RPK's take on Hudud & PAS

As part of trying to understand the mind of Muslims and PAS, here is a reproduction of RPK's NO HOLDS BARRED: Thick in the head which incidentally repeated wha I had mentioned in my earlier post - Should non-Muslim have a say on Malaysia becoming an Islamic state?:

RPK: PAS requires non-Muslims to pay ‘Islamic’ tax other than income tax. Muslims pay zakat and non-Muslims pay kharaj. Is this not a violation of Article 11(2) of the Constitution?

At least now in addition to knowing the people of the book are referred to as dhimmis in an Islamic state, I now know the rest are called thimmies (also referred to as Ahl Zimmi?) and the tax paid by non-Muslims is called jizyah

Full text from RPK's article:

Grow up, PAS supporters. Stop acting like bloody spoiled children who throw tantrums every time someone does not agree with you. You are still far from matured. And until you show maturity do not expect us to show you respect. Respect must be earned. Stop demanding that we show you respect when you have not earned it.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

We are still seeing a lot of venom being spitted out because of my article on Hudud. The trouble is these people appear to think they have every right to propagate Hudud (just because they happen to be Muslim-Malays) and others have absolutely no right to oppose the issue.

They appear to have forgotten one very crucial issue. PAS is a political party. Therefore, whatever PAS says and does is politics. That is all it is. Politics. Nothing more nothing less.

Any political party is allowed to propagate and promote its objective, aspiration, ideology, mission, vision, manifesto, and what have you. This is the right of all political parties. And in that same spirit, any citizen of Malaysia has the right to disagree with what these political parties stand for.

It just happens to be that PAS promotes the Hudud issue. And those who do not support this issue are allowed to oppose it. What if PAS promotes the issue that every Malaysian citizen must be given a free cow? Do we have right to oppose that if we disagree with this idea?

What if PAS says that Malaysian males of the age of 15 must be allowed to vote and for females it should be the age of 11 because that is the age of puberty? Can we disagree with that proposal on grounds that Malaysians of age 11-15 are just too young and instead propose that all Malaysians of the age of 18 should be allowed to vote since they can get married and can drive a car at that age -- so they should be also allowed to vote at that age?

PAS members and Malaysians in general scream that Barisan Nasional and Umno do not respect the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. But do the PAS supporters respect the Constitution?

Article 8 (1 and 2) of the Constitution says all Malaysians must be treated equal. So how can Muslims suffer a different punishment from non-Muslims for crimes they commit? Is this not a violation of the Constitution? And is PAS respecting the Constitution by proposing different punishments for crimes based on your religion? The Constitution says there must be no discrimination based on religion.

PAS requires non-Muslims to pay ‘Islamic’ tax other than income tax. Muslims pay zakat and non-Muslims pay kharaj. Is this not a violation of Article 11(2) of the Constitution?

Why scream about Barisan Nasional and Umno not respecting the Constitution when we too do not respect it? We scream blue murder when it suits us. But we also violate the Constitution when it suits us.

This is what these emotional PAS supporters are overlooking. PAS is a political party. And everything they say and do must be seen as politics. And in politics we have a right to agree, disagree, and agree to disagree.

So what if PAS happens to be talking about Islam or Islamic laws? It is still politics since PAS is a political party. And in politics we have every right to agree or disagree with what you say and do.

Grow up, PAS supporters. Stop acting like bloody spoiled children who throw tantrums every time someone does not agree with you. You are still far from matured. And until you show maturity do not expect us to show you respect. Respect must be earned. Stop demanding that we show you respect when you have not earned it.

***********************************************

DAP will not compromise on hudud issue, says Karpal

(The Star) - DAP will not depart from its stand that Malaysia should not be an Islamic country.

DAP chairman Karpal Singh said PAS should not infringe the ruling by the five-men bench Supreme Court ruling in 1988, which decreed that the country is governed by secular laws.

“This ruling is not overturned and therefore the decision still stands.

“PAS has to accept the Supreme Court’s pronunciation,” he told a press conference at the Air Itam market yesterday.

He was commenting on PAS Youth chief Nasrudin Hassan Tantawi’s statement that it would continue to push for the implementation of Islamic laws in Malaysia despite fierce objection from the DAP.

Karpal Singh, who is also Bukit Gelugor MP, said the party would not compromise on its principles to appease its political partners.

He said DAP was not anti-Malay or anti-Islam but “what we want in absolute terms is what the Constitution provides for and for what the Supreme Court has decreed”.

“Syariah laws means hudud laws and hudud laws are inappropriate for a multi-cultural and multi-racial country like Malaysia.”

On the allegation made by Umno Youth that the state government was using the Penang Turf Club’s contribution to fund its hardcore poor eradication programme, Karpal Singh said Umno should not exploit the issue.

“The income of the country or at least part of it is from gambling.

“If Umno is right, then all governments (state and Federal) should be condemned as the gambling permits are also issued by the Federal Government,” he said.

***********************************************

Federal Constitution of Malaysia

Article 8

1. All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.

2. Except as expressly authorized 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.

Article 11

1. Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.

2. No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.

Hadi, PAS & the Islamic State Document

After talking with an intellectual Muslim, it seem his view is, getting a Muslim non-Muslime Consensus in Malaysia will be a (very) uphill task, for he said that the current crop of Muslims (assumed in position of authority) are very arrogant.

Then perhaps let's take a step back and try a step back and seek an understanding of the Muslim mind. Below is the Q&A of the press conference held by the PAS President, Dato' Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, on Wednesday, 12 November 2003, after the launching of the blueprint on the introduction of Islamic laws in Malaysia -- a.k.a. the ISD or the Islamic State Document.

What is the most significant difference between what you are expounding through your document and what the Barisan Nasional government has been doing?

The most significant thing is that under the Barisan government, Islam is ruled. What we want is for Islam to rule. We will let the power of Islam rule.

We will not follow the narrow view of Islam where Islam is only one aspect of the country, while what we are expounding is that a country is only one aspect of Islam, which is all encompassing.

You said that your Islamic state document accepts the existing Federal Constitution but with the necessary amendments. What are some of the amendments?

The first thing which needs to be clarified is the word “Islam” which is mentioned in the Constitution.

PAS was involved in giving its views through the memorandum which was hastily drawn up by the Reid Commission just before Independence and was part of the other Islamic groups which pushed for the inclusion of Islam in the Constitution. The problem was that the Reid Commission interpreted Islam according to their understanding.

We have our own understanding of Islam which is different from that of the Commission. The time has come for the word “Islam” in the Constitution to be interpreted accurately in accordance to the Quran and the Sunnah.

Secondly, the word “syariah” which is now placed under the jurisdiction of the states is subjected to limitations. These limitations will have to be amended.

Although the Constitution has undergone several amendments, it does not give power to Islam and syariah.

So the amendment will allow syariah law to be applied in states?

The amendment will allow syariah to apply at both state and Federal levels.

What will be the difference between the syariah law at Federal and state levels?

The amendment will make the Federal and state levels consistent.

We can retain the existing Federalism concept. We realise that there are states where Muslims are not the majority and Federalism is very suitable under such circumstances.

In states where the majority are Muslims, Islamic law can be implemented. In states where non-Muslims form the majority, it will be up to the non-Muslim party ruling the state, but at the same time the non-Muslim leader would allow syariah to be applied to Muslims there.

You said the dualism in the existing legal system would be retained. Do you mean that there will be two sets of laws, one for Muslims and one for non-Muslims?

Yes. That is allowed by the Quran. The Quran allows those who are not Muslims to practise the laws of their own religion and the laws which they choose for themselves.

At the same time, Muslims would be practising laws of their own.

That means non-Muslims will not be subjected to hudud?

Yes. Yes.

You said you welcome comments on your document from everyone. Does that mean the Islamic State concept is not final as far as PAS is concerned?

For us, it is final. What is important is for us to explain. In terms of principle, it is final. On principles which may not be clear, we accept questions and we will explain. On issues which are not part of the principles, we can have common understanding when it comes to implementation.

What is the reaction of the other opposition parties?

We have had initial discussions with those parties where our co-operation is political for the purpose of facing elections. At the same time, we respect the policies, principles and the struggle of each individual party.

You said an Islamic state would emphasise meritocracy. What would happen to the existing policies which give focus to bumiputras such as quotas?

The reality today is that the majority of the poor are bumiputras. Hence, for the initial period, focus will be on the bumiputra.

There may be a situation in the future that the bumiputras will overcome their problems, and the Indians become the majority of the poor. Then, it will be the responsibility of the country to look after the Indian community.

Maybe the Chinese who have been rich for a long time suddenly become bored with their wealth and turn poor. Then, it will become our responsibility to protect the Chinese.

It will depend on the situation. We are not disposing off with the term bumiputra.

What do you mean by saying that the Islamic state emphasises on meritocracy?

Justice is dispensed to anyone who is entitled to it. It is in terms of wealth, education and others.

Does that mean PAS will remove quotas?

That will depend on developments. Quotas are something which cannot be decided upon now.

Does that mean the special rights which are provided for by the Constitution will be amended?

It will continue to be used until the time when the Malays can stand on their feet. Then, it will no longer be needed. There may be a time when other races are weak. Islam prohibits the exploitation of people who are weak.

Will the existing monarchy system be changed?

The Quran maintains the monarchy system of government and also recognises a non-monarchy system. Both systems are recognised by the Quran. The prophets Daud and Sulaiman were kings.

At the same time, Islam requires the establishment of the khilafah (a leadership which is responsible for establishing Islam as the religion and in governing of the state).

What is important is that there is implementation of justice, the spirit of musyawarah (consultation) is present, and within musyawarah, there is democracy.

It is stated that non-Muslims will be allowed to enjoy the rights of their own beliefs and practices. Does this mean that things like gambling and drinking will not be banned?

This has already happened in Terengganu and Kelantan where before we enforce these laws, we hold a dialogue with the non-Muslims and ask them what their religion said about those practices.

When they say their religion also forbade those practices, we will then ban them outright. If their religion allowed those practices, then it will be allowed.

Gambling is forbidden by all religions, so we have banned it. But with drinking and eating pork, there are religions which allow these practices, so they are allowed.

What happens when a crime which is committed involved both Muslims and non-Muslims? For example, what would happen if a non-Muslim killed a Muslim?

Under such a situation, it would be up to the victim of injustice to choose the law. Or the judiciary will have to make a decision on what kind of law will be applied.

Furthermore, for the non-Muslim, there is already a punishment for murder. There are similarities with Islamic law although it is based on the Penal Code.

What about for offences like khalwat (close proximity) or zina (adultery)?

The Muslim will be punished according to hudud while the non-Muslim will be punished according to the law he or she chooses.

Please do not regard this as unfair. According to the teachings of Islam, Muslims who have been punished according to hudud will not be cast into hell in their hereafter. Those who have not been punished by hudud, they will be sent to hell despite being punished under laws that are non-hudud.

That is why Muslims are satisfied with such a situation.

It was stated that the ruler would be a Muslim? Do you mean the King or the Prime Minister has to be Muslim?

Yes. The King and the Prime Minister will have to be Muslim. This is the usual practice throughout the world. A communist country will not choose an American to be president. When the Republican Party wins in the US, they will not choose a Democrat to be president.

If it is Islam that rules, then a Muslim will be the head of state. But the Cabinet can be made up of non-Muslims. This is something which is allowed in Islam.

One more thing is that Islam is not tied up with ethnicity. If there is a Muslim non-Malay who is considered influential and fulfil all requirements of the religion, he can become the head of state.

In fact in history, the rulers of Islamic countries were not always Arabs. The Ottomans were Turks. Mamelukes were former slaves. Where in Western history have you seen an ex-slave becoming leader of a country?

What would be the role of non-Muslims in the Islamic state which you hope to establish? Would they have a role?

Among the roles would be executive, legislative, and others. Non-Muslims can be members of the Cabinet and the administration. They can even be members of Parliament and have a voice and give views. They can be community leaders representing their own communities.

What do you mean by 'the syariah will be the supreme law of the land'?

As the laws are based on the Quran and Sunnah, that means syariah is supreme. But this does not mean everything is rigid. There will be matters which are “movable” and those which are “immovable.”

What are immovable are the principles. But there are things, which are movable such as time, culture as well as laws and these will depend on the opinions of Islamic jurors.

But as stated earlier, Muslims will be totally subjected to Islamic law while non-Muslims will be subjected to laws of their own religion.

There will be rules which will apply to all, and those which will only apply to parts of the community.

What about atheists?

For those without a religion, there will be laws. There are laws which are connected with religion, and there are those which are applied generally, such as traffic laws, where a green light means everyone can move. These concern public interest and morals.

Why do you think non-Muslims will trust that the contents of this document today will be implemented and that there will not be any “surprises”, such as the implementation of the kharaj (tax imposed on non-Muslims) in Terengganu?

You have to look at things practically when it comes to Terengganu and Kelantan. Kharaj is a new word which we introduced and many do not understand its meaning. It is connected to taxation. Muslims are required to pay zakat. Non-Muslims cannot be required to pay zakat because it has a spiritual aspect. That is why they have to pay tax. Tax in Arabic, it is call kharaj. It’s the same. Land tax is called kharaj. It is just a term.

How would this document help PAS in the coming general election?

To realise our aspirations in the general election would depend upon a manifesto which we will reveal to the people. It will depend on our common understanding between the various opposition parties.

The document on the Islamic state is more general.

Will there be other documents on the Islamic state after today?

As and when it is needed. If there are people who request any explanation in writing, we will do so.

There will also be those who require explanation through practice as there are matters in Islam which may be difficult to understand if it is in writing. And that will require us to be in power.

Chief Justice Zaki Azmi dare not comment on complaint against himself

There is something rotten in Malaysia, and it is the Judiciary. Look at the face of its Chief Justice on being asked to comment on a complaint filed by Karpal Singh against him in August under the Judges' Code of Ethics Act, 2009 and the Judges' Ethics Committee Act, 2009 (photos extracted from video tape 6:25):




We have a Chief Justice who allergly admitted to bribing court official with a tape of his bribery admission handed to the King in February this year. Till now, nothing was done, no enquiry or investigation, no denial nor any effort to clear his name.

Karpal Singh further filed a complaint against Zaki Azmi last month claiming Zaki Ahmad had a "defect in character" warranting disciplinary action under the Acts. The complaint was hand delivered to the Chief Justice's office on September 24 and here on being asked to confirm he had received the complaint, he grimaced and immediately clamped up saying "No comment. I do not want to enter into the political arena."

Hey this is no politics! It is about the integrity of the highest office of the Judiciary in which every Malaysians have a stake. His refusal to comment on the matter plus his demeanor is likely an admission of guilt.

Listen to the videotape of Zaki Azmi bragging about how quick the cases in the courts are being disposed of but looked so frightened upon being asked that embarassing question by the reporter. That embarassing moment is at 6:25 minute of the 6:28 minute long video:

Zaid Ibrahim "Do we need a Third Force?"

Here are the videos featuring Zaid Ibrahim speech at the first Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia fund raising dinner. Zaid was asked to give a speech on the question "Do we need a Third Force (the civil society plus Pakatan Rakyat versus UMNO/BN) but this was only briefly touched upon in the beginning of the speech:

Speech: Part 1


Speech: Part 2


Speech: Part 3


Speech: Part 4


Question & Answer Part 1


Question & Answer Part 2

Best reason for voting Pakatan Rakyat - riches for the people

Pakatan rakyat resolves to return the riches of the Selangor state to the rakyat unlike the corrupt UMNO/BN which uses the riches of the country to enrich itself and its croonies. Read what Khalid Samad has to say about the philosopy of Pakatan Rakyat. Read about what Pakatan Rakyat plans to do about:

Introductory comments
The new policy regime
Free water
The poor and disenfranchised
The old and handicapped
Potential of young people of all races
Respect and tolerance
Tackling racialized and racist attitudes
High quality of life
Room for improvement

COMMENT The social policies of any government are obviously coloured by its political philosophy and what it understands as its role as a government in relation to its citizenry.

Pakatan Rakyat emerged as the ruling coalition in Selangor on the back of rising discontent towards the BN state government which was seen as increasingly arrogant and burdened by cases of blatant and open corruption.

Intolerant policies towards religious places of worship with obvious racial undertones were another important factor.

With that as the backdrop it is logical to assume that the mandate given to Pakatan was to establish a clean and responsible government for the state of Selangor which would act fairly towards all races and religions. And such was the promise made during the campaign period.

However, putting things right when taking over from a corrupt administration is not limited to structural or procedural reforms. It includes changing attitudes and mindsets and as such it cannot be expected that the objectives will be fully achieved in a short time.

Nor can a change in attitudes and norms be forced upon society. It has to be handled with care, slowly unravelling fears and prejudices, as well as misinformation and induced apathy, which had sustained the previous establishment in power for decades.

Much of this push for change has taken the form of social policies which embody the new attitudes towards the issues of social justice and good governance. These policies are fundamentally based on the principle that the wealth of Selangor is to benefit its citizens and
that the government is merely an administrator of this wealth and is responsible for its effective and efficient administration.

The state government thus embarked on an ambitious plan to instil this new political understanding by implementing policies which addressed the following priorities:

Good governance entails the provision of basic necessities at minimum cost especially for items like water which is a God-given asset to the state.
Assisting the poor and the disenfranchised irrespective of race and religion.
Assisting the old, the handicapped, victims of broken homes and re-establishing strong family values.
Developing the potential of the young of all races.
Upholding the values of justice for all and respect and tolerance for all religions.
Undoing racialised and racist attitudes which had been the cornerstone of the previous administration.
Framing proper and planned development with the objective of enhancing the quality of life for all.
Laying the basis of a responsible government with emphasis on competency, transparency and accountability.

The new policy regime

A range of new social policy initiatives have emerged that reflect the Pakatan government's values and philosophy.

Free water

This policy of free water for every metered household for the first 20 cubic metres was mentioned in the election manifesto of the earlier Barisan Alternatif. It hinges on the belief that the government must ensure the supply of basic necessities at minimum cost.

This is especially so in the case of water which is a God-given asset. It is also in stark contrast with the privatisation policies of the BN which systematically attempted to turn every basic necessity into a cash-cow for its cronies.

The current free water policy costs the Selangor state government about RM10 million a month as payment to the BN-appointed concessionary has to be made.

A serious attempt is being made to alter the existing arrangement with respect to the water concession so that this basic necessity can be provided cheaply to citizens. In the meantime the state government is 'hanging tough' in opposing the price increase which was specified in the concession agreement designed by BN for its cronies.

The poor and disenfranchised

When taking over from the previous administration it was noted that efforts to assist the poor and disenfranchised were minimal and not considered a priority. Records and statistics on the poor were incomplete and far from satisfactory.

Policies with clearly identified objectives and target groups were also not present. Political affiliations were always an important consideration for any form of assistance, monetary or otherwise. The new administration put forward a new definition of poverty for Selangor where a family with a combined household income of below RM1,500 per month is defined as being 'poor'.

Subsequently various programmes have been undertaken which necessitated the proper and up-to-date recording of the 'poor'. Within a few months much important data were accumulated and processed.

These programmes have included the following initiatives.
Financial assistance to families of the poor during Ramadan, Hari Raya, Chinese New Year and Deepavali. Similar assistance was given during the restart of the school year and school shoes and bags were also given out in addition to a financial contribution.
Much of this was undertaken by the state and parliamentary representatives who used their state allocation for such programmes.
Free tuition programmes for school children from families who could not afford to pay tuition fees. This programme was initiated in late 2009 with each state assembly person asked to identify at least one location in their state constituency to initiate the programme.
A one-off financial contribution of RM1,000 to every student from a poor family who manages to secure a place in a local university. This programme cost the state government RM 7 .7 million in 2009.
A fund was set up to assist the children of estate workers who were identified as the most disenfranchised community in the state. This happened when the estates were sold to be turned into townships and these workers lost not only their homes but also their livelihoods. They were thrown into a new environment with no means of making a living, with no retraining or assimilation programme being set up and this led to their current status.

This obviously in turn led to various social problems and by identifying them as a disenfranchised entity with a special fund set up for their development, it is hoped that their problems will be effectively addressed. In this manner they will also be assisted to readjust to their new circumstances. The state government also finances the building and maintenance of hostels for the children of estate workers. For 2009 the total amount used to assist the children of estate workers amounted to RM2 million.

The old and the handicapped

One-stop crisis centres for assisting victims of broken homes, particularly battered wives, were set up in 37 of the 56 state constituencies. These centres provide legal consultation, infrastructure, counselling and motivational services. A second phase is planned to concentrate on efforts to educate the public about the incidence of domestic violence and ways to handle it.

The handicapped have also been provided with various forms of financial assistance and given priority in certain allocations. A standard car sticker for the handicapped was issued throughout the state which allows people with disabilities access to facilities at carparks and other benefits.

Accessibility for people with disabilities has also been implemented in all new government buildings. Opportunities have been given to them within government working teams, and local councils have representation of people with disabilities.

Elderly people were provided with an allocation termed usia emas through which any individual above the age of 60 is to be registered and upon his or her death the family will be provided with financial assistance of RM2,500 for burial services.

For 2009, the state spent RM15.6 million on this programme. By January 2010, more than 22,000 people had registered for the scheme, more than 40 percent of the total number of senior citizens in Selangor.

The effort to strengthen family values is being assisted by the state government implementing laws which show that the family is both a priority and an asset. This includes 90-day maternity leave plus 14-day paternity leave for staff in the employment of the state government.

This sends the message that the state acknowledges and understands the needs of newly-born babies and does its own bit to assist the families. At the same time, when a husband passes away the widow is given 30-day compassionate leave so as to have enough time not only to grieve and come to terms with her loss but also to be able to settle all matters arising from the death.

All the above policies are aimed at accentuating family values and assisting those with specific difficulties to stay true to their loved ones. Strong family values will have a positive impact on social problems as many of these problems arise from the weakened role of the family.

Potential of young people of all races

The development of the full potential of young people is being addressed by creating a fund called Tabung Warisan Anak Selangor (Tawas), a state government investment and insurance fund through which an account is opened in the name of every new-born Selangorian, irrespective of race or religion with a RM100 deposit.

When the child reaches the age of 18 years the account, inclusive of the dividends earned, will be opened to assist in the pursuit of higher education. The amount available to the teenager then would be RM1,500.

In 2009 there were 15,802 approved applicants and RM1.342 million has been paid to participating banks to date. At the same time greater emphasis is now given to upgrading the quality of pre-school education. The state government assists in ensuring the availability of proper premises and emphasis will also be put on the training of the teachers.

Pakatan strongly believes in the fact that the young of today are the leaders of tomorrow and as such the question of proper education for the young is given the priority it deserves.

Respect and tolerance

As noted earlier, widespread opposition to intolerance and racial prejudice was a factor which led to the Barisan Nasional's downfall in Selangor. The Pakatan government acknowledges the problem by putting aside a sizeable contribution for religious and vernacular schools.

The allocation can also be used for use by places of worship which have been maintained purely through contributions from devotees to date. The religious and vernacular schools have never received any form of financial support from the state governments of the past except in the form of one-off contributions as and when it suited them.

This indifferent treatment was meted out not only to vernacular schools but to the Islamic religious schools known as Sekolah Agama Rakyat as well. The Pakatan state government has since given allocations to Tamil and Chinese schools as well as the Sekolah Agama Rakyat.

Together, currently a total yearly allocation of RM14 million exists for the purpose of financial support for all such educational institutions. Support and assistance from the government is proof of the religious and racial tolerance practiced by Pakatan.

It is looked upon as a matter of basic human rights which must not only be respected but encouraged. It is hoped that through this action Selangor society at large will be induced with the kind of tolerance and mutual respect which is a fundamental requirement of any multiracial and multireligious society.

Tackling racialised and racist attitudes

All the policies which seek to establish social justice are based on merit rather than race and party affiliation. All the poor, irrespective of race and political affiliation, receive assistance. All the old, irrespective of race and political affiliation, are given their rights.

All the social institutions, such as religious and vernacular schools, receive an allocation. This is in stark contrast to race- and party-based assistance programmes of the previous BN administration which, while denying the right to assistance of those in need merely because they are of the 'wrong' race or political group, did much to instil racialised and racist values within society.

The policies of the Pakatan administration looks upon the whole rakyat as its responsibility, irrespective of colour and creed and it is hoped that through example, society at large will learn to respect and tolerate the differences which exist in Selangor. It is hoped that the Selangor of the future will be one that has become free of the race-tinted inflections of the previous administration.

High quality of life

While implementing these policies and educating the public through its justice-based policies as against race-based approach of old, the Pakatan administration has not forgotten the need to bring about development to the state. Various programmes have been undertaken to ensure that the quality of life for Selangorians will be improved.

This is done by ensuring a more efficient and responsive administration at the local council level through which existing facilities are better looked after and maintained while at the same time working on new areas of development.

Current concerns of the state administration include the question of public transport and the rehabilitation of rivers. This is planned for implementation through the 'Pakej Rangsangan Ekonomi Selangor' or the Selangor economic stimulus package launched in 2009.

Responsible government

The Malaysian public has never been encouraged to demand a high quality performance from the government. Politically they have been taught paternalism - to value peace and harmony, special rights for certain groups and to be grateful for whatever that comes their way.

As such, no matter how badly the government performs and no matter how many scandals are uncovered, the public is taught to conclude that at the very least we are living in peace and this would be threatened if BN were not in power!

Such was the level of political propaganda among the general population. By contrast,Pakatan attempts to educate the public to be more discerning and critical, to know their rights and demand quality performance from the government of the day.

Its leaders continuously remind the public that they are in power because of them and are to work for the people's benefit and with their interest at heart at all times. It must be accountable and transparent in all its dealings.

Its performance is to be evaluated and if it falls below the expectations it is not wrong to elect a different government in the next general election.

Transparency and accountability are further attained by empowering the general public through public hearings by use of the local council sponsored Majlis Perwakilan Penduduk (Residents' Representative Council) for matters pertaining to local council administration.

For state affairs, the newly formed Select Committee on Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) attempts to achieve a similar objective albeit in a different form.

Room for improvement

The role which is demanded of the Pakatan state government is not merely to implement good social policies but also to enable the rakyat to understand that these policies are the kind which they have a right to demand and expect from the government in power.

The old destructive values which inculcated mistrust and suspicion amongst the races are to be slowly but surely eroded and the unity of the rakyat on the basis of justice, mutual trust and respect is to be fostered.

There is always room for improvement. For example, there should be a regular review of the social policies implemented by the state government on the effectiveness and success of each programme.

Such an evaluation would be useful in measuring the extent to which these programmes have assisted targeted groups. Understandably, it is difficult to make a precise measurement as to the efficacy of how each programme manages to reduce poverty within selected communities, given the lack of data generated by the federal government.

This could be overcome by doing surveys on how recipients of state government programmes feel about how the aid has assisted their livelihoods, if at all.

In addition, although it is clear that these policies are meant to alleviate the conditions of the poor within the means available to the state government, more could be done to empower them with a special focus upon human capital development and training programmes, as these ultimately assist in lifting people out of abject poverty.

Such a unique combination of social welfare-driven policies would propel the new generation of young Selangor citizens towards being empowered for the future.

It is important to note that research being conducted by academics or organisations studying poverty should be incorporated in the Selangor government's considerations of new policies and programmes, since research can help to identify key geographical and community areas to work on specifically.

Such collaboration with universities, think tanks and other similar interest groups within civil society would be useful for the state in both the conceptualising and implementation of its social policies.

It is hoped that the political re-education undertaken, through the implementation of social policies, will finally put to rest the narrow-minded and bigoted politics characteristic of BN and usher in a new kind of politics based on justice and equality.

'The Road to Reform: Pakatan Rakyat in Selangor' is a book made up of a collation of articles written by 22 authors on the achievements and difficulties of the Pakatan state government since taking power 18 months ago. It will be launched on Sept 27.

Are The Police The Protector of The People? 警察是人民的保镖?

Public Forum : "Are The Police The Protector of The People?"
Date: 21st September 2010 Tuesday 8.30pm
Venue: Dewan Dato Haji Ahmad Badawi (Location map)
12000 Butterworth, Penang

Bahasa Malaysia
Bahasa Cina 汉语

Public Forum : " Are The Police The Protector of The People?"

A public forum entitled " Are The Police The Protectors of The People " will be held on the 26th of September 2010, Sunday, at 8.30pm at Dewan Dato Haji Ahmad Badawi in Butterworth. The forum will be conducted in Bahasa Malaysia.

The rakyat has been debating the many controversies surrounding the Royal Malaysian Police, including that the Police has become a third force unto themselves and that the police has eroded the civil rights of the people. There have been many instances when the police have severely transgressed against the basic human rights of the peoples, such as the use of violence against peaceful demonstration. During the demonstration against the ISA held on the 1st of August 2009, a total of 589 persons including a child were arrested.

Besides this, during the tenor of the former Chief of Police Musa Hassan, the Royal Police of Malaysia have shown a very poor record on the upholding of basic human rights. According to official statistics, from the year 2007 to 2009, a total of 183 persons died from police gunfire. Among these, the most notorious cases include the death of a14 year old Aminulrasyid and that of Mohd Afham. Both were gunned down by the police.

From 1999 to 2008, a total of 153 deaths have occurred while in police custody. Among these cases, the most well known include the death of A Kugan, G Gunasegaran and Mohd Anuar Aharip who died while detained in police lock-ups.

It is hoped that through this public forum, the rakyat can examine and discuss the many concerns the public have towards the Royal Police of Malaysia and the various suggestions that have been proposed for the reforms of the police force.

The panel of speakers are:
1) Mahfuz Omar ( Vice President of PAS, MP for Pokok Sena, Kedah)
2) Lawyer Mr. Wong Hong Wai ( The Chief of Political Education DAP Penang, A member of Exco Penang State Government)
3) Lawyer Mr. Ong Chin Wen ( Vice President of Youth Wing PKR Penang, ADUN Bukit Tengah )
4) Mr. Arulchetvan ( Secretary General of PSM, Municipal Councillor of Kajang)

The Moderator:
Nora Murat ( Executive Director of Amnesty international Malaysia)

For further enquiries please contact Mr.Ong Jing Cheng 012- 758 3779 or email suarampg@gmail.com

Pengumuman Program

21hb September 2010 (Selasa)

Kepada pengarah,

Wacana Rakyat: “Adakah Polis Pembela Rakyat?”

Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) Negeri Pulau Pinang bersama-sama dengan badan bukan kerajaan (NGOs) seperti Amnesty International Malaysia (AIM), Sembang-sembang Forum dan Persatuan Muafakat Kesejahteraan Rakyat Pulau Pinang (PERMUAFAKAT) serta parti politik iaitu Lajnah Penerangan PAS Negeri Pulau Pinang, Angkatan Pemuda KEADILAN Negeri Pulau Pinang dan Parti Tindakan Demokratik (DAP) Negeri Pulau Pinang menganjurkan Wacana Rakyat bertajuk “Adakah Polis Pembela Rakyat?” pada 26hb September 2010 (Ahad), jam 8.30 malam bertempat di Dewan Dato Haji Ahmad Badawi, Butterworld.

Banyak persoalan telah dibangkitkan terhadap Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM) termasuk kuasa ketiga dalam pasukan polis dan juga isu-isu yang pelanggaran dengan hak asasi manusia.

Pelanggaran hak asasi manusia yang serius boleh dilihat di dalam tindakan keras anggota polis terhadap peserta perhimpunan-perhimpunan aman, termasuk perhimpunan aman membantah Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA) pada 1 Ogos 2009 di mana seramai 589 orang, termasuk kanak-kanak telah ditahan.

Di bawah pimpinan bekas Ketua Polis Negara Musa Hassan selama empat tahun sejak 2006, PDRM mempunyai rekod dan reputasi yang teruk di dalam isu hak asasi manusia.

Statistik rasmi kerajaan menunjukkan bahawa seramai 183 orang telah mati akibat ditembak polis dari tahun 2007 hingga 2009. Antara kes yang paling serius adalah penembakan mati remaja Aminulrasyid dan Mohammad Afham oleh polis.

Selain itu, terdapat sebanyak 153 kes kematian dalam tahanan polis antara tahun 1999 hingga 2008. Pada tahun 2009, seramai tujuh orang telah meninggal dunia di dalam tahanan polis. Antara kes-kes yang diketahui umum termasuk kematian A. Kugan, R.Gunasegaran, Mohd Anuar Sharip.

Kami berharap mendapat maklumat mengenai polis dan idea-idea reform melalui wacana rakyat kali ini.

Panelis:
1. Y.B. Mahfuz Omar (Ahli Parlimen Pokok Sena, Naib Presiden PAS Pusat)
2. Y.B. Ong Chin Wen (ADUN Bukit Tengah, Naib Ketua AMK Pulau Pinang)
3. Y.B. Wong Hon Wai (EXCO Kerajaan Pulau Pinang, ADUN Ayer Itam, Pengarah Pendidik Politik DAP Negeri Pulau Pinang)
4. Sdr. Arutchelvan (Setiausaha Agung Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)

Moderator:
Nora Murat (Pengarah Eksekutif Amnesty International Malaysia)

Sebarang pertanyaan boleh menghubungi Saudara Ong Jing Cheng 012-7583779 atau suarampg@gmail.com


大马人民之声槟城支部
SUARA RAKYAT MALAYSIA
Penang Branch:
Address: 63B – 01 – 07, University Heights, Jalan Sungai Dua,
11700 Penang.
Telephone / Fax: + 6 04 658 2285
E-mail: suarampg@gmail.com

活动预告

2010年9月1日（星期三）

至：新闻编辑

人民论坛：“警察是人民的保镖？”

人民之声槟城支部，大马国际特赦组织（Amnesty International Malaysia），Sembang-sembang论坛，大马国际特赦组织，Persatuan Muafakat Kesejahteraan Rakyat Pulau Pinang (PERMUAFAKAT)，槟州回教党宣传局，槟州公青团，及槟州行动党联合于2010年9月26日（星期天），晚上8点30分在北海Dewan Dato Haji Ahmad Badawi举办“警察是人民的保镖”。此论坛将使用国文进行。

人民对马来西亚皇家警察的争议不曾停止过,包括警队有第三股势力及对人权的侵犯。一些严重违反人权的例子，包括警方暴力对待和平集会者，如：2009年8月1日的反对内安法令大游行，共有589人包括一名小孩被扣留。
除此之外，在前警察总长慕沙哈山领导过去的四年，马来西亚皇家警察在基本人权议题上的记录和表现非常不佳。政府的数据显示，在2007至2009年期间，共有183人被警方用枪击毙。当中最严重的案件为14岁少年阿密努拉希（Aminulrasyid）以及莫哈末阿夫汉（Mohd Afham）被击毙的案件。
在1999年至2008年期间，共有153宗扣留所死亡案件，而当中最为人知的包括印裔青年古甘（A. Kugan），古纳斯加兰（R.Gunasegaran）以及莫哈末安努亚（Mohd Anuar Sharip）在扣留所死亡案件。
希望透过这次的人民论坛能让人民探讨整个皇家警队面对的问题及改革的建议。
主讲人：
1）马夫兹Mahfuz Omar（回教党全国副主席，吉打波各先那区国会议员）
2）黄汉伟律师（槟州行动党政治教育局主任，槟州行政议员）
3）王敬文律师（槟州公正党青年团副团长，武吉丁雅州议员）
4）阿鲁哲文（社会主义党秘书长，加影市议员）

主持人：
诺拉Nora Murat （大马国际特赦组织执行长）

任何疑问，请接洽王泽钦 012-7583779或电邮suarampg@gmail.com。


人民之声槟城支部协调员
王泽钦启
63B-01-07, University Heights,
Jalan Sungai Dua,
11700 Penang.
电话/传真: 04-6582285
电邮: suarampg@gmail.com
http://suarampg.blogspot.com/

Location map

View Larger Map

TALK & CHANGE 的时代! 你准备好了吗？

Event: TALK & CHANGE 的时代! 你准备好了吗？
Date: Monday, September 27 · 8:00pm - 11:00pm
Location: Sri Petaling Hotel（大城堡酒店）(Location map)
30, Jalan Radin Anum,
Bandar Baru Sri Petaling,,
57000 Kuala Lumpur
Selangor
03-9058-2323

迦玛 (Jamaluddin Ibrahim)后援团。反对无理打压言论自由！ 论坛活动 ：言论有自由，种族才和谐！
日期 ：9月27日（星期一）
时间 ：8PM
地点 ：Sri Petaling Hotel（大城堡酒店）
主讲人 ：1）YB郭素芯国会议员
2）迦玛 （前988早点说玛主持人兼时评人）
3）Hishammudin Rais （前著名学生运动领袖）
询问电话 ：03 7983 6768
入场 ：免费

*欢迎所有提倡并认同种族和谐，言论自由的朋友们一起出席！听听不同的声音，改变你的刻板印象！

Created By
迦玛 (Jamaluddin Ibrahim)后援团。反对无理打压言论自由！
More Info 论坛活动 ：言论有自由，种族才和谐！
日期 ：9月27日（星期一）
时间 ：8PM
地点 ：Sri Petaling Hotel（大城堡酒店）
主讲人 ：1）YB郭素芯国会议员
2）迦玛 （前988早点说玛主持人兼时评人）
3）Hishammudin Rais （前著名学生运动领袖）
询问电话 ：03 7983 6768
入场 ：免费

*欢迎所有提倡并认同种族和谐，言论自由的朋友们一起出席！听听不同的声音，改变你的刻板印象！

Location map - Sri Petaling Hotel

View Larger Map

PAS DAP relation - can it survive hudud law dispute?

As a continuation of seeking a consensus between PAS and DAP over the Islamic state and Hudud law issues, let's do a compilation of all views regarding the relations and interactions between PAS and DAP. So here is political analyst Wong Chin Huat take on whether PAS and DAP can survive the hudud law dispute, courtesy of the Nut Graph:

Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: Can PAS and DAP survive hudud law dispute?
By Ding Jo-Ann | 20 September 2010 |

MALAYSIANS have been seeing PAS and DAP cooperate on a level not thought possible before. When DAP Member of Parliament Teo Nie Ching received brickbats from Umno for speaking in a surau’s prayer room, PAS leaders spoke up in her defence, saying non-Muslims are allowed in Muslim houses of worship. Earlier this year, Umno leaders argued that sports betting should be legalised. PAS and DAP begged to differ. Umno said Christians should be banned from using “Allah” to refer to God. PAS leaders said otherwise.
But what about the ultimate bones of contention — hudud law and an Islamic state — both of which DAP opposes? Can PAS and DAP really put aside their differences on this to form a lasting coalition in Pakatan Rakyat (PR)? The Nut Graph asks political scientist Wong Chin Huat in the latest installation of Uncommon Sense.

TNG: PAS and DAP disagree over the implementation of hudud laws every so often. The most recent incident involved DAP chairperson Karpal Singh reminding PAS that hudud and the Islamic state are not within PR’s policy. How will this play out if PR manages to form the next federal government? Will either side have to compromise and if so, will those compromises alienate their respective voter bases?

Wong Chin Huat : The issue will disappear once they form the next federal government provided Umno is sufficiently weakened but not completely wiped out.

While their ideological commitments are real, DAP and PAS have always been strategic in the issues they highlight. There are many ways to showcase PAS’s contribution in promoting Islam other than implementing hudud. DAP won’t have problems with Islamisation if it involves islamising the financial system or expanding social welfare as long as non-Muslims are not discriminated against or forced to follow Islamic laws.

Before 8 March 2008, you would expect DAP to stand up to defend the right of non-Muslims to gamble, a position now ironically taken over by Umno on the sports betting issue. Instead, DAP supported the anti-gambling position and packaged it with a strongly non-Muslim flavour by announcing Penang’s state-level ban on sports gambling outlets on Wesak Day.

All things are possible in politics. What we should be concerned about is how to divert attention away from the divisive issue of hudud or at least not make it a priority. The answer lies in giving PAS and DAP enough power so that they appreciate that forsaking such power over hudud is suicidal. This rests more on non-Muslim voters than on Muslim voters. Imagine if PAS won 40 parliamentary seats, with half of those won in mixed seats due to crucial non-Muslim support. Would they harp on hudud if they risked losing these 20 seats in the following elections?

However, if Umno/Barisan Nasional (BN) is completely destroyed in the next elections and PR starts to feel it is unbeatable, there will be some who will want to play hero again within Pakatan Rakyat on the issue of hudud. So the issue will come back.

TNG: PAS leaders have said they will adhere to PR’s Common Policy Framework (CPF) and called a truce for now on the hudud issue. How binding is this document and do you foresee PR parties sticking to it on principle, even at times when it may hurt them politically?

If the prospect of PR coming into power is real, the CPF will be binding. They will definitely stick to it before the next elections even if it hurts. What happens after the next elections will depend on who survives and who triumphs.

If people like Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, Khalid Samad and Siti Mariah Mahmud lose in the next general election, then they can stick to the CPF all they like, but it won’t matter anymore. Collectively, politicians are opportunists. It’s part of their job requirement. So, don’t test them on their principles more than you want to deliberately test your partner on their fidelity. All we should aim for is a good outcome, not a heroic but tragic ending.

TNG: Does the CPF bind PAS’s actions in the states where they hold a majority such as Kedah and Kelantan? Have they been abiding by the CPF’s principles so far?

There are clearly sins of omissions to say the least. Kelantan and Kedah have shown no interest in local democracy. Kedah’s policy of reserving 50% of housing lots for Bumiputeras certainly does not fit well with PR’s vision of an inclusive and colour-blind Malaysia.

Why is the CPF not being followed religiously? The simple answer is that it is not being indoctrinated effectively. It remains an official document, not an ideological guide. If you tested DAP and PKR’s party election candidates and asked them to list out five specific issues in the CPF, I don’t know how many would pass.

Is this a problem? Yes, the lack of interests and seriousness in CPF means that we can’t expect a clear picture of how this country will be run. The CPF is rather vague to begin with. But this is not a serious issue, and it is not one that will break the Pakatan Rakyat.

As long as federal power is still within sight, DAP and PAS will love each other. By the same logic, the moment the prospect of power fades, Umno will bid farewell to MCA, MIC and other member parties. For example, in Sarawak, because Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud is increasingly unpopular, his once-loyalists in SUPP have hinted they might leave BN.

At the end of the day, all political coalitions are marriages of convenience. We don’t have to ask whether there will be true love at the time of adversity. We should just make sure that the marriage works out well when they are in power or on the road to power. This is the problem with BN — their marriage is not even working when they are still in power.

TNG: Have PAS and DAP leaders been saying different things to different constituencies in order not to ruffle any feathers? How consistent have both their stands been on hudud and the Islamic state issue since March 2008?

No. The exchange of words between Karpal and PAS spiritual leader Datuk Seri Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat over hudud is the case in point. With the increasingly multilingual population, double-speak or dog-whistling has no chance of success but will backfire.

The challenge for PAS and DAP is exactly how to remain consistent and reconcilable with each other at the same time. It’s how to persuade their members that some issues just need to be left to time and they just need to agree to disagree for now.

TNG: Will one way of compromise be that PAS implement its Islamic state model only in states where they hold a majority? Will this result in creeping Islamisation state by state?

Islamisation has two approaches in general.
The first is Islamisation of the state, using state power to impose Islamic values and institutions, as understood and interpreted by the ruling elites, on the rest of population. This is basically Islamisation by coercion — even though its advocates would call it part of believers’ duty or even that of residing minority groups. The fact remains that those who refuse to follow cannot opt out. Such Islamisation will not work even if carried out only at the state level because citizenship and civil rights should not be differentiated by region.

The second approach is Islamisation of the society and economy through persuasion and incentives. People are encouraged to adopt Islamic values and practices because such values and practices benefit them. The best example is of course Islamic finance, where non-Muslim Chinese are said to be one of the most enthusiastic groups. Halal standards are also adopted by many non-Muslim restaurants because they want Muslim business. Surely Islam has more to contribute to the society, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, on a voluntarily basis. If state governments are competing to Islamise in a non-compelling way, such competition is only good for making Malaysia more diversified.

So the key is really not how Islamised Malaysia should be, but how Malaysia is to be Islamised, by persuasion or by force.

Article 153 - Islam, Muslims, bumiputeras, non-Muslims

Aizuddin Danian argued that Article 153 of the Malaysia Constitution that provides special privilages to bumiputers creates unfairness and is unislamic. I would believe so. However, as a non-Muslim and a non-bumiputera, what I am keenly interested in is whether similar discriminations and unfairness against non-Muslims in an Islamic state exist. There is some preliminary discussion of that issue in my earlier post on Should non-Muslims in Malaysia have a say regarding Malaysia becoming an Islamic state? at a time when I may not have an in-depth understanding of the issue yet. However, let us see what Aizuddin regarding bumiputeras and non-bumiputeras. Check back later to see if there is any further development:

Article 153 -- is it un-Islamic?
By Aizuddin Danian on September 20, 2010 9:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Share |

Malaysia's official religion, according to Article 3 of its Constitution, is Islam. That doesn't make Malaysia a Muslim nation; there is a find line between a theological state and a secular one. We've yet to make that cross over.

Having said this, it came to mind whether there are any articles in our beloved Constitution that are un-Islamic, in particular Article 153.

(2) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, but subject to the provisions of Article 40 and of this Article, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall exercise his functions under this Constitution and federal law in such manner as may be necessary to safeguard the special provision of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and to ensure the reservation for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak of such proportion as he may deem reasonable of positions in the public service (other than the public service of a State) and of scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities given or accorded by the Federal Government and, when any permit or licence for the operation of any trade or business is required by federal law, then, subject to the provisions of that law and this Article, of such permits and licences.

When you think about a Muslim Government in current times, you have to compare it against the Muslim Government of the Prophet Muhammad's time, namely his administration of Muslims and non-Muslims while he was alive.

Muslims are told to take the Prophet as an example (his sunnah); while the Holy Quran often speaks in parables, the actions of the Prophet are how Muslims for all time should interpret as manifestations of what the Holy Quran prescribes in practice. For example, the Holy Quran mentions that Muslims must pray, but it doesn't teach us how to pray. The Prophet's daily prayers are the sample of how these prayers should be performed.

What about the Prophet's political sunnah?

The basis i'm dealing from is the social contract the Prophet signed and ratified with the people of Medina called, the "Medinah Charter". Some say that the Charter is one of the first of its kind, the first ever written state constitution.

The document itself, signed in 622, is an excellent socio-political compromise. The Prophet Muhammad had to get away from the religious persecution of Mecca, and the people of Medina, due to conflict between the native communities of Khazraj and Aws, needed a peace-maker. It was a match literally made in heaven -- the Prophet brought Islam and peace to the Khazraj and Aws by being the one person both sides could trust, and the Prophet was provided a base from which Islam could grow and flourish in the region.

There are key articles in the Charter that can be, taken into context, contradictory to the Constitution of Malaysia, particularly Article 153 which promises a "special position" to the indigenous Malays (Bumiputeras).

Therefore, the thesis is: Malaysia is a Muslim nation. However, its constitution is not in accordance to the sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad. Does that make the Malaysian constitution (parts of it) un-Islamic?
Article 16 of the Medina Charter:

Those Jews who follow the Believers will be helped and will be treated with equality.

Article 17:

No Jew will be wronged for being a Jew.

Article 19:

The peace of the Believers (of the State of Madinah) cannot be divided. (it is either peace or war for all. It cannot be that a part of the population is at war with the outsiders and a part is at peace).

Article 30:

The Jews of Bani Awf will be treated as one community with the Believers. The Jews have their religion. This will also apply to their freedmen. The exception will be those who act unjustly and sinfully. By so doing they wrong themselves and their families.

The example in this document set by the Prophet is molded on several principles:

Loyalty will be rewarded, treachery will be punished.
The minorities of the community (the Jews) are equal in rights to the majority from the point of view of the State.
Those that need help will be given help, regardless of their belief.

Let's transplant these principles into our locality:

Loyalty will be rewarded -- the modern day equivalent is citizenship and nationality. If you profess to be a Malaysian, that means you are loyal to your country. No distinction is made to your ethnicity, race or origin. If you are loyal (i.e. a citizen), then you will rewarded by the State. In 622, "protection" was the reward. In 2010, "equal opportunity" should be the reward -- its the only real protection we have against the ills of socio-economic hardship.

The minorities have equal rights to the majority -- this is where the Prophet Muhammad was at least 6 centuries ahead of his time; even the venerated Magna Carta does not protect the rights of all its people equally. If people like Ibrahim Ali and the ultra Malays have their way, then the Prophet Muhammad will be at least 1,500 years ahead of us.

Those in need will be helped, regardless of their belief -- race is the new religion. In 622, the Prophet laid the framework for religious equality: the State will help you if you are in need (and if you are loyal), the State will be "blind" to your religion when dispensing this aid. Fast forward to the 21st Century, and at least where Malaysia is concerned, is seems that there are many in our society who believe that "help" should be dispensed based on your race. If you're a Bumiputera, then "more" help should be made available to you.

The crux of the argument is that the resources of the country will always be limited. To put it simply, there will always be only 100 cows to give away. While it may make sense to give a guarantee that 60% of the population will always have preference to 30 of those cows, this creates a vacuum where the herd has effectively become much smaller: after the "majority tax" the nation only really has 70 cows left to give away.

Considering the fact that these 70 cows need to be distributed evenly, its very possible that they won't be enough to feed everyone. What do you say to the starving people who couldn't get one of the 70 cows? Sorry, we know you're in need, but we've already reserved those 30 other cows, you can't have them (we'll give them to that other fellow instead, who may not need the cow to begin with but happens to be part of the privileged group).

The Prophet Muhammad was a pretty smart man. He knew that the Muslims needed the Jews, Christians and idol worshipers of Medina, just as much as they needed his unique peacekeeping talents.

The Malays of Malaysia need the Chinese, Indians and others, and vice versa. Its a symbiotic relation that only works when we're all equally vested and equally rewarded. While the early years of statehood required Article 153 (just like we required the Reid Commission to write our Constitution for us), i think the time has come that we use our own words to determine our own fate.

The sunnah of the prophet has shown us that equality and fairplay are the basic twin peaks of nation building. While i won't go so far as to say the likes of Article 153 in the Malaysian Constitution, PERKASA and the ultra Malay are un-Islamic for ignoring the sunnah of the Prophet, sometimes you just have to realize that the proof is in the pudding.

Related articles
Ibrahim Ali - intellectually bankrupt (aizuddindanian.com)
Am i racist? (aizuddindanian.com)
The Gini co-efficient is only half the story for Malaysia (aizuddindanian.com)
This is the sort of thing that inflames Muslims (aizuddindanian.com)

Categories: Perspectives
Tags: article 153, malaysia, racism
1 Comments
By timothy au on September 20, 2010 6:21 PM
Prophet Muhammad is an honorable man, those from perkasa and barisan national can't even be compare to His Highness shit!shit!shit!

Source: Article 153 -- is it un-Islamic?

Najib Abdul Razak cash cow - KTM

Reproducing RPK's story on How playing golf with the Prime Minister can earn you billions here in case his site become inaccessible again:

Najib's new cash cow

Keretapi Tanah Melayu
Raja Petra Kamarudin



(Malaysia Today) - Tan Kay Hock is the low-profile controlling shareholder of Johan Holdings Berhad, a public-listed investment holding company. He is also the golf buddy of Najib Tun Razak and this relationship has made him hundreds of millions. Kay Hock recently caused ripples in China when he asked the Chinese for RM500 million and told them that RM200 million is for Najib’s family.



How playing golf with the Prime Minister can earn you billions

For about ten years and over three Prime Ministers, the current Prime Minister included, the contract for the double-tracking electric train from Gemas to Johor Bahru has been ding-donging. Despite what was agreed between the leaders of China and the three Prime Ministers, which was later confirmed by the issuance of a Letter of Intent to China Railways Engineering Corporation (CREC), the government is again backtracking.
Najib now wants to award the contract to China Harbour Engineering Co. Ltd. (CHEC) instead, the company that is building the Second Penang Bridge -- which shot up from RM1 billion to RM4.5 billion and now to RM22 billion (read more on the matter below).

The man behind this is Tan Kay Hock, Najib’s golf buddy. He is brokering the deal on behalf of CHEC.
The Chinese say that Tan Kay Hock is demanding RM500 million from CHEC and he told them that RM200 million is for Najib's family. And this is making the Chinese very unhappy because, in China, both the givers as well the receivers of bribes will be sentenced to death with a bullet in the head plus the cost of the bullet is charged to the family of the deceased.

When the Chinese government offered the Malaysian government a loan to construct the Gemas to JB railway they indicated that CREC should be the contractor. CREC is one of the biggest specialist contractors for electric trains while CHEC has not constructed even one kilometer of electric railway (more details below).
A Letter of Intent had already been awarded to CREC. Now the government wants to cancel this Letter of Intent and issue a new Letter of Intent to CHEC. But for the new Letter of Intent to be issued to CHEC they must fork out RM500 million, which Kay Hock claims RM200 million will be paid to the Prime Minister of Malaysia’s family.

This is not only a violation of the terms of the loan from China but CREC is the company with the experience in constructing electric railways, not CHEC, the company already involved in the construction of the Second Penang Bridge. Added to the withdrawal or cancellation of the Letter of Intent to CREC and a new one issued to CHEC, with a RM500 million ‘price tag’ attached, it puts the Chinese government in a dicey spot when the risk would be a bullet in the head for those who approve the payment.

The Chinese are wondering whether it is worth the risk to pay Kay Hock the RM500 million he is demanding. If the Letter of Intent to CREC can be withdrawn after issuing it, what guarantee is there that the new Letter of Intent to CHEC will also not be withdrawn after they pay the RM500 million?

The Chinese are very aware that Vincent Tan also received a Letter of Approval for his gaming licence, signed by the Deputy Minister of Finance. However, after he paid RM170 million ‘under the table’, Najib denied in Parliament that Vincent Tan had been given a gaming licence and subsequently the Letter of Approval was withdrawn.

KTM is being used as Najib’s new cash cow. The EMU coach was a deal involving Rosmah Mansor (Najib’s wife), Mumtaz Jaafar (Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s ‘godmother’) and Cindy (Desmond Lim's wife). Desmond, in fact, handled the deal where KTM coughed out RM1.4 Billion for coaches that cannot function. According to KTM, the coaches are not even worth RM300 million.

The saga gets more interesting with Najib and Rosmah holidaying in Monaco as guests of Jho Low -- who told everyone that the yacht belongs to the Prince of Qatar. It was later revealed that Jho Low rented the yacht for Euro 90,000 per day to allow Najib and Rosmah to rub shoulders with Hollywood Starlets.

That brings us to a very crucial question. Where did Jho Low get that kind of money? Well, you see, after Malaysia Today exposed Deepak Jaikishan -- Rosmah’s carpetman cum bagman cum toyboy -- she was forced to dump him. So now Jho Low is Rosmah’s new Mister Fixit and Collector of Commissions.
Let us see how the CHEC-Tan Kay Hock saga is played out. Now that the Chinese government knows that we know about the RM500 million deal would they dare still proceed with it? And does Tun Dr Mahathir Mahathir know that Najib has hijacked his pet electric train project?


Mr Tan is said to be a golf buddy of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak
He is the low-profile controlling shareholder of Johan Holdings, a public-listed investment holding company, and said to be a golf buddy of Najib Tun Razak.

The Financial Times had reported that Tan Sri Tan, 61, was the owner of the 607ha Guiana Island, which is now at the centre of a fraud case brought by the United States authorities against Texan billionaire businessman Allen Stanford. -- The Straits Times (Singapore)

Read: The crooked faces of Najib Altantuya’s Cronies and their Related Companies (http://ckcounterpunch.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/the-faces-of-najib-altantuya-cronies-and-their-related-companies/)


***************************************
CREC is the third largest civil construction enterprise in the world, and the Asian and Chinese largest railway, road and tunnel construction contractor. It has a leading position in China's construction market, and participates in many large-scale infrastructure projects overseas (especially in countries in the Southeast Asia and Africa). Fortune magazine in the United States reported that CREC ranked 342 in the 500 world's largest enterprises in 2007.
CREC consists of 31 member enterprises including:
- 16 super-large construction enterprises
* China National Overseas Engineering Corporation
* China Railway Resources Co., Ltd.
* China Railway First Group Corporation
* China Railway Erju Group Corporation (China Railway Second Group Corporation)
* Third Engineering Group Co. Ltd
* China Tiesiju Civil Engineering Group Co. Ltd (China Fourth Group Civil Engineering Group Co. Ltd)
* China Railway Wuju Group Corporation (China Railway Fifth Group Corporation)
* China Railway Sixth Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Seventh Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Eighth Civil Engineering Group Corporation
* China Railway No. 9 Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway No. 10 Group Corporation
* China Zhongtie Major Bridge Engineering Group Co. Ltd (China Railway Major Bridge Engineering Group Co. Ltd)
* China Railway Tunnel Group
* China Railway Electrification Bureau Co. Ltd
* China Railway Construction Engineering Group
- 3 large or super large surveying and designing enterprises
* Second Survey and Design Institute of China Railway
* China Railway Engineering Consultants Group
* China Major Bridge Survey and Design Institute
- 3 large R&D enterprises
* Northwest Research Institute
* Southwest Research Institute of CREC
* Engineering Machinery Research and Design Institute
- 5 large manufacturing enterprises
* China Railway Shanhaiguan Bridge Group Co. Ltd
* China Railway Turnout Bridge Inc.
* China Railway Bus. Co. Ltd.
* Wuhan Engineering Machinery Works of CREC
* Hengping Trust and Investment Co. Ltd

Penny Wong Australia Finance Minister

A Malaysian born ethnic Chinese Penny Wong has become the new Finance Minister of Australia:



I remembered that when Tan Siew Sin was the Finance Minister of Malaysia, we never hear of any financial scandals compared with what all the mega billions scandals that are currently being exposed. Will we ever see a Chinese Finance Minister ever again for Malaysia?

No I am not advocation Malaysia should have a Finance Minister because he or she is an ethnic Chinese, but what I dearly hope would be such an important post be solely based on merit, on abilities to manage the country's finance well. It does not matter what race or religion.

Getting Access to Malaysia Today (revised)

Below has been copied-paste from Malaysia Today low bandwidth version (which was taken from UpperCaise) giving instructions on how to get access to Malaysia Today which is still under DDOS (Distributed Denial of Service) attacks by professionals most probably paid by UMNO/BN or related to deny Malaysians a source of information:

Getting access to Malaysia Today (revised)
Posted on 11 September 2010
Getting access to Malaysia Today (revised)
by uppercaise

Three ways to read MT if it’s blocked
Try using a proxy server. Go to one of these sites:
1. http://hidemyass.com (Hide my Ass!)
2. http://zend2.com (Freedom of Speech)
3. http://browsesafely.co.uk (Browse safely)
4. http://no3s.info (Pumpkin Proxy
5. Or choose from a list of public proxy servers

There will be a box where you can type in the address of the site:
Malaysia Today’s site address (URL):
http://www.malaysia-today.net/
Free Malaysia Today's URL:
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com



If there’s only a local block on Malaysia Today, the proxy should get you around it, and you can read Malaysia Today normally and even post comments.

But if the site is being attacked, then proxy servers won’t get access either.
Go to No 2.

2. Look up the Google cache for Malaysia Today. It may be several hours or a day old, but at least you can see what was posted. Go to one of these addresses:

» Click here for Google cache of ‘Corridors of Power’
When the Google page opens look for the link as shown.

Click on the word ‘cache’ as shown above

» Click here for Google cache of ‘No Holds Barred’
When the Google page opens look for the link as shown.

Click on the word ‘cache’ as shown above

» Click here for Google cache of ‘Guest Columnists’
When the Google page opens look for the link as shown.

Click on the word ‘cache’ as shown above

» Click here for Google cache of ‘Around the Blogs’
When the Google page opens look for the link as shown.
Click on the word ‘cache’ as shown above

Look up a mirror blog of RPK’s postings.
Mirror blog by Mustapha Kamal Abdullah of RPK’s postings
«Malaysians must know the truth»
If you know of others, please post a link in the comments box below

Read more at: UpperCaise.wordpress.com