Haris Ibrahim & RPK

Today I'll make a minor change or rather, adjustment, to my posting plan. I have prepared a post on the recent verbal stoush between Pak Haji Hadi Awang and Dr Mahathir on the subject of who is the Devil, wakakaka.

But this morning after reading Bro Haris Ibrahim's post (via Free Malaysia Today) titled Laying my RPK ghost to rest, once and for all I feel very very sad in realizing that a potentially marvellous partnership in the promotion of Malaysian civil liberty (cum nouveau political) awakening has now come to an end - thus this post instead of the prepared one on the 'Devil' you know all too well.

I hope the current war of words between them won't affect their friendship, despite the infamous Malaysian Bush-like attitude towards political differences. 

Needless to say, those who have been long riled by RPK's comments unfavourable to Anwar Ibrahim and some PKR senior leaders have lapped up Bro Haris' post like starving hounds and smacked their lips with much relish, wakakaka - hah, at last their suspicions and anger against RPK have been vindicated by a credible person.

But for me, I reckon it's a very sad moment in the campaign by both to instigate Malaysian political-civil-liberty awakening, one that calls more for a dirgeful rather than celebratory or triumphant reaction. Anyway, that's kaytee's personal feelings at the humongous loss of this erstwhile tremendous partnership.

Another Anak Bangsa Malaysia, one of the commentators at Bro Haris blog, stood out from the pack of syiok sendiri salivating wolves in stating (note in particular my highlighted bits):

Haris, 

I am sorry to hear that you and RPK have called it quits. Together with others, the both of you have contributed much to making Malaysia a better place and I doubt if we would have come this far without you guys providing the leadership you have in the past and which you, Haris, are still providing today. 

I am taking on faith, the claims that RPK has been bought over but I also bear in mind that there is no solid evidence other than the words of others who have said so. 

On my part, I have no intention of ostracizing RPK despite what I have been told for the simple reason that I find some of his writings interesting from a philosophical perspective, eg some of his essays on Islam. 

Many of his articles are rather tiresome and bland due to the predictable nature of his ranting and it is easy to see why many people object to what he says. Personally, I think his intentions are to make people think but, unfortunately, slapping someone around the head and ramming something down a person’s throat whilst insisting it is good for you does not always endear one to others. 

RPK’s abrasive attitude is probably one of his shortcomings. I don’t know if it is due to his royal status or his bitterness at being excluded from the Malaysian political scene or the personal toll which exile has taken on him or what. 

Where you and ABU are concerned, my stance has not changed. I have always believed you are a person of great integrity and honesty deserving of my total support.

The fact that you stand up as being a Malaysian first and foremost also finds resonance with my own personal thoughts as I have always found it strange that when I was growing up, I seemed to be the only Malaysian amongst my Malay, Chinese and Indian friends. 

Maybe circumstances will change after GE13 and you and RPK can settle your differences under calmer conditions. Who knows? Until that happens, 

More power to you, Haris Ibrahim.

My exact thoughts!

Before I end this sad reflection, I suppose I could offer my personal thoughts on what I believe to be the possible cause of their current regrettable difference.

Bro Haris is very dedicated to the concept of ABU, which incidentally I don't agree 100% but support in general and only grudgingly, with many qualifications (I will soon have another post on this, my personal reservations about ABU).

He is single-minded about his ABU campaign because he cannot stomach any longer the gross excesses of the BN government, in particular UMNO. Every reservation or 'but's ...', etc, on and about this sweeping anti-UMNO campaign is to him trivial or insignificant by comparison to the unmitigated evil of UMNO.

RPK, on the other hand, has qualms about replacing UMNO with an UMNO-clone or more correctly, an UMNO entity all this while in sheep's clothing.

He had for years tolerated a known ferocious and carnivorous political macan tutul memakai kulit kambing (one which hasn't, can't and more dangerously, won't changed its spots) until, as I suspect, no longer has any expectation of the leopard, nope, none of Isaiah 11:6 (KJV) which tells us that:

The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

I believe therein in their difference is the reason for their parting of ways a la Ezekiel 21:21 (KJV):

For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made his arrows bright, he consulted with images, he looked in the liver.

One is prepared to tolerate Anwar Ibrahim in the highest political post if it means removing UMNO from government, while the other considers that there will be no change to the Malaysian political scenario if it is just about replacing UMNO with Anwar Ibrahim (and inner core).

Just my thoughts.

P/S

The other difference between Bro Haris and RPK that I have observed (correctly, I hope) and wish to add is that the former (Haris) is very scrupulous in his information while RPK (wakakaka) has a more easy going whatever-it-takes & bend-it-like-Becker attitude in presenting his stories, a sort of 'the end justifies the means' approach. ;-)

Another military dud torpedo

Early this month, after viewing Malaysiakini's 'Scorpenes to prevent repeat of 1511 attack on Malacca', I (initially) wakakaka-ed at the laughable lunatic ludicrousness of such an absurd asinine assertion by Malaysia's top naval man, RMN chief Laksamana Abdul Aziz.

But immediately after I had gotten over the guffawing, I realized the import (or disaster) of such a public statement by the Malaysian Navy Chief  for us Malaysians, and began cringing with shame and embarrassment.

How the f* did we go so very wrong in the development of our senior military officers?

As Sakmongkol AK47 commented on that statement in The Malaysian Insider:

"We must remember to sack the imbecilic navy chief when PR takes over the government. [...] The reason given by the navy chief must be taken as signs of incompetence spawned by an inept and corrupt government."

Today, when I saw Malaysiakini’s US nuclear warships bring 'economic benefits' I read with much trepidation what Deputy Defence Minister Abdul Latiff Ahmad said about US aircraft carriers docking at Port Klang being 'not an issue' for Malaysia.

The pathetic political pygmy from UMNO said that allowing the US nuclear-powered warship into its waters has been acceptable, despite Malaysia being part of Southeast Asia's Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality (Zopfan), because the US ship did not carry any nuclear arms.

As before I wanted to laugh but then remembering my earlier mistake, cringed (again) instead.

PKR's Tian Chua had in Parliament asked that wretched witless Wunderkind: "I don't think it's not an issue... as you said, we provide repairs and supplies. Do you know that the aircraft carriers is part of the US strike force for the Gulf countries.”

"A warning was issued against their presence in Iran, which is seen as a provocative move. What exactly is the government's stand on this?"

For obvious reason he evaded Tian's trap for Muslim him and UMNO, with the Deputy Speaker intervening to save him from his inability or refusal to answer directly to Tian's question. The Deputy Speaker censured Tian for repeating the question and of course acted dunno when Tian argued that the wretched witless Wunderkind had not answered his question at all.

There is one issue I want to address before I come to the words of that wretched witless Wunderkind.

Firstly, it's about his statement that "... allowing the US nuclear-powered warship into its waters was acceptable ...".

Quite frankly, there's f* all Malaysia could or can do even if the USN declared/declares its warship carries nuclear armaments and intends to sail through the Straits of Malacca, unless of course, the Lord Nelson-ish modern day Hang Tuah, our remarkable Malaysian Navy Chief, sends his two Scorpene submarines to attack the US Navy (instead of waiting endlessly for a descendant of Afonso de Albuquerque and the Portuguese Armada to invade Malacca), wakakaka.

Because Malaysia and Indonesian territorial waters have been extended from 3 to 12 nm in 1982, there is no or hardly any high seas for a third nation's ship to sail through the Straits of Malacca without entering the waters of the two SE Asian nations (and f* Singapore, wakakaka).

USS Washington

Besides, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea III (UNCLOSS III) allows any 3rd party nation the right of "innocent passage" through such straits as the Straits of Malacca.

"Innocent passage" is defined by UNCLOSS III as passing through waters in an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not "prejudicial to the peace, good order or the security" of the coastal state.

Additionally, the US has always made it a point that it would not tolerate any country in SE Asia denying its warships passage (innocent or otherwise) through the vital sea lane in the Straits of Malacca.

Yes, Malaysia can say USN ships are not allowed to dock at Port Klang or any Malaysian ports but "... sailing into Malaysian waters such as the Straits of Malacca ...?

Okay, I will give that dimwit the benefit of the doubt when he recklessly said it was okay for US warships to sail "... into [Malaysian] waters ...".

But it's another thing altogether for him to assert that the US aircraft carrier and accompanying escort ships (like battlecruisers and destroyers) did not carry any nuclear arms. That was totally reckless, uninformed and, for a defence minister, an unmitigated joke.

USN nuclear-armed battlecruiser USS Ticonderoga

The US Navy has a strict policy of never confirming whether its warships carry nuclear armaments.

It has been this policy that had set the USA at odds with its ANZUS ally, New Zealand.

New Zealand, then under the PM-ship of David Lange enacted the NZ Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament & Arms Control Act 1987, which prohibits entry into NZ territorial waters (12 nm radius) by any ship whose propulsion is wholly or partly dependent on nuclear power ... or have any control over any nuclear explosive device.

David Lange

Because US policy does not admit carriage of nuclear devices on its warships, NZ would not allow US warships to enter its territorial waters, let alone dock at NZ ports. 

For years the US has applied diplomacy, deprivation of military support/obligations under the ANZUS Pact, and threats including denial of free trade agreements to get the NZ government to withdraw that ACT, but the NZ public is so supportive of the Act that neither major political parties dares do that.

So, how did our dimwit know that USS Washington did not carry any nuclear arms. Au contraire, it is more than likely the aircraft carrier has been and is still carrying a battery of such devices.

Was that wretched witless Wunderkind briefed by the Department of the Navy, or more probable, was he lying through his rotten teeth with his tap dancing (from Tian Chua's trap) and extraordinary excruciating extemporaneous parliamentary bull, abetted by another Wunderkind, the deputy speaker?

But more importantly, hasn't the wretched witless Wunderkind realized after the Naval Chief's dim-witted dungu debacle about forestalling a possible attack by the Portuguese Armada that his remarks would be published around the world, and not confined to within the Heartland for only domestic consumption?

As if that was not bad enough, our pompous pathetic political pygmy said: "We have to ensure that there are no nuclear leakages or radiation, etc. We give the green light after all procedures are adhered to."

His Bull is certainly of Godzilla proportion, equal to the size and complement of the USS Washington!

You all know I have not been a supporter of the ABU campaign - and why, wakakaka - and had only recently gave grudging acceptance of that Bro Harris' promotion, most reluctantly and with many qualifications and reservations, but it's moment like this that I believe there may be something in ABU after all, if only to remove such morons.

The 100th name of God!

I am happy to be able to say I told you so.

In an earlier post Road to hell I had lightly tapped the wrist of Steve Oh for his letter proclaiming Nurul Izzah's statement on 'freedom of religion' as a 'watershed' idea for nation, but which I had suspected was driven by his personal agenda.

better Nurul's photo than Steve Oh's wakakaka

Anyone's personal agenda is okay by me, provided it doesn't adversely affect the public or yours truly, because everyone has an agenda of his/her own.

But I chided Steve Oh because he exploited Nurul Izzah's rather daring or impetuous statement, from which she has since belakang pusing (turned around 180 degrees), to present his rather bizarre views.

I'm being euphemistically polite here in describing his views as 'bizarre'.

He went beyond (in fact, never was in) context with regards to Nurul's original statement, a 'bizarre' philosophical excursion that had probably worsened Nurul's predicament.

S. Thayaparan, one of the more erudite Malaysiakini columnists wrote in his article Welcome to Malaysia's religious jungle (lovely appropriate title, but Thayaparan's write-up has not been very complimentary of Chinese or, we hope, just BN's Chinese cronies), that:

Steve Oh's Malaysiakini letter, (which for some reason warranted a visit by the state's security apparatus) in support of Nurul, is loaded with the usual Christian hypocrisy that the calcification of the Malay mind happened in an Umno vacuum.

... which confirms my point about Steve Oh in my earlier post Road to hell, wakakaka.

Christian hypocrisy

However, I have some doubts about one of Thayaparan's assertions, namely the paragraph which states:

The whole Christian issue is merely the natural consequence of growing section of the mainly Chinese community falling under the sway of a worldwide capitalist/Judeo-Christian revivalist movement, which is leading the way in demanding equal religious rights (which is their constitutional right) after years of Umno corrupting every institution that was supposed to safeguard those rights.

Now I am not saying he is wrong - I really don't know - but from my reading and observations, I opine that his opening sentence in the above paragraph should rather be: '... The whole Christian issue is merely the natural consequence of growing section of the mainly Indian community (including Anglo-Indian) falling under the sway of a worldwide capitalist/Judeo-Christian revivalist movement ...'.

I had sparred with a few (Malaysian) Indian Christians over Israel, where I found them unusually loyal to the Jewish State, making frequent references to the Bible as so-called 'proof' that God has given the land to the Israelis.

Then, I recall our dear Father Lawrence Andrew, the bloke who insisted rather stubbornly on using the 'Allah' word.

I offended my blogging mateys, staunch Catholics Lucia Lai and D'Cruz, as well as other Catholics, when I published not only three posts on the use of the 'Allah' word, but also wrote a letter to Malaysiakini expressing my concerns with the Catholic Church (in the person of Father Lawrence Andrew) being obdurately insistent in using the word 'Allah' (instead of 'Tuhan' or other words with strong Judeo-Christian pedigree) in the Malay edition of the Catholic Herald.

Okay, I have to admit I was a wee annoyed with Father Lawrence's intransigent obduracy when I wrote in my post:

It seems that Father Andrew is dead set on using ‘Allah’ to refer to the Christian God, regardless of the superior pedigree (in the Christian context) of God’s other names as revealed in the Bible.

... and I followed that up by asking Father Lawrence (in my post too):

“What is really your goal in obdurately pursuing the use of the word ‘Allah’ to refer to the Christian God in a Malay-language newsletter and Bible when so many other names of your Christian God, with even better biblical pedigree, remain available?”

My three posts on the 'Allah' word issue were:


(a) Allah, Elohim or Yahweh?

The above post was originally sent to the Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) for acceptance as a CPI article (I had previously written a few pieces for it) but alas, was rejected by its director Dr Lim Teck Ghee who did not provide any reason for his rejection - could it be that he was stunned by a non-Muslim Chinese speaking out against the Catholic Church, and by default, in favour of the Muslims.

Well, it was his prerogative. So I then sent it to Malaysiakini as a letter, where it was published, wakakaka.

(b) Catholic Herald and the 3rd Pandora Box in which I brought out (then) Malaysiakini columnist Helen Ang's sarcasm on the Catholic Church insistence in using the 'Allah' word, as follows:

In today’s Malaysiakini column, sweetie Helen Ang wrote in her new article of Malaysia being not quite secular.

She said: Last week, PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang called on the government to amend the first precept of the Rukunegara to 'Belief in Allah'. All those who insisted on the Catholic Herald's 'right' to 'Allah' should now warmly welcome Hadi's proposal made in Parliament when debating the motion of thanks on the Agong's speech. After all, these people had so enthusiastically embraced the idea that "your Allah is my Allah too".

My post continued:

Even Indonesia, the largest Muslim nation in the world, states the first of its Pancasila (national ideology) as 'KeTuhanan Yang Maha Esa', thus without mentioning 'Allah'. Our Rukunnegara was just a modified copy of the Pancasila.

Now, Pak Haji Hadi Awang wants to better Indonesia in this department. He has effectively raised the ante for UMNO to follow.

But sweetie Helen warned that Pak Haji Hadi Awang’s 'Allah' is not quite the ‘Allah’ that Father Lawrence Andrew and the Catholic Church have in mind. Read her article to find out more.

So be prepared for onward escalation of this issue if/when UMNO succumbs to the temptation to outflank PAS on this one, in similar fashion to what Dr Mahathir once thought was an excellent idea.

And we can only have Father Lawrence and the Catholic Herald mob to thank for the probable opening of the 3rd Pandora Box, which will be both an extension and an advance model of the 1st Pandora Box.

This was 2.5 years ago, in April 2010, when we were reminded of Pak Haji Hadi Awang's mindset.

'Reminded'? ... because even earlier in 2004, just leading up to GE-11, PAS was riding on the hem of Dr Wan Azizan's popularity, to an extent they hijacked her/KeADILan campaign as PAS' own.

Mistakenly believing the support for Dr WAn was for them, they went feral as they have done today, bearing their fangs (or rather, their scorpion sting in the tail). Unfortunately for them, they moved too early and frightened the hell out of the non-Muslims who voted heavily for AAB.

PAS has this weakness to revert to its true intolerant nature when they think they're riding high - 'tis the nature of the (scorpion) beast.

(c) Some biblical names of God

I thought I'd be a good Samaritan and help Father Lawrence Andrew select an alternative name with better Judeo-Christian pedigree for his Catholic God instead of 'Allah'. But I suspected by then I was so unpopular with the Catholics that they must have prayed for me to be barred from entering the Pearly Gates when my Time arrives, wakakaka.

At some stage during the brouhaha about copyrights issue on Allah's name, the silliness of the squabble deteriorated to one Muslim suggesting that if the Christians insisted on using the word 'Allah' instead of just Tuhan or any other Biblical names like Elohim, Adonai-Jehovah, El-Olam, Elyon, Yahweh, etc, then they still could, provided they spelt the word as 'Alah' with only one 'L' letter, wakakaka.

I was so tickled by the quarrel over God's name that I cheekily penned a poem Magic of the 100th name of God on the silly controversy and sent it to Malaysiakini. It was published and I am now reproducing same below:

Once

I had a hundred names

with only 99 known.

Trust Isis and her wiles,

yes, a woman

and a lovely one too,

to pry the 100th out of me.

Devious!

Isis

Amazed!

I now have a new one but

minus an 'L' as if that

would mean someone else,

like Odin, Manitou, Zeus,

rather than ole me, you

know who, don't you?

Moi

Isis

Hey

I call out to them, they

in the red and blue corners.

The names' the same, it's all mine

of course, whose did you think?

Butt out, sneered one;

Yes, the other concurred;

Scat!

Isis

Huh?

But they're all mine, those

names you're fighting over.

So what, did you patent them

like mapped gerome of langsat

and petai for exclusive use?

No? Then, buzz off!

Goodbye

Isis

But

Why fight over my names

when I am the same Bloke

for all of you guys and gals?

Hellooooo, didn't we say

to butt out of our turf wars,

on exclusive use of THE name.

Understand?

Isis

Isis!

Only she knew my 100th name

that bestows the most powerful

magic on those who know.

She was privy to my secret (100th)

name called Compassion, sometimes

known as, would you believe,

Love!

It's a pity we Malaysians, whether Muslims, Christians, Hindus, etc, just can't keep religion out of our politics.

The python hanging around the ceiling fan

I never thought this day would come when I ........

In fact I'm embarrassed to say it ........ but alas, I must brace my gonads and say it.

Okay, here goes - I feel sorry for Anwar Ibrahim.

There ........ I have done it. Now, should I go and wash my mouth, wakakaka!

Most of you know I dislike him, mind you, not as a private person, but as a politician. That's because he has always refused to accept his mistakes, wrong doings/utterances, etc when he was in UMNO in various ministerial capacities, even up to DPM/acting PM. And he has the cheek to promote himself as a political reformer without dealing honestly with his UMNO-demon.

If only he had bared his breast (not physically of course, yuck) and said, just as an example: "Look, I admit I had f* it up kau kau when I was in UMNO. I was ... la-li-da, yadda, yadda ... but now I'm different. Forgive my past because I want to start afresh, on a clean plate. I have learned from my mistakes which I believe can strengthen my resolve to remedy that I had taken part in ...", what a difference that would have made to many people like me.

We all have a capacity to forgive, but not someone who treated us like fools as if there was no evidence of his nasty performance during his 16-years tenure in UMNO?

But when I read of PAS' treachery against a Pakatan agreement, with the potential to AGAIN deny Anwar Ibrahim from his wannabe destiny to assume the PM's post, this time through no fault of his, I feel really sorry for him.

A couple of Shakespearean quotes for you then, my dear readers - yesterday I poked fun at Pak Haji Hadi Awang by quoting Mark Anthony's speech as per Act II, Scene 3 in Shakespeare's 'The Tragedy of Julius Caesar:

You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this
ambition?

... adding that the Roman senators who ganged up as the Liberatores (Liberators) suspected Julius Caesar of bersandiwara-ing when he refused the crown 3 times, though mind you, at least, he didn't say “Saya lebih rela jadi khadam daripada PM" (I’d rather be a servant to the country and the people).

Caesar didn't have the opportunity to say "I accept" but Pak Haji Hadi Awang did, stating in Kota Bharu yesterday "I welcome being elected as the prime minister ... but I ask Allah to grant us victory."

No one had elected him - he was nominated by his own party, but never mind.

PAS is so damn confident it will emerge as the Pakatan component party with the most number of seats, standing in 60 choice federal constituencies that, on the eve of GE-13, it has made its most alarming aggressive avaricious move.

As I stated in a post over at Malaysia-Today (very much expanded here): ... insofar as who in a winning coalition shall assume the PM post, on the basis of convention, if PAS wins far more seats than PKR, then it should rightfully have a claim to the PM position.

However, I added: ... but a coalition is also based on cooperation and agreed policies, arrived at by consensus prior to victory and we need to remember that it's precisely that consensus which permits the coalition to work together with synthesized syncretised and synchronized strength as a unified political entity, thus the very instrument which ensures and enables victory for Pakatan. Therefore the consensus must be respected and honoured.

One fundamental Pakatan consensus or agreement has been that Anwar Ibrahim shall be the PM of a Pakatan government. Regrettably, PAS on the eve of a Pakatan victory has grown selfish, arrogant and hubristic, and is now publicly indicating it will renege on the consensus.

PAS in indicating its dishonourable intention, has demonstrated bad faith in not respecting a coalition agreement. What other coalition agreements will PAS abandon arrogantly, disrespectfully and dishonourably?

PKR and DAP must now have second thoughts about the reliability, integrity and sincerity of such a so-called ally.

In the lead up to the 2004 GE, PAS in its pre-election campaign showed it was being two-face, presenting only the ‘moderate’ one to the non-Muslims because it wanted their votes, as it does today to enable the party to secure 60 federal seats.

But we now have to ask again as we did in 2004, once these votes have sent PAS into federal power, what ‘face’ will it then reveal?

More importantly, while we know PAS wants to implement hudud, will it maintain its promise not to apply the Islamic code of criminal punishment to non-Muslims?

Did I just head ‘yes’? But didn't PAS say ‘yes’ too to Anwar Ibrahim becoming the PM of a Pakatan government?

Pak Haji Hadi Awang's "reluctant" acceptance of the PAS proposal for him to be PM has not only been arrogant (as he didn't even bother to consult/discuss that with PKR or DAP) but truly calls for a second Shakespearean quotation, yes, another one by Mark Anthony:

For Brutus, as you know, was Caesar's angel.
Judge, O you gods, how dearly Caesar lov'd him!
This was the most unkindest cut of all;
For when the noble Caesar saw him stab,
Ingratitude, more strong than traitors' arms,
Quite vanquish'd him: then burst his mighty
heart.

- Tragedy of Julius Caesar (Act III, Scene 2)

Indeed, Hadi Awang's unilateral acceptance of his party's arrogant and selfish go-it-alone nomination of him as the Pakatan PM was 'the most unkindest cut of all' for Anwar Ibrahim.

As per Shakespeare's words, it would be PAS' treachery, especially Hadi Awang's, that will finish off Anwar - 'Ingratitude, more strong than traitors' arms, Quite vanquish'd him: then burst his mighty heart'.

The PAS scorpion just has to be true to its venomous nature, stinging its vital carriage even in mid stream, for Anwar Ibrahim has indeed been its carriage, carrying the Islamic Party across the stream to (be acceptable to) the non-Muslim side.

Now I seriously wonder about the viability of the coalition, with such a treacherous and arrogant party within its midst.

In the midst of such treachery, Anwar Ibrahim should be relieved to hear Lim Guan Eng joining his father in affirming DAP's support for Anwar Ibrahim to be PM.

Let's consider a few possible scenarios, assuming Pakatan will win GE-13, and BN will not roll out the tanks, or declare a national emergency, or the number of votes counted will not exceed the number of registered voters for any particular constituency, wakakaka.

At last count, the Malaysian Parliament has a total of 222 federal seats, 166 in Peninsula and 56 for Sarawak and Sabah. To become the new ruling party/coalition, Pakatan must win a minimum of 112 seats. 

Say (using simple notional figures to project a hypothetical picture) and ignoring the kutu parties:

PAS contests 60, wins 45

PKR contests 66, wins 42

DAP contests 40, wins 30

Total for Pakatan = 117

Therefore BN wins 105

Leave aside UMNO's usual tactic in such an above situation, wakakaka.

Putting together the issue of who'll be PM and hudud, what then will most likely transpire when (not if) DAP says no to both PAS' demands for Hadi Awang to be PM and hudud to be implemented?

Three scenarios may occur:

(a) PAS accepts DAP's no, and Anwar becomes PM - no hudud is implemented.

(b) PAS says f* off to Pakatan and forms a United Islamic Front with UMNO (plus MCA, MIC and Gerakan, if any still survives) to form government, with an UMNO man (not necessarily Najib or Muhyiddin) still as PM while PAS picks up a few choice ministerial positions. Hudud is implemented as a quid pro quo for PAS joining UMNO as the new majority ruling coalition. And so sorry to poor Anwar.

(c) That boa constrictor (reticulated python) hanging around the ceiling fan called 'Malay Unity' suddenly drops down, and PAS, UMNO and the core section of PKR unite to form government, again with hudud implemented as a quid pro quo for PAS' willingness to join up with its old enemy UMNO which then becomes its rediscovered ethnic brother. I'm afraid poor Anwar will not be considered for the PM's position.

Postscript:

Hasan Ali rejoins PAS and becomes a cabinet member, as Minister of Technology (solar division, wakakaka) and Nasharudin is awarded the Tan Sri-ship. Most probably sorry again to poor Anwar.

Sting in the tail (or at the end)

Malaysiakini - PAS ready to rule M'sia with Pakatan, declares Hadi reported:

“PAS conducts tahaluf siyasi with an understanding that Pakatan Rakyat upholds the concept of commonality and not focus on differences,” he said.

“This tahaluf siyasi should not make us lose sight of PAS members’ understanding towards the concept of Fiqh al-Taat (loyalty) to the party,” he said.

Harakah Daily - Hadi outlines ways to set right the economy

Hadi said should PAS be given the mandate to rule as part of Pakatan Rakyat, the party would strive for a shift to an economic philosophy that was fairer.

“In this regard, the fiscal as well as the fair monetary policy must be utilised fully to pace growth,” he said, adding that future implementation of economic policy must be complemented by the concept of reward and punishment according to the Shariah, holistic accountability and preventive laws to prevent extravagance, leakage, fraud and corruption.

These are not just the words of a PAS President but that of a PM-in-waiting.

Pak Haji has now projected his very very presidential prime ministerial persona, and proclaims he/PAS is “ready” to rule Malaysia …. er … together with Pakatan of course.

Throughout his more than 2-hour speech at the PAS Muktamar, he studiously avoided any mention of the hudud word, and stressed instead on PAS’ concept of an Islamic welfare state.

Coincidentally, The Malaysian Insider (TMI) had carried the news earlier that some leading PAS delegates want party leaders to tread lightly on sensitive issues where it reported:

Several PAS delegates have expressed fear that the outspokenness and eagerness of some leaders to comment on sensitive issues would only invite trouble for the party ahead of the coming general election.

Though they used Nurul Izzah’s ‘no compulsion in religion’ as the example to showcase the improper, inappropriate and indiscreet haste of some over-eager PAS leaders to speak out, and unwittingly use words which could hurt PAS’ election prospects, I suspect those PAS delegates have something more important in mind, namely, the implementation of PAS avowed hudud.

Today, TMI’s Muktamar PAS lebih matang, elak bicara isu sensitif untuk kekal sokongan bukan islam left us in no doubt on that, reporting clearly PAS' pre-election strategy:

Muktamar Tahunan PAS ke-58 yang terakhir menjelang pilihan raya umum (PRU) ke-13 akan melabuhkan tirainya hari ini dilihat lebih matang berbanding tahun sebelumnya, kata penganalisis politik tanah air.

Mereka turut berpendapat, PAS dilihat mengamalkan sikap berhati-hati dalam menyentuh isu sensitif seperti hudud yang berkemungkinan akan memberikan kesan sokongan daripada penyokong bukan Muslim mereka.

In short, ... (translated in kaytee's way) ... so far so good mateys, you've shown maturity but make sure you don't blurb out sensitive stuff that'll frighten away the non-Muslim votes for PAS.

To be fair, PAS has never hidden the fact it is an Islamic party with an Islamic obligation to turn Malaysia into its vision of what an Islamic country should be.

And no matter how many examples or empirical evidence we present to it in hopes those would convince the Islamic party that a syariah system, inclusive of hudud, will not cure away or even minimize corruption, injustice and misrule or for that matter, install a better regime of social justice, proper governance and compassion (as per the Compassion of Allah swt), it will fall on their deaf ears ...

... as PAS firmly believes it’s not only its Islamic duty to implement hudud successfully but that it can do what couldn't be done/achieved in other Islamic hudud-ruled countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and even Shia Iran, etc.

hudud-ruled Pakistan

In those and any other Islamic countries, you will not find one single Islamic country which can demonstrate those aspired Islamic qualities of social justice, proper governance and compassion, as ironically can be found in many secular nations.

Hudud!

Aiyah, PAS obviously hasn't heard of the non-Islamic advice given by:

(a) Lord Acton who said "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men", or

Lord Acton

(b) British PM William Pitt the Elder who advised "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it", or

(c) French poet Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine who gave us “It is not only the slave or serf who is ameliorated in becoming free ... the master himself did not gain less in every point of view, ... for absolute power corrupts the best natures.”

And that’s what a hudud-ruled nation would confer on its leaders, total unchallengeable unquestionable absolute power as witnessed in Afghanistan under the Taliban, Iran under the ayatollahs, Saudi Arabia, etc, and even a whiff of that in our own Kedah where PAS has passed legislation stating its fatwa's may not be questioned or challenged.

The common denominator of hudud-ruled countries seems to be the 3-P's, that of 'prohibit', 'persecute' (note, not 'prosecute') and 'punish'.

Missing instead are the 3-C's of 'counselling', 'care' and 'compassionate' (a la the Compassion of Allah swt).

Nonetheless, for PAS to achieve its religious dream it must first be in (majority) rule, and that in turn relies on two equally important factors.

Firstly, it must win for itself mucho federal parliamentary seats, on which it is fairly dependent on non-Muslim votes, to help secure, say, around 60-ish federal parliamentary seats if not more. Every single vote counts a la Julia Fietcher Carney’s:

Little drops of water,
little grains of sand,
make the mighty ocean
and the beauteous land 

Yes, every non-Muslim vote helps if it is to realize its desire to emerge as the Pakatan component party with the most number of parliamentary seats and thus, with the loudest say in the coalition, in other words, as Pakatan’s primus inter pares (first among equals).

PAS supporters club

Naturally, at this most crucial moment (on the eve of GE-13) it most certainly doesn't want some inflexible (immature, wakakaka) hardcore ulama to say stuff that will frighten away its non-Muslim supporters ...

... non-Muslim supporters whom it has now gained substantially for the first time in its long history, thanks to a combination of the brilliant strategy by its Erdogen faction (one which Pak Haji Hadi Awang joined late, perhaps after his ulama eyes were opened to the ‘bigger picture’) and the support of its Pakatan allies.

The ABU campaign which I only support with much reservation and many qualifications has also contributed greatly to the pro-PAS non-Muslim supporters' blind rage to get rid of everything and anything BN, even if the consequences can in some cases be far more forbidding.

In this, PAS' Erdogan-ists have to be complimented for brilliantly projecting to the non-Muslims that it’s an inclusive political party with the welfare of the rakyat foremost in mind. Of course in the process it had to marginalize those obdurate and blinkered Myrmidon ulamas within its fold.

So basically, it’s a crucial juncture in time that calls for the following reminders:

(a) Loose lips sink the PAS ship,

and 

(b) please shut the fuck up.

Secondly, for PAS to be in government it must cooperate with PKR and DAP and any other Pakatan member. Yet in this, in spite of the absolute need for close cohesive cooperation and good will, the PAS scorpion has stung again.

No siree, it's not exactly brilliant for PAS' excited members to come up with avaricious statements that renege on a Pakatan agreed policy, which has been for Anwar Ibrahim to be PM in a Pakatan government.

TMI reported in its Anwar says ‘no problem’ if Hadi made PM that a PAS delegate, Hairun Nizam, proposed that:

... the PAS president was the “best person” to lead the country. In response, the delegate earned enthusiastic shouts of “takbir” from the over 1000 gathered for the annual meet ...

“I’d like to ask the delegates — who is the best person to lead the Malaysian government if not for Tuan Guru president ” he asked “This is not for the sake of revering him but he is the most qualified person to become the next prime minister and we as protégés of an Islamic party should not campaign for others to take on the post ”.

So, PAS wants to renege on its part as a coalition partner, by not campaigning for others in Pakatan. 

Shortly you will understand what I mean by, 'tis the nature of the PAS beast, or scorpion.

Poor Anwar bravely said it's okay for PAS' Hadi Awang to be PM. Of course it's not f* okay for Anwar. He didn't come on this long arduous road just to hand over his long-sought-after dream job, the PM-ship, to a PAS man, whose party couldn't and wouldn't have achieved such a broad based multi racial multi religious support if not for Anwar Ibrahim.

But DAP's Lim Kit Siang loyally reaffirmed DAP's support for Anwar as the new PM. Hmmm, maybe  PAS' melayu mudah lupa but not DAP Indians and Chinese, wakakaka.

Of course lovely Pak Haji Hadi Awang said modestly (as reported by TMI): I’m not chasing PM’s post but TMI also reported:

The veteran politician however stopped short of saying if he would accept or decline the post if the offer was made should Pakatan Rakyat PR succeed in wresting federal power in the coming pools.

At this stage, I like to invoke an extract from Anwar Ibrahim's second fave book (his most fave being of course the Quran - smile)

You all did see that on the Lupercal
I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?

 - Mark Anthony, Tragedy of Julius Caesar, by Shakespeare (Act II, Scene 3)

... though we know that Casca, one of conspirators who murdered Julius Caesar, believed that Caesar in refusing the crown thrice was nothing but an actor bersandiwara-ing to curry favour with the public.

Anyway, from ancient Rome to contemporary Malaysia - PAS is terribly excited, as is Anwar Ibrahim wakakaka, at its recent assessment that Pakatan is on the cusp of victory over BN.

Suddenly, for PAS, that far away misty mirage-like Putrajaya is within its reach. So, we now hear PAS President Pak Haji Hadi Awang issuing statesman-like policies and promises, but cleverly omitting mention of hudud. Yes sir, there was not a skerrit of anything hudud-ish in his presidential address at the PAS Muktamar.

But there is a story of a frog, nay not what you think, as this time the katak is different from the manmanlai or Ah Jib Gor’s variety.

It’s the one in a well-known fable, about a scorpion asking a frog to carry it across a river. Naturally the katak was sh*t scared that the kala jengking would sting it during the trip, but the scorpion said: “C’mon Bro, if I sting you, wouldn't you die and sink and drown me in the same process, huh?”

“Hmmm, sounds logical,” the katak thought and thus carried the scorpion on its back, but alamak, midway across the river the scorpion did indeed sting the frog, screwing both of them up fatally.

The frog gasped out with its last breath, “WTF, why did you do that and doom yourself as well?”

The kala jengking replied, “Sorry Bro, it’s my scorpion nature to sting, just couldn't help myself what!”

You see, the katak made a fatal mistake in thinking logically, because on issues as binding and blinding as a religious obligation, there is no logic, scruple or principle that can be applied. Perceived duty to God overrides all other earthly considerations.

And thus we have PAS ulama chief, Harun Taib speaking at the PAS Muktamar in Kota Baru on Thursday, claiming PAS had clarified its views on hudud with DAP on many occasions, even before Pakatan Rakyat was formed.

Harun Taib

He even audaciously claimed that while Karpal seemed disagreeable to the implementation of hudud, that “does not mean he disagrees”.

Wakakaka. He obviously believed in the old adage (paraphrased by kaytee) that ‘Fortune favours the brave bullshitter’ - it's the nature of the scorpion (it just can't help itself), or as kaytee likes to term it, 'tis the nature of the beast.

Good old Bhai went ballistic and responded pungently that “… Harun’s assertion on DAP’s stand on hudud was mischievous and a long way from the truth”, which wakakaka, means Harun was, as mentioned, bloody blatantly bullshitting.

And by the way, do you recall what I say about the significance of the word ‘mischievous’ in politics or current affairs or among adults who aren't intimate friends. It’s not an adjective describing something ‘playfully annoying’ as in a ‘mischievous’ act by a budak, but rather one which is ‘malicious, injurious or intended to cause harm’.

Hmmm, I wonder what’s the hudud penalty for blatant bullshit, especially one which is patently “mischievous”? wakakaka.

Free Malaysia Today reported (in the following extract) Karpal Singh stating unequivocally:

“I have always disagreed and publicly stated my reasons for saying so based on the provisions in the Federal Constitution and interpretations of this provisions by the highest court in the country.”

“The position of the DAP on this issue cannot be subject to any compromise. It is fundamental to its existence.”

 “The DAP has time and again publicly asserted its stand against the introduction of hudud in the country. Hudud cannot exist in Malaysia which is a secular state.”

But the scorpion cannot help itself as it continues to sting, as per:

Harakah’s Haron Din kata PAS tidak tersasar daripada perjuangan Islam - indeed Pak Haji!

Okay, I just read an article by Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, a director at Islamic Renaissance Front, who first penned it for New Mandala but which is now republished in Free Malaysia Today as PAS’ unwavering pursuit of Islamic state (extracts only):

If there is anything unmistakably clear from the recent muktamar or general assembly of Islamic party PAS is that despite the acceptance of the concept of tahalluf siyasi or political consensus among the three major components of the opposition front – Pakatan Rakyat – PAS’ ambition in establishing an Islamic state and implementing hudud laws is unwavering, if not more resolute.

It appears rather incongruous that despite the acceptance of Buku Jingga or Orange Book as a comprehensive framework of the opposition front on how to govern the country when they come to power, PAS seems to have a higher agenda – to transform the multiracial and multi-religious country into a full-fledged Islamic state with Islamic laws.

Islamic laws and hudud were never mentioned in Buku Jingga and neither was the establishment of Islamic State. PAS even came out with its own manifesto “Nation of Care and Opportunity”. However this concept of a benevolent state is not well received by many PAS members themselves.

Reason being, the so-called Erdoganists in PAS mainly mooted it.

Recent spate of debate about the concept of Islamist Democrat – a term popularised by the Erdoganists – between the ulama faction and the young Turks clearly proved that they are considered contaminants in the “pure and pristine” PAS struggle.

Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa

Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa continues with succinct advice for PAS leadership:

Perhaps the most important thing that PAS should appreciate and understand is that the appeal for hudud and Islamic state is not there anymore in the post-Islamism period.

PAS should not misunderstand the votes they received as amounting to the support for their Islamic agenda. More than a hundred thousand went to the street for demonstration during Bersih 3.0 recently. The demand was not to implement hudud or establishing an Islamic state.

People of various races and religions from all walks of life marched together for a better democracy. They wanted a clean and fair election and a government free of corruption. It was an act of defiance to the draconian and unconstitutional Act that prevented people from any peaceful assembly.

It must be heard loud and clear that the people want a truly democratic state. Not a state ruled by a group of Mullahs who considered themselves to be above the law.

The precedent was already set when one state under PAS passed an enactment that a fatwa or religious verdict from a Mufti cannot be challenged in the court of law.

Dr Ahmad was referring to pro-Malay Unity Kedah MB Azizan Abu Bakar and his draconian and undemocratic-dictatorial legislation on fatwa.

KUIN students protesting Kedah MB's anti academic freedom

It has to be understood that the state is not something from God but from the people. The state has to serve the benefit of the people and not just a certain group based on their faith. The state has to be neutral in all aspects. It must also be made clear that a state is a human product and managing a state requires human endeavor and not divine inspiration.

The governance of a state falls under the realm of political and is not in the realm of revelation.

Any observance of religious values must never be through coercion. A state should respect personal beliefs and moral values and not imposed itself on its citizens. Unfortunately, the current situation in states under PAS rule failed to prevent this obtrusion of the state into private sphere.

... as evident throughout the Islamic world where it's even worse in that NOT ONE SINGLE Islamic country has ever shown it practises the basic (not highest) standards of Islamic governance, justice or the compassion exemplified by Allah swt.

A state should not dictate how we should wear in public as this falls under personal affairs. However to regulate how women should dress seemed to be the first agenda under many Islamic governments, PAS not excluded.

Could it be a nasty fallout from granting absolute power to a bunch of bullies, as had happened at the Zuok nightclub, when raiding JAWI religious officers degenerated into disgraceful depraved demons, lustful monsters who abused their powers to humiliate as well as terrorise young Muslim women.

Yes, bullies, being the cowards they really are, usually start bullying the weaker gender.

Matters of the heart such as faith should be left to individuals. It is not the state to meddle in matters of the heart.

There is no value in observing a faith that was made through coercion. Coercing people to believe in a faith they have no believe anymore through state’s coercive tools only turn them into hypocrites.

People are created free and any effort of the state to coerce people from embracing or leaving a faith is worthless and futile.

Indeed ...  though I opine PAS won't give two figs about his advice.

So now, what will happen when we have a PAS that has voiced its preparedness to renege on an agreed Pakatan policy regarding the PM-ship and its covert Islamic aim to implement hudud to replace the secular civil justice system once it comes into power?

Have PKR and DAP unwittingly entered into a Faustian pact with PAS?

To be continued ...