Monday, December 22, 2014

Ride the Islamic tiger, risk becoming cat food

On this blue Monday (malas nak kerja lah what with the approaching long Xmas-New Year holidays, wakakaka, the mood is not quite there) I reproduce below what I wrote four years ago for the Centre for Policy Initiatives, then with the encouragement and support of a dear dear but sob erstwhile matey.

Even my other dear friend HY wakakaka left a comment there.

I had then left a friendly message for the DAP which is still very relevant today, especially today, wakakaka:

[note that my phrase below of 'God proposes, man disposes' is a role reversal of the original idiom 'Man proposes, God disposes', indicating the dangerous powers of some clerics ... indeed, of all religions ... where those 'Men' could claim to speak with the voice of, and mandate from, God]

A modern Asian myth has it that Lee Kuan Yew is the only man to ever ride a communist tiger without being eaten by the 'beast'.
In the mid-50s he teamed up with the incorruptible, dedicated and charismatic Lim Chin Siong (left), a left wing trade unionist, to form the People's Action Party (PAP). But Chin Siong was wrongly accused of being a communist, where some suspect he was set up by then anti-communist Lim Yew Hock, British Singapore's Chief Minister, and the British authorities.
Even Kuan Yew acknowledged Chin Siong was a selfless man with a Spartan lifestyle, and a mesmerizing orator who was totally dedicated to his cause, and in fact the man who set the gold standard for Singapore's renowned integrity in public governance. But it was said too that Kuan Yew so feared Chin Siong's immense popularity with Singaporeans that he got rid of him when the latter formed the Barisan Socialis, detaining him under the ISA as a 'communist'. 
Though declassified British documents prove that Chin Siong was never a communist, Singaporeans continue to believe that he was one, as a result of years of the authorities' black propaganda against him. Thus the myth of Lee Kuan Yew surviving the ride on the communist tiger remains.
As the Italian say, Se non è vero, è ben trovato meaning "Even if it's not true, it's a good story."
In Malaysia today, we fear another such attempt in the making -- that of Lim Guan Eng riding the Islamic tiger. We do know not yet whether he will survive though my guess is, alas, he won't, for the reason majority-Muslim Malaysia today isn't the same as majority-Chinese Singapore in the 1950s.
Wooing the Malay electorate 
Since March 2008, some DAP leaders have been courting Malay voters in order to dispel the Barisan Nasional stigmatization of the DAP as a Chinese-based political party. Obviously this is necessary as more than 60% of Malaysian voters are Malays, and the DAP realizes that it can never aspire to be a significant political force without their support.
Ironically, like Lim Chin Siong, Lim Guan Eng is an incorruptible dedicated leader who too lives a personal austere Spartan lifestyle, and has shown his care for the poor and elders of Penang. These and his going to jail some years ago in seeking justice for an underage Malay girl are already redoubtable models to showcase the DAP as a worthy multi-racial party to the Malay voters.
Yet DAP has gone one step further, choosing to project itself as a pro-Islamic organization.
Guan Eng has often referred to the Caliphate of Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz as his model for a scrupulously clean and thrifty government which cares for the ordinary people, while another DAP leader Nga Kor Ming is known for spouting quotations from the Quran. 
Apart from the obvious need to expand its Malay-Muslim base, there have been other compelling reasons for DAP to expedite its wooing of the Malays via the Islamic avenue. The party has been concerned about the future of Anwar Ibrahim as well as the politics of PKR.
Anwar has served a vital role as the bridge and glue for the new coalition, Pakatan Rakyat which has PAS and DAP with antipodal ideologies. If Anwar is forcefully removed from the Malaysian political landscape, it is unlikely that PKR will be able to provide a substitute of equal stature and charisma. Thus DAP has decided on the worst case scenario where it will be required to work directly with PAS. What better time than to start now, and perhaps sneak a ride on the Islamic tiger.
But PAS, unlike the Singapore trade unionists, is no ordinary tiger. It is endowed with divine Teflon stripes. In a religious state, when power hungry men can overturn the tables into 'God proposes, man disposes', the potential for gross injustice cannot be understated or overestimated.
Take for example what PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang said in a press conference on Nov 12, 2003, after the launching of the blueprint on the introduction of Islamic laws in Malaysia. When asked what would happen to the existing [BN] policies which give focus to bumiputeras such as quotas under PAS's claimed meritocracy in an Islamic state, Hadi answered:
"The reality today is that the majority of the poor are bumiputeras. Hence, for the initial period, focus will be on the bumiputera. There may be a situation in the future that the bumiputeras 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. It will depend on the situation. [...] We are not disposing or dispensing with the term bumiputera." 
Not unlike Umno, PAS' Islam would be an Islam with a strong Malay flavour. Under the Islamist party, even the already proven-to-be-marginalized Indians have to wait until the Malays have been 'rescued'.
The matter of hudud 
Then there's PAS Youth chief, Nasrudin Hassan (left), who was looking for an excuse to insert hudud into Malaysia's justice system. He saw the horrendous murder of businesswoman Sosilawati Lawiya and three others as an opportunity to propose that hudud replaces the current system. How hudud would have prevented the murders when the current justice system hasn't was not explained. 
Mind you, this is the same PAS leader who blamed Valentine's Day and New Year's eve celebrations for the social ill of baby dumping. Of course he didn't explain why Valentine's Day is celebrated all over the world without incurring Feb 14 pregnancies (and our kind of baby dumping) in those countries. 
We've also read of how in Saudi Arabia, three supposedly learned Islamic judges victimize the minorities, i.e. a Shiite, or one of the female gender (rape victim). The usual apologists in Malaysia offer the predictable excuses that the Saudi clerics' outrageous injustice was not influenced by Islamic jurisprudence but rather Arab tribal custom -- despite the obvious fact that the verdict had been delivered by Muslim judges in an Islamic nation that is the birthplace of the Prophet Muhammad.
'Tribal custom' was the same pathetic excuse offered when Pakistan, a nation which subscribes fully to Islamic laws, saw the horror of the oxymoronic 'honour rape' perpetrated against Mukhtaran Bibi.
Even the already ridiculous claims of tribal revenge against the woman and her teenage brother were subsequently discovered to be the sheer fabrications of lustful men. But the criminals were not apprehended while their victim was harassed and ostracized. 
Where was the syariah and hudud laws in all of this? It had to be secular international pressure which forced the Pakistani president to order the arrest of the criminals. 
But syariah laws or not, those 'honour rapes' continue in Pakistan even after that shameful case. Three years after the victimization of Mukhtaran, another sensational case occurred where seven men kidnapped and gang-raped a woman over two days in retaliation for some perceived wrong.
Were these the examples that the PAS Youth Leader wants us to believe his hudud laws can prevent? 
But what worries me most was when PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat recently claimed only DAP chairman Karpal Singh in his party was against the implementation of hudud laws, whose implementation, in their mind, would solve all of the world's problems, the Pakistani and Saudi shameful examples notwithstanding. 
In asserting the DAP (all of party cadres and leaders) only minus Karpal is for hudud, Nik Aziz might have harboured high expectations from Guan Eng and Kor Ming's frequent references to Islamic governance and the Quran.
Let me advice those DAP leaders who want to ride the Islamic tiger that you are unlikely to succeed! 
Its consequence would not only be the riders becoming meals for a big cat but in a reiteration of my earlier remark, in a religious state, when power hungry men can overturn the tables into 'God proposes, man disposes', the potential for gross injustice cannot be understated or overestimated.

Our only protection is the current constitution and the secular civil courts, warts and all.


  1. Well,Kaytee,let us hope that these leaders woke up before the shit hit the fan and back onto their blushing faces.Hehehe.

  2. Dr Nurul Farrah is a really sick and fucked upside down lady,asking educated women to stay at home and tend to the kids.Did she stayed at home,tend to the kids and get hump by the camel.Screw her kau kau.

  3. Like the PR leaders screwing each others asses,Mic is doing it three ways.And Umno is in no better shape and the question is will Najib follow the way of Badawi?

  4. The DAP Penang State government even went along with the 2010 Selangor-style Fatwa banning "Allah" and 50 other phrases from being used by non-Muslims.

    This is 2010, mind you, not ancient history back in 1998, like the case in Selangor.
    DAP has been going around telling people the Selangor 1998 Islamic enactment would not have passed scrutiny with DAP in the stae.

    Now Lim Guan Eng is trying to tap dance by turning around by saying the the fatwa does not apply to non-Muslims.

    Fact is Lim Guan Eng and DAP have been playing a two-faced game trying to project itself as pro-Islamic at the same time trying to shore up its Christian base.

    In the end Lim Guan Eng and DAP come out sounding like hypocrites, which I suppose they are.....

  5. Lim Guan Eng incorruptible ? Haha.......look again, very carefully....
    He may not personally be "On The Take" in the narrow traditional view of corruption, but his Penang administration has been acting in many ethically questionable and compromising actions.

    1. I suspect (but hope not) that Lim Guan Eng will in the end suffer the same fate as his predecessor Koh Tsu Koon.

      An ethical , moral man brought down low by sleaze in his administration.

      In Koh TK's case they arose from the greed of his fellow BN/UMNO taikos and their cronies.

      For Lim Guan Eng, it will likely be the business interests of the Corporations that DAP has had to cozy up to bring badly needed development to Penang , attempting to replace the loss of BN Federal government funding and support.

    2. Hahahaha, ok, kindly show your IC number and your full name and publish it in the newspaper. Do it

  6. maestro's worse nightmare.9:05 am, December 22, 2014

    With Christmas around the corner,people of all walks of life around the world are celebrating.But the fuckup babarians from Perkosa are jumping like crazy monkeys tearing down Christmas banners at the Perak DAP HQ.Go figure you fucked Perkosa pariahs.

  7. ‘Though declassified British documents prove that Chin Siong was never a communist, Singaporeans continue to believe that he was one, as a result of years of the authorities' black propaganda against him.’

    The S’pore govt has published, via PM Lee Sheng Loong’s face book some documentary proofs of Lim Chin Siong’s membership in the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) recently.

    Unless, u r going to implies that those documents r fakes!

    Time changes, new evidences prove many long held myths to be what they r – manufactured &/or distorted facts to suit the situation at that time.

    So, r u sure of what u‘d written, based on yr 2010 ‘understanding’, is going to be prophetic?

    Or more likely of a syok sendiri egoistic trip – same in the class of yr half anmoh sifu’s I-told-u-so series?????

    Ouch...No wakakaking for u this time!

    Just to be clear, Lim Chin Siong is indeed a selfless man as Lee KY has claimed. He has the soul of the then nation in his heart, despite of his communist link.

    Just to prevent yr trademark wakakaking twisting, he IS not in the same league as those bigots from perkasa/isma – who claim to champion Malay/Islamic rights, in disguise of their ketuanan objectives for the 20% elites!!!! The country’s fate IS never the prime objective of these manipulative puppeteers!

    1. the question is did lcs being incarcerated bec he was a communist or was he a opponent to that bastard lky, n british? was anwar went to jail for being a sodomist? even if the doc is not fake, so what? lee teng hui of roc was a comminist, many kmt fella used to be communist, n vice versa, but did lcs ever incite violence to overturn the govt? the son is a joker trying to defend his father's tyrannic act, similar to those that defend mahathir.

    2. I dont buy what u said.

      项羽乌江自刎而死 is a much much sadder outcome of a political competition, though it might not be a very good example for comparison!

      LCS & LKY r creatures of their time. Both r capable man with distinction qualities. Both have a vision for the country, but with different approaches.

      It's just that THERE can be only one winner in any contest. LCS lost bcoz he was unable to execute the necessary Machiavellian moves that LKY was so well articulated.

      Like all political manoeuvrings, dirtiness & ruthlessness r the main ingredients of a successful move. & LKY has that take, simple as that!

      Looking back in hindsight, could LCS bring up S'pore to what LKY has done with his communist ideology? That's a million dollar question that's irrelevant now. S'pore is prosper & well managed & that's the heart of all governing issue that a nation & her citizen SHOULD look forward to.

    3. No, LCS can't. Neither did David Marshall. And he is a jew.

    4. hmmm, so essentially u r telling me u r okay with isa, dirtiness n mahathir? lets cheers for unmo / bn then.

      spore economy might have much to do with capitalism, strategic location (at least to the west that fear the muslim n communist chinese), n a migrate work force that r willing to work their asses off. i never read anything that tell lcs would introduce a communist type of economic system, but i do think that the relationship among various race in the federation would be much better under lcs as compare to lky.

      there is no element of unfairness between the battle of 项羽 and 刘邦,in fact 项羽 was a pompous n arrogance general. many historian pen 项羽 in a positive manner bec 刘邦 was a rogue. thus u r right to a certain extent, the cambridge lawyer name harry is nothing but a rogue.

      looes. then y pap kiss ccp ass today? what make u think lcs can't while banana lee can? anwar can or cant?

    5. Dont be naive & let yr imagination goes tooooo far into, well, tokoh scenario!

      Any leader, even the benevolent one, COULD achieve ascendancy to power via political trickery. Every one of them, good &/or bad, does that throughout the history of humankind.

      There is NO exception. PERIOD.

      LCS never reach the state of introducing a communist type of economic system to the nation, so whatever he was going to do/implement is academic NOW.

      To imply I'm ok with isa, dirtiness n mahathir is stretching yr hyperactive thinking cap to imaginary world!

      That mamak can never be an equal of LKY. & ISA is certainly a blackspot of PAP legacy.

      However, like I said before, the final putting is in the state of the nation. Look at the big picture!

      S'pore, now, might still be imperfect but comparing with say M'sia - apa lagi u mau????

      Like KT, u let yr personal dislike of LKY overwhelm the reality of what he has achieved for S'pore in the face of multiple challenges. A lesser man would have gone down the drain, dragging the nation with him/her LONG LONG time ago!

      Anwar can or cant is still an open question. Nobody know! But one thing for sure, he WOULD definitely change the political scene of M'sia forever!

      & that's what deep down that trouble those ultras, that mamak especially!!!

  8. BTW, how's this latest jingo juxtapose with;

    Malay-nization-of-dap with non Muslim Melayu?????

    Wahloi eh....... That would be the day!!!!!

    So, what do u want?

    Ride the Melayu tiger, together with that Islamic tag that goes with it? Or find one that has NO islamic tag?

    Make up yr damned mind......lah.

    1. world of a difference between being partners with Malays in a secular democracy and being subordinated to an Islamic State complete with Syariah Laws cum Hudud

    2. That is the reason why kaytee is still in aussie land. Plus, he can argue the way out for himself even though the first tenet of rukun negara stated that thou shall believe in god.

      Kaytee is an atheist

    3. Still trying to twist!!!!!

      How to being partners with Malays, WITHOUT 1st sorting out the Islamic polemics?

      & how to have a discourse on Islamic polemics without talking about them?

      Like a fuckup mentioned about not getting involved with kalimah Allah debates!

      & dont fan the fire of hudud issues by ignoring them - dont see, dont hear & dont talk?

      Hopefully that these three 'wise monkeys' could lead u to the utopian of Malay-anization of DAP!

      Meanwhile still 死鸡挡飯蓋, continuing in syok sendiri mood. There MUST be something loose up there inside the head.

    4. until Mahathir declared Malaysia an Islamic country, wasn't Malaya and then Malaysia a secular democracy where Malays, Chinese and Indians and others participated in partnership, in Perikatan and then BN, and on the opposite side, the multiracial Socialist Front?

      Why can't we work to return to that status?

      So know your history before mumbling irrelevantly, wakakaka

    5. We have been letting the ultras leading the country to the club of doom for far too long now!


      Whether we could pull ourselves out is already a BIG question, judging from the prevailing mood of the blur-sotongs, clinging to their virgin dream!

      & u r talking about history!!!!!!

      If history is our judge, we should have been a goner iff we remained silence.

      Honestly, unless & until those blur-sotongs been put through the fire of bath, DONT u ever talk about the good old days.


      Simply bcoz the drug of that virgin dream is too deeply encroached in their mind, so much so, whatsoever sufferings they face now CAN be substitute with that virgin dream hereafter. Thus what's now is NOT important. What's hereafter is what they r looking toward to.

      Want to revert that?

      Forced march them as what the Shah of Iran used to do & yet failed!

      So what irrelevancy is u talking about?

      Vainglorious fool!

    6. i think our political belief (naivety) is far apart. my stance is simple, i dislike (ur word) any leader that misuse the power toward their POLITICAL opponent, regardless lky or mahathir. i have sympathy toward the weaker side ie opposition, my big picture is to support them blindly to attain a balance. u apply big picture when it suit u, u see mahathir n lky differently while i think both r the same. i think authoritarian is not the solution, i believe spore can achieve what it is today even without detain one opponent without trial, for many many years. lky is not a man, just a coward. mahathir can always assert if he did what lky did, msia can be more successful. these 2 fucker r just crap.

      secondly yr measurement of success is dissimilar to mine, that is y u cant grasp hasan pov most of the time. i am not saying u r wrong, we r just diff.

      finally, try re read ur own writes before claiming me implying anything, I am not one that said “dirtiness & ruthlessness r the main ingredients of a successful move”, however by looking at yr approach of debate, the moment u mention big picture, it seem nothing much for me to argue anymore. n whether lcs could achieve similar progress, of course it is acedemic, but r u n looes not the one who claim he cant? come on la, dun let yr idolised to lky overwhelm the fact that he detain his political opponent without trial, he is a coward, n the son now tring to whitewash the fact that his dad is merely a coward.

    7. Indeed our political belief (naivety) is far apart!!!!!

      My stand is simple, too. In short, 邓小平’s famous quote - “不管黑猫白猫,捉住老鼠就是好猫。” – sums it all.

      I don’t buy all of Deng’s political trickeries, BUT I do subscribe to this practicality. Example; 天安门六四Massacre is a BIG black mark but a necessary political move for the good of China as a whole.

      Nobody can predict what would happen to China if 赵紫阳 had successed in letting the students having their ways. China could turn chaotic & then prosperous. Or China could turn chaotic & kapus!

      That’s academic, izzn’t it!

      But one thing for sure is that that initial phase of political turmoil. How long it would last & how many innocents r going to die - r ONLY the consequences people like u want to gamble, purely on yr personal ideological (perhaps utopian) thinking!

      This is the dilemma of 大我 vs小我

      Same picture with LKY’s S’pore!

      LCS could lead S’pore to a prosperous development & still he might not. He has NO such chance! & that’s what I’d written, period.

      S’pore under LKY has leaped bounce many time over & to u, this is bcoz of ‘spore economy might have much to do with capitalism, strategic location (at least to the west that fear the muslim n communist chinese), n a migrate work force that r willing to work their asses off.’!!!!


      Hmmm… capitalism vis-à-vis LCS??? Strategic location & migrant workforce??? Islamic terrorism was not an issue to the big brother then, Communism yes in those areas.

      The 1st part, I let u reflect on yr own self-delusion. For the 2nd part, there MUST be a visionary leadership to manage both the location & people. Yes?

      As far as yr ‘believe spore can achieve what it is today even without detain one opponent without trial, for many many years.’, again is academic. What happens if it COULDN’T? (do reflect DSP’s quote).

      Big picture means 大我 & I’m a OK in using “dirtiness & ruthlessness as the main ingredients of a successful move” in achieving the mission under大我. Harry did that to S’pore, to ALL fairness!!!!!

      I don’t care why/how u termed LKY as a coward. That’s yr opinion, similar to KT’s dislike of manmanalai, within that confinement of 小我!

      I judge Harry purely on what he has done to S’pore, as a whole. So, apa lagi u mau????

      & I know too well that he is NO 佛佗, who has an above-human nature’s 与世无争 attitude. He is human after all!!!!!!!

      Now, yr most delusional comparison – ‘mahathir can always assert if he did what lky did, msia can be more successful.’

      That mamak has his chance & what did he bring to M’sia, who has ALL what S’pore doesn’t! If u referred to ISA, then that mamak is/was an addict to his colonial master’s tool!

      What a mind, indeed. Perhaps, that explain WHY my measurement of success is extremely dissimilar to yrs!!!!!!

      (sorry about the many mixing terms. I’ve not written in Mandarin for many years. More importantly, this is only for u & I believe u can understand the essence of the meanings that English words might not be able to translate).

  9. If the concern is the dangers of the extreme Islamization of Malaysia, it is a mistake to be focused on PAS, though they may be the ones who talk the loudest.

    The Malaysian Muslim community has become increasingly Islamised, with the paradigm that the answer to the ills of society and the world is more and stricter Islam, with increasing use of coercive powers.

    Most of this has occurred nationwide under the BN government.

    If you want to point to one person currently most active in this, it is not Nik Aziz or Abdul Hadi. Its Jamil Khir Baharom, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, effectively Minister for Islam, under Najib's auspices.

    From Friday sermons calling Christians as threats to Islam in Malaysia to labelling the recent Court of Appeals ruling on the human rights of Transgenders as an "assault on Islam", this ambitious minister is daily pushing Malaysia harder and faster down the road to extreme Islamism.

    And he is not from PAS.

    1. Anybody with half a brain knows BN and UMNO is responsible for all the extreme Islamisation in Malaysia going on for decades.

      Ktemoc is focused on attacking PAS to serve his pay masters....

    2. There are some element of truths about PAS. However, if you have read Mr Bean and the Lupus aka CL Flamiaris, PAS is actually the weakest link with the moderates realising that PAS would go kaput if they turn extremely ulamak.

      All DAP got to do is how stay cool. From the game theory point of view, this is a chicken game. This is not a matter of supporting Anwar anymore. This is about projecting the image that DAP is still the most principled political party

  10. Your Centre for Policy Initiatives partner at the time would have been Helen Ang , right ?
    That is actually a good, thoughtful website, with many excellent articles.

    Sadly, Helen has gone over to "The Dark Side" for whatever reason known to herself.

  11. Kaytee,
    Then what the fuck would be your solution? Slow slow catch the monkeys. Oh yes, appint Nizar as PM. Which party Nizar come from?

    Guys and gals,
    DAP has been in existence for 50 over years. When your electorate base is shrinking...........Okay, wait till Marina Mahathir to be next PM......According to kaytee, if she does, all problem solved

  12. If Helen had not gone over to the dark side,she would have ended up in bamboo resort eating nasi kuah ikan with white rice.

    1. Ya, she was interrogated for 4 hours non-stop by police as part of Sedition Act investigation into her CPI Asia articles, from Perkasa police reports. This was back in 2010.
      The interrogation must have spooked her profoundly.

      After that she lay low for months.....then re-emerged as a "Pro-Establishment blogger"....

  13. On December 15, 2014, RPK wrote an article on “Faith versus reason: the Allah-Hudud debate”. It is a very good article. I have to agree with RPK on this write, though I may not agree with him on a lot of other issues.

    In his last paragraph he wrote the following:

    “ Hence, if you want to discuss or debate matters pertaining to Islam, let us first be clear about what platform we are standing on to discuss or debate the matter. If you stand on the platform of the law and the Constitution while I stand on the platform of faith and akidah, then, as Rudyard Kipling said:

    Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
    Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God’s great Judgment Seat;
    But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
    When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth! ”

    My Comment.

    Kippling was born to English parents but was brought up and spent his early life in India. A cultural hybrid, he struggled with his two halves – the civilized West and the under-socialized Indian. Though Kippling justified the colonialism in India, he however, was also much bewildered by his Indianness. Since, he cannot banish his Indianness that was within him, Kippling chosed to turn on himself and his own kind, i.e. the West!

    Today, we are fighting for secularism. As much as I want to justify secularism, the constitution, and the ascendancy of our country into the global civilization, yet being a Muslim, I could not banish my Muslimness (faith and akidah) that is within me.

    Indeed, “there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth” BUT “when two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth!” As RPK had put it; the Allah-Hudud debate – It is Faith versus Reason. The big question is: Should reason or faith prevail? Should we have faith in our reasons?


    1. All yrs, & RPK's, r based on the assumption that M'sia IS an Islamic country (no thanks to that mamak, KT's favourite SYT's dad!)

      Is M'sia an Islamic country?

      No point going into that circular question, as many has tried.

      Let's just look at a simple fact of how to be fair to yr fellow M'sian.

      To be fair - one MUST be racially color-blind, secular in thought & act without fear &/or favour.

      These elements CAN only be possible in a 'plain' state, where faith has NO place & logic rule supreme.

      Theocracy cant be fair to the non-followers of the faith as clearly spelled out by Farouk A Peru in;

      Thus the question of;

      “Hence, if you want to discuss or debate matters pertaining to Islam, let us first be clear about what platform we are standing on to discuss or debate the matter. If you stand on the platform of the law and the Constitution while I stand on the platform of faith and akidah, then, as Rudyard Kipling said:

      Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,
      Till Earth and Sky stand presently at God’s great Judgment Seat;
      But there is neither East nor West, Border, nor Breed, nor Birth,
      When two strong men stand face to face, though they come from the ends of the earth! ”

      is meaningless!!!!!

      Rudyard Kipling is a romantic that can be easily lead astray in the world of real politic. PERIOD. As romantic falls in the same class as faith!

      Discuss Islam as if it’s a humanitarian virtue, guided by logic, where the concept of an omnipotent superbeing plays NO PART. Once, an omnipresent superbeing is been involved then all bets r off, bcoz the idea of that superbeing, lead to the conflict of logic been gainfully explored in the discourse.

      Every times when some dilemma comes about, it’s been easily brushed away by being the way/work of that superbeing. QED(????) - No more question!

      This IS not the way forward. Rather it’s an easy way out as been wakakaking other’s argument to win an argument!!!!!!

      Saying that yr 'inner' sense of yet being a Muslim, u could not banish yr Muslimness (faith and akidah) that is within me is not excuses.

      There r BIGGER issue here than yrself!!!

      Thus never the east & west shall meet?

      Think again – this is a circular world ONCE that faith element is been removed from the equation.

    2. "Think again – this is a circular world ONCE that faith element is been removed from the equation."

      If so, then religion/faith is like a 'lukisan': As Don Cupitt, an Anglican priest and a Professor at University of Cambridge said: “ left-wing postmodernists like me are turning religion into something like art: believers must continuously reinvent their own faith….the vulnerability of rational belief to refutation by argument is its strength.”


    3. So, r u 'reinventing' yr understanding of yr faith to suit modern setting?

      Or r u still stuck in yr ever-constant virgin dream as dictated by the tribalism elements of yr faith?

    4. Nah......he is dreaming of his 72 virgins......ended up as demons

  14. "Allah" is only for Muslims.
    "Hudud" is only for Muslims.

    What is your problem ?

    1. You can go mampus! What Malaysia need is a revoluton a la northern ireland style? Anyway it would be happening in Sabah if one not carefully. The minorities in NI stood up against ulster and won.

    2. One question, why MUST Trengganu impost closing of the Shopping mall for 2 hours on Friday noon?

      What have non Muslim got to do with the Friday prayer for Muslims?

      Still "Hudud" is only for Muslims????

      When it's been implemented, it WOULD be for all, SIMPLE as THAT!!!!


    3. Is that word syllabus founded or created by muslim. A-Z. If others religions use Arabic or jawi words to preach than its is wrong.

    Now everyone can hudud !

  16. You guys can continue to -
    gorge on all the Pork you can eat,
    guzzle down all the Beer and Brandy you can hold,
    splurge on 4D
    roll the dice at Genting
    relax with female masseuse
    Thump all the Bibles you want (as long as they don't refer to Allah)
    remain governed by civil laws and the Penal Code.

    kenapa buat bising sangat pasal Hudud untuk orang Islam ?

    1. Because it affects us. You cibai motherfucker. Why built mosque in an area where majority of nons? By the way, fuck you just as like ktemoc, what name you should use.

      I strongly suggest you got to Fucking, Austria for a fucking good time.

      How much zakat you pay......I bet zero

      All ulamak must pay at least 20% of their gaji

  17. WTF...PKR "stays neutral" on Hudu....
    Bunch of spineless weenies....

    1. Hehehehe, just like kaytee stays silence against the excesses of HRHs and his sifu


    Massive marches in Germany against Islamisation.
    However, there was a wide range of viewpoints shown among the marchers.

    They range from concern against Islamic extremism to direct anti-Islam , xenophobic and neo-Nazi opinions.

  19. UMNO is corrupt , racist and badly led.
    PKR is just a corrupt party for the benefit of Anwar Ibrahim, family and cronies.
    PAS is an untrustworthy party with Jihadist mentality, including a lack of regard for those who don't follow Islam.
    DAP is a Chinese / Indian party backing itself into a corner.

    I've given up on Malaysian politics....that's why I've moved to Australia, and intend to apply for Australian citizenship at the first opportunity.


    Hahahaha, I bet kaytee is going to write another cook up stories on Hudud. For the record, I am against Hudud.

    There are tonnes of things to write about........starting from

    1) Fatwa can't be challenged in court of law - By The more respectable ex-diplomat

    2) Gender segragation in Kelantan

    I am not sure about you, so called pious muslims. If you go against people banning your burqa and nijab, ah so

    How I love the old Republic of Turkey under Kemal Ataturk

  21. One mistake in 100 cases........hand kenna chopped. Whoops! Sorry hor, wrong man. Apa macam, cut cibais hand who passes the sentence

  22. Malaysia was not, is not and can never be a true secular state.
    Article 3 right away states that Islam is the religion of the Federation. Other constitutional clauses provide the Agong and the Sultans as custodians of Islam in the individual Malay states and those without rulers.
    So a true secular state where religion has no place in government is not gong to happen in Malaysia.

    For the majority Malays, Islam is a way of life. It is impossible to separate religion out of one's life and way of thinking. So a Muslim can never be truly secular.

    So....the best that can possibly happen is Malaysia is a democracy with Islamic foundations, and respects the right of non-Muslims to live their life in accordance with their culture and religious beliefs.

    Islamisation, going back to a more fundamental practice of Islam, is a global phenomenon, and Malaysian Muslims are not immune. What can be done is to ensure a range of views and opinions to be aired, and respect for the individual is secured.
    Islamisation must not be allowed to degenerate into medieval brutality.

  23. Anon 2:15,

    U r arguing from the points of an Islamic angle.

    The Federal Constitution has mentioned in Article3 that Islam is the religion of the Federation. That’s ALL it said!

    & yet people like u want to stretch IT like an infinite rubber-band to justify all kinds of overbearing action and suppression of non-Muslim religious practice. Along the way, forgetting about that The FC also guarantees the universal freedom of equality & freedom of worshipping among all M’sian.

    The FC is a supreme Document of our nation. Article3 is ONLY a clause open for interpretation unlike the other clauses, especially on equality & freedom of worshipping. Thus its interpretation MUST be in synch with time & aspiration of the time!

    The other constitutional clauses provide the Agong and the Sultans as custodians of Islam in the individual Malay states and those without rulers. These conditions arise purely bcoz of Article3, since the founding fathers want to give a contexturised meaning to it.

    It’s the same as naming the Queen as the head of the Anglican Church, nothing more nothing less! No doubt, that part about the Anglican Christianity been the religion of the state has been removed due to the advancement in nationhood understanding.

    Yr argument has put an over-leaning weight to the part on Islam, which is ONLY been practiced by a section of the populace, a majority one ONLY since independence.

    ‘For the majority Malays, Islam is a way of life. It is impossible to separate religion out of one's life and way of thinking. So a Muslim can never be truly secular.

    So....the best that can possibly happen in Malaysia is a democracy with Islamic foundations, and respects the right of non-Muslims to live their life in accordance with their culture and religious beliefs.’

    The issue of Islamization was NEVER a question until NOW. Why the harden stand about Islam-first-&-last by the ummat Islam NOW?

    What about those Malays prior to the infamous mamak’s Islamic country pronunciation?

    Aint we r all a ‘happy family’ then just like Sabah/Sarawak now? What gives?

    Perhaps, the heart of that answer lies here, as Farouk A Peru so elegantly mentioned;

    ‘We must understand the nature of Shariah law. Shariah law is not designed to play second fiddle to any other legal system. Rather it was designed with the firm notion of supremacism in mind. It will grow and ultimately subsume whatever system with which it is co-existent.

    No amount of curtailment and restraint will help this due to the absolutist nature of Shariah legal texts.

    The reason for this malignancy is the fact that Shariah law is developed under an imperialist system. The Islamic empire of the time was expansionist and needed its law to be supreme in order to strengthen its imperial grip. It is worth noting that these laws are usually against the letter and spirit of the Quran.

    The second thing to note is that Shariah law is also against the Federal Constitution itself. The biggest example of this is the issue of freedom of religion. While this freedom is guaranteed in the Federal Constitution, it is forcibly taken away from Malay-Muslims by Shariah law.

    These cases are usually processed in the courts without any violence but the issue of apostasy is a thorny one. Malays grow extremely agitated when any group is accused of leading Malay-Muslims to apostasy or even deviance from the Islamic norm. This example should tell us of how easily "moderate Islam" can manifest as extremist tendencies.

    cont 1of2

  24. 2of2

    There can be only one solution to this problem – complete secularisation. We cannot enforce legal boundaries to Shariah law and expect it to stay within those boundaries anymore than we can expect cancer cells which start in the liver to stay localised and not manifest elsewhere. Both are designed to be malignant. They will spread and ultimately overtake.

    The only solution is to remove Shariah courts altogether. It must be remembered that Shariah courts were conceded as a compromise to British colonialism in the past so that Malays would not lose their identity altogether.

    While global civilisation has moved past these anachronistic throwbacks, we are still stuck in bodysnatching legal battles to bury some person in the Muslim cemetery. How can we ever become moderate and progressive then?

    We need to also dis-empower religious authorities altogether and keep them, if at all, as mere functionaries. It is their job to lead religious rituals. Politics, economics, legislature are beyond their sphere of concern. Religious function must be kept separate from public life.’


    Yes, ‘Islamisation, going back to a more fundamental practice of Islam, is a global phenomenon, and Malaysian Muslims are not immune.’


    "Muslims believe it is incumbent upon them to live according to the teachings of the Sharia, that is, to enjoin the good and forbid evil and to promote justice". This also a case of pretend representation.

    The first pretend in this statement is that Syariah law is a monolithic entity which can be applied immediately. This is simply untrue.

    Within the Syariah domain, there lie differences (ikhtilaf in their technical terminology) for which there is no clear solution. This is indeed strange as this priestly class consider themselves as ‘inheritors of the Prophet’ (al-ulama warith al-anbiyaa, as the saying goes).

    Will they attribute these differences to God or to themselves? If it is to themselves, then why on earth should we trust them? These are not God’s laws, they are man-made.

    And of course Syariah is at odds with fundamental liberties. Not only that, they effectively rob a person of their God-given rights to live with a clear conscience. If a person was born into a Muslim family yet comes to the conclusion that Islam is the enemy of human civilisation (and there are many such people), he or she is still forced under the threat of death to acquiesce to living as a Muslim.

    Have they not considered some of the biggest Muslim-populated countries in the world such as Turkey and Indonesia? In these countries, despite having more than 80% Muslim population and decades of history as nation states, they have not legislated Syariah law.

    If anything, they are resolutely secular! This shows that, notwithstanding Pew’s findings, Muslims are not in favour of Syariah law. Perhaps they see what life would be like under such laws after seeing the Taliban experiment.

    - See more at:

    So secularism can live in harmony with Islam. & it’s imperative that OUR country continue to be a secular state, otherwise the ongoing Islamization in the country would degenerate into medieval brutality, as many of the current Islamic ‘affairs’ proved to be!!!