rahim Tamby Chik then sued DAP for defamation which he won and this is what happened - as explained by DAP in their Oct 21, 2003 statement.

Former Malacca Chief Minister, Tan Sri Rahim Tamby Chik this morning withdrew his defamation suit against the DAP in connection with the DAP book “Lim Guan Eng – MP in Jail” and the Sympathy, Support and Solidarity with Lim Guan Eng Poster after DAP defence counsel Karpal Singh read out the following statement by and on behalf of the DAP. There was no order as to costs in the consent settlement.
Statement by the Democratic Action Party 

We, the Democratic Action Party, hereby refer to the Book published by us entitled “Lim Guan Eng – MP in Jail” (“Book”) and to the Poster (“Poster”) campaign which we embarked on relating to the Plaintiff, Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Bin Datuk Tamby Chik, and we hereby make the following statements: 

(1) We must stress we made the allegations relating to Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Bin Datuk Tamby Chik contained in the Book and Poster as we believed them to be true at the material time based on the statements made by Pendek binti Amhad to Mr Lim Guan Eng and by Noryati Binti Mohamad Yusop and ACP Mok at the High Court, Melaka, in Criminal Trial Nos: 45-2-1995 and 45-3-1995 (Pendakwa Raya v Lim Guan Eng). 

(2) However, in view of subsequent events, in particular
a) the retraction of the allegations by Noryati Binti Mohamad Yusop under oath by way of a Statutory Declaration; and
b) the fact that similar allegations made by Time Magazine and Asiaweek have resulted in an apology being given to Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Bin Datuk Tamby Chik;
We now realize that the basis for the allegations we made against Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Bin Datuk Tamby Chik in the Book and Poster no longer exists and in view of this, the said allegations are wholly unfounded. 

(3) Accordingly we acknowledge that these unfortunate events have caused all parties concerned, including Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Bin Datuk Tamby Chik and family, great distress and anguish.                                                          

(21st October 2003)

So it was clear that Asiaweek and Time Magazine had apologized to Rahim Tamby Chik.

And DAP also withdrew the rape allegation and read out the statement in open court.

Thus, subsequent events show that LGE was indeed wrong to spread false news and incite the people with that rape allegation (which was eventually withdrawn and various parties apologized for it) - thus the court conviction at that time was proven correct.

However, whether this deserved 12 months in jail instead of just a fine or not is another matter but that was for the courts and judge to decide.

Jailed for contempt of court and spreading false news
LGE did not go to jail for defending a Malay girl who was raped (since this allegation no longer exist) but for distributing false news and inciting the people based on a faulty allegation.

Do you really think he was "defending the girl" or he was trying to make it into a political issue to score votes because it had links to a BN politician?

Ask yourself this:

There are many Malay girls who got into trouble before this and after this. How many of these girls has LGE defended?  

None.

Of course LGE, being a DAP politician would use whatever issue that they have at that time to fight the government - but unfortunately for them, this issue was later proven to be wholly unfounded in the eyes of the law and admitted to by DAP themselves in their open court statement.

But of course, DAP will continue to spread this "proud claim" that Lim Guan Eng went to jail for defending a Malay girl although it is not entirely correct.

If you are still not convinced, you can read the written judgement on why Lim Guan Eng went to jail in the case of G.E. Lim - vs - Public Prosecutor

Posted by Lim Sian See at 19:31 

WHY MAHATHIR ?

WHY MAHATHIR ?

November 14, 2017

WHY MAHATHIR ?

Let us say for the moment that Barisan Nasional is not good for Malaysians.  So the voters want an alternative. DO they have it?

Yes they do - they have EX UMNO and Barisan Nasional big wigs now offering themselves as the alternatives and DAP which has been in the opposition for years.  And of course PKR, which is a mix of EX UMNO and new faces not from UMNO.

 And the splinter party called Amanah who are basically EX PAS, the party no Malaysian, Muslim or non Muslim can trust.

SO, the real alternatives are actually DAP and to a certain extent PKR. To be fair to PKR, Anwar Ibrahim has transformed that party into a Multi ethnic party and he was the first in Malaysian politics to give "ketuanan Rakyat" or people's sovereignty a public recognition in Malaysian politics. This itself is brave and visionary in Malaysian politics which have been dominated by the cry of "ketuanan Melayu" which is racial based.  

In the last election, Pakatan Rakyat, the coalition opposition actually won the popular votes - largely due to PKR and DAP. 

This election is different. In this election, it is no longer Anwar Ibrahim who is the star leader but Mahathir Mohamad, the ex Prime Minister of Malaysia for 22 years.  Anwar Ibrahim's platform was that he was a political victim of Mahathir because Mahathir was opposed to his reforms when he was in UMNO. Anwar's platform was also reform and he did cross the country igniting the refomist mind of many Malaysians. 

To be fair, one  can say that Anwar achieved more outside UMNO than when he in it in terms of democratizing the political imagination of the Malaysians. IN his speeches, even though he did attack Mahathir and his family but largely he was more issue based. He made Malaysians understand about fair income distribution, about non-discriminatory policies while not alienating legitimate Malay privileges. Malaysians, both Malay and non Malay remember his famous speech on "anak Melayu anak kita, anak India anak kita, anak Cina, anak kita , anak Iban anak kita...". Basically saying that the children of any Malaysians of any ethnic origin are children of all Malaysians. This is powerful message for Malaysia.

Anwar was also the first politician in Malaysia to say greetings in various ethnic languages whenever he gives a speech.  He was also the first West Malaysian politician to recognize  the East Malaysians in his speeches moving away from the norm of "Melayu, Cina dan India". 

In short, from the black eye, Anwar and PKR has actually moved on to things that matter to Malaysia.

Then why is the new opposition Pakatan Harapan placing its political fate on Mahathir as the new star leader of the opposition with Muhyiddin as the second man?

It is a known fact that Muhyiddin had only survived on his Malay credentials. Thats the only political platform that he understands. And Mahathir? The complaints against him over the decades are a plenty and has become legendary !

Pribumi, Mahathir's new political party is Malay centric. Name me any top positioned orang asli or East Malaysian in the party even though is is ironically named "Pribumi" (native) ?! Is it not clear what this party is about? It is about using Malays to get votes for them away from UMNO.

And what does Pribumi offer other than "bring down Najib"? 

And the most morbid thing is - Pakatan Harapan refuses to name who they have in mind as the Prime Minister when every Malaysian knows the PM calls the final shots when it comes to policy and vision.

SO - why is DAP and PKR spoiling their chances with the very man that has caused decades of misery to their leaders and the country?

Jamilah Siddique

Siapa pendatang sebenarnya?

Siapa pendatang sebenarnya?

 11:34 AM  POSTED BY RIDHUAN TEE 

https://www.ismaweb.net/2018/08/06/siapa-pendatang-sebenarnya/

Saya membaca dengan teliti terjemahan ucapan pemimpin India ultra kiasu, antaranya berbunyi: "Ramai orang, apabila ditanya tentang sejarah kita (mereka kata) sejarah (kita) bermula 120 hingga 130 tahun lalu. "Tak betul. Kita datang ke sini (ialah) 2,500 tahun lalu. Buktinya ada di Lembah Bujang. Ada kuil disana.... tertanam."Mereka yang pendatang, bukan kita pendatang. Mereka dan kita adalah sama.

Siapakah yang dirujukkan sebagai ‘mereka’ jika bukan orang Melayu? Tidak mungkin sama sekali merujuk kepada orang Cina atau bumiputera Sabah Sarawak. Sudah terang lagi bersuluh, mereka yang dimaksudkan adalah orang Melayu. Jika orang Melayu pendatang? Bagaimana dengan bangsa lain? Sudah tentu lagi jelas pendatang sebab wajah dan rupa fizikal mereka jauh berbeza dalam kalangan bangsa asal yang tinggal di alam kepulauan Melayu.

Lihat rupa Melayu di Kepulauan Melayu, bandingkan dengan rupa India dan Cina. Jauh sekali berbeza. Satu berkulit gelap, satu lagi berkulit putih. Melayu di tengah-tengah tidak gelap dan tidak putih. Inilah rata-rata orang yang tinggal di Kepulauan Melayu merangkumi Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Filipina dan yang berdekatan. Justeru, siapa sebenar pendatang? Siapa pula yang mendatang sesama mereka?

Saya tidak pernah dengar lagi rantau nusantara ini dikenali sebagai kepulauan Hindu, kepulauan India, atau kepulauan apa. Jika ada pun nama Laut China Selatan, bukan Laut India Selatan. Yang saya tahu, seantero dunia mengenali kepulauan ini sebagai kepulauan Melayu atau Malay Archipelago. Sebab itu, saya sangat pelik apabila ada ekstremis LTTE boleh mengatakan bahawa ini tanah kita bersama daripada segi asal-usul. Saya tidak menafikan jika dilihat daripada sudut agama, kerana agama Hindu lebih lama bertapak di kepulauan ini, tetapi bukan bangsa.

Sejarah setiap bangsa ada tanahnya sendiri, bangsa Cina membentuk negara China. Bangsa India membentuk negara India. Begitu juga dengan negara-negara Arab dan negara-negara lain di dunia. Raut wajah mereka membentuk bangsa dan negara mereka.

Tiba-tiba rantau yang sudah dikenali dunia sebagai Nusantara atau kepulauan Melayu, ultra kiasu tidak mahu mengiktiraf sebagai kawasan kepunyaan bangsa Melayu. Malah, sanggup merujuk Melayu sebagai pendatang. Cubalah tukar DNAnya.

Lebih jahil lagi ada yang berkata Sarawak atau Sabah tidak termasuk dalam rumpun kepulauan Melayu. Memang asal-usul Melayu majoritinya beragama Hindu, tetapi apabila Islam datang, rajanya memeluk Islam, diikuti seluruhnya rakyat jelata, maka senyaplah legasi agama Hindu yang bertapak di Alam Melayu. Jika lihat dari segi pengaruh dan tinggalan akeologi, ajaran Buddha lebih mendapat sambutan di kepulauan Melayu, bukan Hindu. Dalam sejarah kami diajar mengaruh pengaruh Buddha-Hindu, bukan Hindu-Buddha. Contohnya di Thailand dan negara berjiran, boleh dikatakan semuanya berfahaman Buddha. Begitu juga di Indonesia. Lembah Bujang hanya contoh yang sangat ultra kiasu. 

Saya tidak mahu terlibat dalam polimek asal-usul Melayu sebagaimana yang diceritakan oleh pakar sejarah Melayu seperti Profesor Nik Hasan Shuhaimi dan antropologi, Profesor Wan Hashim Wan Teh. Sebab kedua-duanya orang Melayu. Ultra kiasu tidak teruja.

Lebih molek jika saya merujuk kepada sarjana berkulit putih, yang lebih meyakinkan ultra kiasu seperti Dr. Steven Oppenheimer (1999), pakar Paleontologi dalam bukunya bertajuk, Eden in the East, The Drowned Continent of Southeast Asia. Beliau yang juga tenaga pengajar di Universiti Oxford turut mengemukakan teori bahawa migrasi moyang kepada rumpun Melayu dari kabilah Negrito, Asli Semang dan Senoi adalah secara terus menerus dari benua Afrika melalui Timur Tengah ke benua Melayu Sunda.

Secara umumnya terdapat beberapa teori tentang asal usul Melayu, Pertama, asal usul orang Melayu adalah berdasarkan teori penghijrahan beramai-ramai orang Melayu daripada Yunnan, Selatan China dan keluar melalui Sungai Mekong ke Laut Cina Selatan, yang dikenali sebagai "Teori Keluar Dari Yunnan" (1890).

Kedua, Melayu lahir akibat kahwin campur antara Cina, India dan Arab. Orang Melayu dikatakan bekerja sebagai kelasi kapal dan buruh kepada pedagang antarabangsa yang terdiri daripada orang Arab, China dan India lebih kurang 2,000 tahun lalu, dikenali sebagai teori "Keluar Dari New Guinea" (1965). Interaksi dan perkahwinan campur dengan bangsa India, China dan Arab, menghasilkan sebuah bangsa baharu yang dikenali sebagai bangsa Melayu. Teori ini agak keterlaluan kerana mengandungi unsur penghinaan.

Ketiga, berdasarkan teori lingustik oleh Peter Bellwood dan disokong bukti arkeologi oleh pakar arkeologi, Eusibio Dizon, menerusi buku, The Austronesian (1997), dikenali sebagai "Teori Keluar dari Taiwan" dan juga  "Teori Keretapi Ekpress ke Polynesia".

Teori ini mengatakan bahawa orang Melayu-Polynesian atau Astronesian atau rumpun Melayu berasal daripada Taiwan. Orang Melayu, telah keluar daripada Taiwan sejak 6,000 tahun dahulu, dan kemudiannya merantau ke serata dunia. Mereka dikatakan merantau dari Pulau Madagascar di Timur sehingga ke Pulau Easter di Barat. Seterusnya merentas Jepun di utara sehingga ke New Zealand di selatan.

Lanjutan daripada itu, Oppenheimer, Wilhelm G. Solheim dan Arysio Nunes dos Santos (1999) menggunakan bukti-bukti geologi dan mitologi, dan digabungkan dengan bukti arkeologi, genetik dan linguistik. Mereka bersetuju orang Melayu sebenarnya berasal dari sebuah tamadun yang hilang, yang dinamakan Benua Melayu Sunda atau Tamadun Sunda. Bangsa ini hakikatnya telah wujud sejak 15,000 tahun Sebelum Masihi.

Menurut mereka lagi, Asia Tenggara kuno disatukan oleh Pentas Sunda yang menghubungkan Sumatera, Semenanjung Tanah Melayu, Jawa, Borneo dan Filipina. Asia Tenggara ketika itu bercantum sebagai satu benua dengan tanah besar Asia dan Pentas Sahul iaitu pentas benua Australia-New Guinea.

Kawasan perairannya yang cetek dan mudah dilalui telah menghubungkan beberapa laluan penghijrahan bebas untuk manusia dan haiwan di tanah besar Asia, yang dikenali sebagai Gugusan Kepulauan Melayu Nusantara. Keluasan gugusan ini atau Benua Sunda adalah dua kali lebih besar daripada Benua India. Kawasan laut Champa, Teluk Siam dan Laut Jawa, pada ketika itu kering kontang dan menjadi dataran pelantar bagi menghubungkan beberapa bahagian benua tersebut.

Menurut Oppenheimer lagi, Benua Sunda inilah bermulanya tamadun manusia yang menyuburkan budaya-budaya hebat di China, India, Mesopotamia, Mesir dan Kepulauan Crete (Greek) lebih kurang 6,000 tahun lampau.

Ini bermakna, bangsa Melayu itu bukan bangsa baharu yang selalu dikaitkan bermula selepas penjajahan Barat. Secara tidak langsung bukti ini menolak dakwaan Anthony Reid yang mengatakan bangsa Melayu hanya berpusat di Selat Melaka. Sekali gus menolak "Teori Keluar Dari Taiwan" dan "Teori Dari New Guinea".

Dalam erti kata lain, Jawa adalah Melayu, Siam adalah Melayu, Moro adalah Melayu, Minang adalah Melayu, Dusun adalah Melayu, Iban adalah Melayu, Filipina adalah Melayu dan Dayak adalah juga Melayu. Suku kaum kepada etnik bangsa Melayu adalah sebaka dan serumpun. Bermakna, Melayu Asli (orang asal) bukanlah berasal dari Yunnan atau Taiwan. Sebaliknya orang Taiwan dan Yunnan itu sebahagian besarnya adalah berasal dari Asia Tenggara.

Nyata sekali bahawa kelima-lima teori ini (enam termasuk oleh sejarahwan Melayu) tidak ada langsung kaitan dengan India. Paling kuatpun dengan Cina. Justeru, apakah justifikasi ultra kiasu India tersebut mengatakan bahawa orang Melayu dan India adalah sama iaitu pendatang.

Paling menarik membaca buku John Russell Denyes bertajuk Malaysia, terbitan tahun 1919, yang terdapat di perpustakaan, University of Illinois. Muka pertama tertulisMalaysia is off the southeast corner of Asia, 1500 miles south of China, 1500 miles east of India. It includes the Malay Peninsula and the islands of Sumatra, Java, Borneo, Celebes, Timor, the Moluccas, New Guinea, and a thousand smaller islands. The country gets its name from the Malay people who live there.

Pendapat beliau tentang India, the Indians who come to Malaysia are mostly Tamils from Madras Presidency and Ceylon. Bishop Oldham describes them as “noisy, exceedingly talkative, faithful, devout, obedient to order, capable of patiently bearing much hardship”.

Justeru, atas landasan apakah dan rujukan apakah ultra kiasu mengatakan Melayu itu pendatang? Kesemua teori di atas saya boleh terima. Tetapi saya sama sekali menolak bahawa Melayu, Cina dan India sama-sama pendatang. Jika ditakdirkan semua itu pendatang, siapakah yang mula-mula membentuk kerajaan di Alam Melayu. Orang Indiakah? Hairan sungguh saya apabila seorang  yang bergelar peguam tidak dapat menerima hakikat ini.

Ini belum dibuktikan lagi dengan bangsa apakah yang begitu lantang menentang penjajahan British di Tanah Melayu. Cinakah? Indiakah? Wajah-wajah bukan Melayu hanya muncul menjelang kemerdekaan, sebelum itu wajah siapa? Wajah Parti Komunis Malaya? Wajah MPAJA? Wajah siapa lagi?

Tidak lain dan tidak bukan wajah Melayu, seperti Tok Janggut, Dato Maharaja Lela, Abdul Rahman Limbung dan lain-lain lagi. Ini tidak termasuk Melayu yang berhaluan kiri, seperti Ahmad Boestaman, Burhanuddin Helmi, Pak Sako, Pendeta Zaaba, Ibrahim Yaakub dan ramai lagi. Tidak perlulah dibincangkan lagi peranan Dato Onn Jaafar, Tunku Abdul Rahman dan lain-lain lagi. Wajah-wajah hanya muncul menjelang kemerdekaan, apabila British mensyaratkan bahawa kemerdekaan hanya diberikan jika semua kaum dapat disatukan melalui persetujuan pemimpin mereka yang dikenali sebagai kontrak sosial. Maka muncullah nama-nama seperti Tan Cheng Lock, Tun Sambanthan dan lain-lain.

Sebab itu saya mohon ultra kiasu menghentikan provokasi sebegini kerana ia tidak baik untuk pembangunan negara bangsa. Provokasi ini hanya akan meninggalkan luka yang amat mendalam. Ingatlah! Dengan Islam, Melayu itu lembut orangnya, bersopan santun dan berbudi bahasa. Melayu bersedia menerima orang lain meskipun warna berbeza. Justeru, jangan keterlaluan, celupar dan kurang ajar, dibimbangi kelembutan dan kesantunan itu hilang

Akhirnya, saya ingin simpulkan bahawa sejarah manusia bukan bermula dari keturunan beruk menjadi manusia. Sebaliknya manusia berasal dari Nabi Adam. Nabi Adam diturunkan ke bumi sekitar 4000 hingga 5000 SM. Apa yang berlaku ialah penyongsangan fakta untuk membenarkan idea Darwinisma iaitu manusia dari beruk. Ini dibuktikan bahawa DNA manusia hari ini berbeza dengan manusia beruk seperti Cro Magnon, Neoderhenthal, Perak Man, Peking Man dan sebagainya. Perbezaan DNA adalah 85 peratus iaitu kromoson manusia Adam tidak sama dengan manusia asal beruk. Menurut Hamka, manusia dari Nabi Adam seperti yang dinyatakan dalam Al quran. Tetapi manusia yang dijumpai seakan-akan beruk itu adalah penciptaan genetik awal dan belum sempurna. Maka tidak layak dipanggil manusia kerana lebih mirip dari haiwan daripada manusia Adam. Jadi, saya noktahkan di sini bahawa Melayu asal dari bani Nabi Ibrahim.