Rudyard Kipling"
“When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier”
General Douglas MacArthur"
“We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.”
“It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.” “Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.
“The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.”
“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .” “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
“Nobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
“It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
The futility of the non-Malay vote By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, November 04, 2024
Malaysiakini : Whichever way one chooses to look at the “Green Wave”, what we are
observing is the diminishing political power of non-Malays in this
country.
Keep
in mind that when I say political power, I do not mean power over
policy but rather power that constrains the excesses of the religious
and racial state.
Protecting rights of non-Malays
Increasingly when non-Malays vote, they vote because they want their communities to be left alone.
The
first principle of democracy is merely a crude framework in which
citizens govern and interact with each other in a mostly fair and
egalitarian manner.
The purpose of a maturing democracy is to build on that. This is the exact opposite of what a theocratic state is.
Every
time a non-Malay votes, it is in the expectation that who they vote for
would constrain the religious and racial excesses of mainstream Malay
politics.
This involves issues from closing down non-Muslim businesses to unilateral conversions.
We are really not talking about deep policy issues but merely baseline democratic issues of self-preservation.
This is probably why non-Malays latch onto any Muslim personality who makes the right noises to issues they consider sacred.
This is why the non-Malay vote is considered secure in the Pakatan Harapan coalition.
Non-Malay
power structures do not deal with their Malay counterparts as equals.
DAP, for instance, had to eat barrels of manure to ensure that whatever
they said or did was not used by PN as evidence they were controlling
the unity government.
Former attorney-general Tommy Thomas
said at the launch of Joe Samad’s book - “The obsession with race and
religion is a huge deleterious obstacle to unifying Malaysia as a united
people.”
This is unintentionally misleading because Malay and
non-Malay power brokers both use race and religion as a means to
galvanise support from their respective communities, all the while
gaslighting minorities that the meaningless social contract is a
legitimate political compromise.
It is difficult to make the
argument that Malaysia is anything but an ethnocracy like Israel when
race-based political parties determine policy and the supposedly
moderate centre-based parties cater to these racial political parties.
Just a figurehead
If
you thought it was bad when Dr Mahathir Mohamad was in power, it is
even worse now that Anwar has decided that whatever forms of political
alchemy he can create with any Malay uber alles parties or personalities
is worth the derision of his non-Malay base.
Take the whole DAP vice-chairperson Teresa Kok and Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh issue over halal certification.
And there was not one word
of condemnation from the prime minister of the way a sitting minister -
Nga Kor Ming - was verbally abused by a member of his coalition and
harassed by the state security apparatus for merely speaking up on
behalf of everyone.
The theocratic state-in-waiting understands
they have no need for prime ministers in the sense of someone leading
the country. All they need is a figurehead.
Who is unity govt serving?
This
unity government, because of political compromise, has become the
realisation of theocratic dreams of fellow Islamic travellers within the
bureaucracy.
They do not care about democracy, they do not care
about the royal institution, and they are as obsessed about controlling
the non-Muslims in this country as they are controlling the majority
Malay polity.
For Malay-Muslim power brokers, hooking up with this
unity government serves both personal and racial agendas and if this
unity government falls, it is business as usual with PN.
But of
course, what they fail to realise is they will not be part of a
right-wing government but rather a theocracy, which eventually consumes
them. This is what non-Muslims need to remember when it comes to
Malay-Muslim solidarity. This is why this unity government is a
dangerous concept for Malaysian politics.
It is a testing ground
for racial and religious policies, even though this government is
technically one without a majority mandate.
When PAS, for
instance, gains federal power, PAS will lead the effort to
disenfranchise the non-Malay vote even more and perhaps make the
non-Malay vote meaningless. This is the plan and PAS has been very open
about it.
Just three years ago, before the general election, then-PAS central committee member Khairuddin Aman Razali said: “There are long-term (needs) that require us to win the next general election with a two-thirds majority.
“(Upon achieving this) the electoral boundaries need to be changed to benefit Muslims.
“We also need to increase the number of parliamentary seats in Malay-majority areas.”
Becoming ‘pak turut’
By
making the non-Malay vote irrelevant, what they are doing is making
non-Malay political power inconsequential - this is the very definition
of “pak turut” (yes man).
This is why PN is enjoying the
antics of someone like Akmal. He is a constant reminder to non-Malays
that their political power is meaningless. Their role within this unity
government is to be the “pak turut”.
And best of all, we
have a reformist prime minister who will not say or do anything to curb
the excess of Umno but, more importantly, attempts to introduce
religious and racial policies which aid the PN folk more than it does
the Harapan base.
So, what are non-Malays left with? Either they vote to feebly stop the inevitable, or they do not vote and embrace it.
SABAH AND SARAWAK NGOS CONDEMN MAHATHIR FOR INSENSITIVE & RECALCITRANT REMARKS
Thursday, October 31, 2024
Murray Hunter : Sarawak’s so-called “high-income” label is a gross misrepresentation
that fails to reflect the daily struggles of most Sarawakians, who
continue to suffer from underdeveloped infrastructure, high poverty
rates, and a severe lack of essential services.
Although federal
data may paint an improved picture of per capita income, it conceals the
fundamental reality that much of Sarawak’s wealth has been siphoned off
for federal use, with minimal reinvestment in the state itself.
This
ongoing extraction has left vast areas of Sarawak impoverished and
deprived of the very benefits generated by its resources.
Despite
Sarawak contributing immensely to Malaysia’s oil and gas revenue, it
receives only a 5% royalty under the Petroleum Development Act of 1974.
This has stymied Sarawak’s economic autonomy for decades, leaving it
reliant on federal allocations instead of allowing it to fully leverage
its resources.
Recent efforts to implement an oil and gas sales
tax bring in only a fraction of what Sarawak actually generates—wealth
that has long been funnelled into developing Peninsular Malaysia.
The
notion that Sarawak should now “share its wealth” with poorer states is
an insult, disregarding the fact that this wealth has never truly
benefited Sarawakians but has been systematically siphoned to Malaya.
The
federal government has capitalized on Sarawak’s oil resources for
national projects that largely exclude the very state that produced this
wealth.
Calls for Sarawak to support other states are premature
and offensive when it has only just begun reclaiming control over its
own resources through initiatives like the state-owned Petros. These
long-overdue steps toward autonomy are necessary for Sarawak to achieve
true development and address the historical inequities imposed upon it.
This
exploitation of Sarawak and Sabah's resources is among the reasons why
the federation’s unity has become increasingly fragile. Achieving parity
with Peninsular Malaysia means Sarawak should retain a much larger
portion of its revenue to alleviate poverty and reverse the
underdevelopment that still afflicts its people.
Dr. Mahathir’s
remarks show a shocking disregard for the suffering endured by Sarawak’s
people, suffering largely exacerbated by policies enacted during his
tenure.
If Malaya had honoured its part of the MA63 bargain,
Sarawak and Sabah would have long ago become high-income states like
Singapore!
His statement is a reminder of past injustices, and he
owes Sarawak and Sabah an apology for the immense harm inflicted upon
them during his time in power.
His insensitive and recalcitrant
attitude toward the community's concerns only deepened the mistrust of
the federal government, as he refused to acknowledge or address the
issues they faced.
End of statement.
28 October 2024
Daniel John Jambun President Borneo's Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)
Robert Pei President Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)
How Najib continues to define Madani By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Wednesday, October 30, 2024
Malaysiakini : So incensed was then-Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin by this
description, that he wanted Low investigated and, of course, the wing
supported Najib.
The former Pekan MP has since apologised, claiming he was a patsy but this is what Low said in an interview in 2015:
"Did
the people supposed to be responsible for decision-making (at 1MDB)
suddenly decide to absolve all their responsibilities and then create
this PR campaign with me as the focus of it?
"No one seems to ask
the question who is the ultimate decision-maker on 1MDB? No one asks
that. No one ever asks about the shareholders' role."
However, all
this is irrelevant of course. Najib defines Madani's policies on
corruption. When he got his reduced sentence, this fed into religious
narratives of PAS and the far religious right.
When you have PAS
president Abdul Hadi Awang and preacher Zakir Naik arguing that it is
better to live under corrupt Muslim rule than an honest non-Muslim rule,
this is the definition of the Madani strategies when it comes to Najib.
This is the message it sends.
Now that Najib may get his house arrest, this merely points to how the ketuanan (supremacy) system handles its reprobates.
Flimsy narrative
Think
about Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s discharge not
amounting to an acquittal (DNAA). In justifying it, Prime Minister Anwar
Ibrahim advanced the narrative that this was partly a political persecution by former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
The
fact that Zahid, Najib and every other alleged kleptocrat say the same
thing points to the narrative that is being shaped by the mainstream
political establishment in this country to justify alliances or to shape
narratives around corruption allegations.
Forget about the message Zahid’s DNAA and Najib’s partial pardon
and possible house arrest say about the hypocritical nature of Madani.
What is more damaging is the message being sent to the civil service and
security apparatuses which are mired in the kind of factionalism that
dominates mainstream Malay politics.
Remember before Najib went to
jail, he was going around shoring up support and spreading all sorts of
lies and misinformation about the 1MDB scandal and his “political
persecution”.
Remember when PKR deputy president Rafizi Ramli had the cajones to directly attack Najib and throw rhetorical hand grenades into the well-laid plans of the Umno establishment?
"We
do not have much time before the next general election. There is a lot
of heavy work to be done within the next four to five months.
"The
first thing we have to do is to counter Umno's narratives, we cannot
let them do whatever they want. We cannot allow Najib to syok sendiri (be full of himself).”
Now,
of course, Umno is in the coalition government and through his proxies
in the party, Najib continues to define Madani and of course, the DAP.
The
pusillanimous attitude of someone like Jelutong MP RSN Rayer is,
unfortunately, louder than the rhetoric of someone like Anthony Loke,
the DAP’s big cheese who could only muster a let cooler heads prevail, when Najib received a partial pardon:
“There
are mixed reactions (to the matter). Some are upset Najib was not
released, while others are upset his sentence was reduced. I urge
everyone to remain calm and keep cool heads.”
Keep
in mind that Rayer “respects” a coalition partner like Umno, whose
youth chief has viciously attacked a DAP minister, created a controversy
involving socks which resulted in acts of arson and continues to stir
racial and religious sentiment among the rakyat.
He does this with
complete immunity and shockingly, no rebuke from the prime minister who
was a long-time reformasi comrade of the DAP.
Welsh perhaps, the best hand when it comes to observing the political circus in this country wrote of Madani:
“Those
who wanted a different government from that of Umno now have the same
party and practices in power, with Anwar providing the means for the
party’s leaders and their family members to be rehabilitated, including
through taxpayer-funded patronage.”
‘The muted DAP’
Replace
Anwar with Najib and this was exactly how the train was running before
it was derailed by a confluence of events that brought down Najib and in
many ways, Pakatan Harapan. And where is the DAP in all of this?
Well, they are busy keeping a low profile. The following extract from an interview with Seputeh MP Teresa Kok highlights the way DAP has been successfully neutered by Umno and of course, Madani:
“One
dilemma faced by DAP is having to respond to the challenge from Umno,
particularly from Umno Youth leader Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh, who issues
racist statements every week that target DAP.
“If DAP does not respond, we would be seen as a ‘muted’ party by the Chinese and Indian communities.
“However, when we get into loggerheads with Umno and Umno Youth like before, the Malays see us as being rude and racist.”
Where
does this leave rational Malaysians? Nowhere good. You see there is no
trade-off. If Madani could point to policies in education, healthcare
and social services which were egalitarian and utilitarian, then
rational people would have no choice but to ignore these political moves
by the Madani elites as the price of doing business in a country like
Malaysia.
Mind you, I was never one of those people who were gleefully awaiting Najib to be paraded around in an orange jumpsuit.
You
don’t get to play the moral high ground card when your coalition was
previously aligned with the architect of old Malaysia, Mahathir.
Perhaps,
how Najib best defines Madani is the way he and his coalition
government enablers game the system while a deaf driver and construction
worker have to hope for justice in Madani.
Can Madani govt assure Act 355 bill won't affect non-Muslims? By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, October 21, 2024
Malaysiakini : Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim just last year in the midst of brewing
the law in Madaniville claimed that PAS bringing up this issue now that
they were in the opposition was just “cheap politics”.
As reported
in the press - “That’s not Islamic, that’s cheap politics,” he told the
media when asked to comment about PAS asking Putrajaya when it will
table the amendments to Act 355.
The prime minister is right
though. Why didn’t PAS or Bersatu bring up this issue when they were in
power? Keep in mind that Bersatu was accused of being in DAP’s pocket
when they would not touch this issue with a 10-foot pole back in the
day.
In 2017, then-Umno information chief Annuar Musa as reported in the press said
that the failure of Bersatu president Muhyiddin Yassin in stating the
party’s stand could be because he could be overshadowed by the decision
of the DAP-dominated opposition pact, which openly rejected the bill.
Why stir issue now?
So rational people have to ask themselves why all these religious uber alles agitators did not want to raise this issue when they were in power.
The
answer is simple. They did not want to be in a position of power when
this act blew back against the ruling democratic regime. They did not
want to be in power when the religious apparatus flexed its power and
there was conflict between the civil and religious apparatus of this
country.
The
question then becomes, why would Anwar want to stir this issue up now?
Together with the mufti bill, this only consolidates power with the
religious class, which includes PAS and the far religious elements in
all mainstream Malaysian parties and further diminishes the influence of
the supposedly secular DAP.
And what of the DAP? Lim Guan Eng in
2017 described the “cheap politics” of Umno and its allies and wondered
why anyone would continue to support Umno after its mass deception with
regard to the political gamesmanship of this Act.
As reported
in the press - “Clearly the perks and privileges of government office
are more important than principles. Yet, the non-Umno BN component
parties try to cover up their failure by pinning the blame on DAP.”
Furthermore, just three years ago, Lim said that Malaysians don’t buy that this Act will not affect non-Muslims.
Religion’s conflict with secularism
Just
last year the prime minister made two statements when it came to the
religion of the state and its conflict with secular democratic norms.
The
first was “There is no issue about complete separation of state and
religion because Islam is the religion of the federation, but it is not a
theocratic state where you can impose Islamic laws on everybody,
including non-Muslims.”
The second was “The majority of Muslims have been told that secularism means complete separation of state and religion based on the influence and experience of the Holy Roman Empire.
“Now, that’s not how Muslims should understand it. The state has secular elements but religious values must be embedded.”
When
anyone talks about “embedded” in the Malaysian context, we have to be
clear about one thing. What we are talking about is not only legal
measures but also norms and observances by not only the federal
government but also state governments.
What we are talking about
is a bundle of legal, cultural and religious diktats merged with
political narratives that determine policy. This has led to numerous
cases where non-Muslims have been subject to religious laws over the
decades.
Some examples
Here are but a few examples. Non-Muslims have had their children unilaterally converted and kidnapped, with the state security apparatus colluding with the religious bureaucracy to undermine civil law.
Non-Muslims economic livelihoods have been threatened
by religious policy because our business is deemed haram. Non-Muslims
have had religious vigilantes walking around shopping malls demanding we submit to their sensitivities.
Non-Muslim school-going children have been subjected to religious enticement by teachers. Non-Muslim religious texts have been vilified by foreign or local preachers.
Non-Muslim
places of worship have been subjected to the scrutiny of provocateurs
who claim we are secretly converting Muslims. Non-Muslims have had our religions demonised by the political establishment to secure votes.
Non-Muslims have been told to dress decently as though they are, by nature, indecent people and little napoleons hold court in government buildings. Non-Muslims have been told that they are the cause of corruption in this country.
Hence
this farcical idea that laws and religious norms embedded in the
political system will not affect non-Muslims is pure horse manure.
Of
course, the narrative now is that this Act is not the same as when PAS
had advocated for it and apparently non-Muslim stakeholders would be
involved in this process.
So
wait, non-Muslims have been warned not to interfere in the religion of
the state and now we are expected to believe that non-Muslim
stakeholders’ input would be considered?
God’s honest truth is
that the narrative that religious laws will not affect non-Muslims is
merely a talking point. No government will ever give this talking point
legal effect.
Indeed no political coalition will ever guarantee
that religious laws will not affect non-Muslims. Why, because those who
advocate for these kinds of laws understand that religious laws
influence and erode democratic guardrails.
Will DAP support FT Mufti Bill? By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, October 14, 2024
Malaysiakini : The always vocal (why this woman is unelected is, I dare say,
criminal) Siti Kasim, who knows a thing or two about religious
malfeasances and how it affects the majority community, reminded
non-Muslims in this country in a Facebook post.
“Don’t
think you’ll escape, for eventually there’s bound to be a domino effect
… If the bill gets through, it’ll be difficult to turn back; I hope MPs
in Parliament will take notice by not letting the bill through.”
Passing the buck, as usual
Communications
Minister Fahmi Fadzil, in defending the legitimacy of this bill, pushed
a disingenuous Madani narrative that needs to be debunked. These four
talking points are typical Madani deflections.
1. The first involves the rather wonky claim that this bill mirrors the Sabah Fatwa enactment.
Notice
how Fahmi does not elaborate on the similarities or the similarities in
civil and religious standings between the proposed bill and the Sabah
fatwa but merely makes a general claim as to the similarity between the
two.
Furthermore, unlike Sabah, religious disruption between the
various communities emanates from the federal government. For example,
the recent backtracking of the mandatory halal certification for non-Muslims came from Putrajaya.
2.
Fahmi claimed - “At the same time, there is no increase in the mufti’s
powers; it remains the same as now. The difference is that we want to
bring it as a parliamentary Act to clarify its jurisdiction, so there
are no claims or disputes about the mufti’s authority,”
The
question we should ask is if the powers of the mufti are the same, then
why is there a need for clarification of jurisdiction? For any rational
person, I think the answer is obvious, right?
So
what the Madani state wants is this - “….the mufti’s position will have
more constitutional and legal order in our country,” which is the
objective of the “Green Wave”.
3.
“Do not view this matter with prejudice; we need to be legally aware.”
cautioned Fahmi, which is strange because the personalities offering the
most vocal criticisms are all lawyers.
4. And finally, this gem.
Fahmi also pointed out that the group’s definition of an Islamic state
has a negative connotation, implying a transformation similar to that in
the Middle East or other regions.
Here it is, the charge of
Islamophobia when it comes to dissent against religious laws or agendas.
This is the play of the Madani state and the “Green Wave” whenever
anyone dares to dissent against the theocratic agendas of power brokers.
It
is not enough that you believe in the position of Islam in the state;
you must be complicit in the strengthening of its scope and powers as
well. Otherwise, you are labelled ignorant or Islamophobic.
Islamisation agenda
I
would argue that this proposed bill is the Madani version of PAS’ Act
355 bill to enhance syariah punishments, and it is being used by the
Madani state as a test case for how far they can push the state’s
religious agenda.
And what did the DAP think of this proposed Act 355? Well, then DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said it best
in 2021 when he stated - “Malaysians remain unconvinced with Idris
Ahmad’s assurances in Parliament yesterday that the religious rights of
freedom of non-Muslims will not be affected by the proposed Act 355 and
the bill to restrict the propagation of non-Islamic religions.”
So,
when DAP’s Bangi MP Syahredzan Johan said, “The provision relating to a
fatwa in the mufti bill is not novel. Many provisions in state
enactment relating to mufti’s fatwa bind Muslims,” this lends credence
to the idea that this really is a test case for the Madani regime and
how they intend to shape religious policies in the states they run and
on a federal level.
Let
me be very clear. There is not one shred of empirical evidence that the
religion of the state and policies from religious laws do not affect
non-Muslims in this country.
Whenever a religious and racial
bully warns non-Muslims not to trespass into Islamic domains, it is with
the understanding that religious laws do affect non-Muslims. That is
the whole point of the bullying.
Mariam Mokhtar wondered if the
recent controversies involving the Umno youth leader and DAP were merely
bully-boy tactics to subdue opposition to this bill.
Who knows,
which is why the title of this piece is “Will the DAP support the mufti
bill?” and not “Will the DAP oppose the mufti bill?”
DAP must stand fast
The
DAP should object to this proposed bill, and they should do it because
the people who vote for them would be affected by this proposed bill.
Keep in mind that the DAP is supposed to have a secular agenda, and it
is hardwired in its party’s constitution.
DAP secretary-general
Anthony Loke not only reaffirmed the party’s secular agenda but also
noted that all parties in the coalition understood this agenda and had
agreed to play nice.
As reported in the press - “…..the DAP secretary-general said his party need not drop the secular nation agenda and its slogan ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ merely to reap support from other ethnic groups.”
Loke
also said - “Before forming the unity government, all parties agreed
not to touch on each party’s principles and constitutions.”
So
this is the perfect opportunity to test these ideas. The DAP not only
has to object to this bill but this should not come as a surprise to its
coalition partners.
The state wants its non-Muslim partners to be
complicit in the formation of religious laws. Why? Because it not only
gives a fig leaf of democratic legitimacy but also demonstrates
religious and racial superiority over its partners.
Any kind of religious law - no matter the religion - is, in reality, a suicide pact.
We
are constantly told not to interfere in the affairs of Muslims even
though these issues affect us as Malaysians. Do you think that Muslim
politicians in this country will ever sign a document that pledges that
non-Muslims will not be affected by Islamic law?
They will never
even moot such legislation or debate it; they would instead use the
system’s security apparatus to crack down on such speech or proposals.
What
they will do is create legislation like this proposed bill, which they
say only affects Muslims but has far-reaching consequences for all
Malaysians.
The prime minister has asked the religious minister to
explain this bill, but we have to remember that it is the same minister
who caused problems
within the coalition with his proposed mandatory halal certification
for businesses not serving pork and alcohol, and this reeks of passing
the buck.
If you are a non-Muslim in this country, you only have
to answer one question. Do you believe that laws affecting the majority
will not affect the minority?
MyPCVE initiative is a punchline to tragic joke By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, October 07, 2024
Malaysiakini : Hence, any racial and religious debates are going to fall within
those lines and any attempt to address this situation has been shut
down, even more so in the era of Madani.
These
days, the non-Muslim polity cannot rely on their political power
brokers to dissent against the hegemonic religious and racial policies
because these power brokers belong to a coalition which is grounded in
the Malay uber alles paradigm - which Anwar and his allies at one time rebelled against or at least wanted to reform.
Now,
since the prime minister has said that “the plan needs to be strictly
implemented and exposed to the people, especially when there are
quarters in the country using racial elements to threaten peace” -
rational Malaysians have to ask themselves which quarter they belong to.
Understanding the irony
Mainstream
political rhetoric and policy are determined by race and religion and,
more often than not, share many similarities with the extreme ideas the
state claims it wants to constrain.
What we are dealing with is
groups or individuals who think that the state is not going far enough
when it comes to the theocratic state project or, for political reasons,
believe that race and religion are under siege.
We are dealing
with groups or individuals who think that there should only be one R in
the 3R (race, religion and royalty), which is what makes them so
dangerous to the mainstream Malay political establishment.
However,
the problem is that because of the way politics is defined in this
country, what we are left with is ample recruiting grounds in the forms
of polarised universities, unchecked madrasahs and independent preachers
who are coddled by the state and, of course, a political apparatus
which radicalises mainstream politics with race and religion.
Non-Muslims
are told to fear the “Green Wave” on one hand and the other, have to
accept the theocratic ideas and policies of a supposedly moderate
coalition.
In 2015, Joseph Chinyong Liow wrote a piece
for the Brookings Institute titled “Malaysia’s ISIS conundrum” which is
applicable even today - “…rather than extol the virtues and
conciliatory features of Islam’s rich tradition, many Malay Muslim
political leaders have instead chosen to use religion to amplify
difference, to reinforce extreme interpretations of Malay Muslim denizen
rights, and to condemn the ‘other’ (non-Muslims) as a threat to these
rights.
“For
fear of further erosion of legitimacy and political support, the Malay
Muslim leadership of the country have in their public statements circled
the wagons, allowing vocal right-wing ethno-nationalist and religious
groups to preach incendiary messages against Christians and Hindus with
impunity.
“In extreme cases, they have even flippantly referred to
fellow Malaysians who are adherents to other religious faiths as
‘enemies of Islam’. Even state-sanctioned Friday sermons have
occasionally taken to referring to non-Muslim Malaysians as ‘enemies of
Islam’.”
Akmalvs Kok
Keep
in mind that by claiming to defend the motherland, what Umno Youth
chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh is saying is that he believes that DAP MP
Teresa Kok or what she said, goes against the motherland.
Isn’t Malaysia Kok’s motherland as well? This is a motherland where Kok does not have the special privileges that Akmal has.
This
is the motherland where the social contract binds the way Kok expresses
herself when it comes to issues deemed sensitive to the majority but is
grounded in democratic first principles. This is the motherland where
the sensibilities of the majority trump everything else, even
utilitarian ideas for the betterment of all.
Remember when PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang claimed that the G25 group were more dangerous than Al Maunah?
Now,
claiming that a retired group of civil servants are more dangerous than
a group of religious extremists who actually murdered Malaysians is indicative of the kind of propaganda used against liberal or moderate Muslims in this country.
The
fact that any kind of progressive movement or ideas are deemed
"deviant" and anti-Malay Muslim should tell us something about how the
state defines "extreme".
Let us break down religious or racial
extremism, for instance. Take the quote that opens this piece. Forget
for a moment that this was coming from the Umno youth leader.
What
would a rational person think, when he or she reads this - “I will
never surrender, let alone apologise. Because I was taught to defend
religion, race and my motherland even if I have to put my life on the
line.”
Well, a rational person would think that the person who
said this has obviously been indoctrinated and radicalised to wage war
against people, even citizens of his or her own country, in the name of
race and religion, even if it meant martyrdom.
So,
what is this plan actually going to do in terms of combatting the
quarters who are using racial elements to threaten the peace?
Keep
in mind that for the majority, race and religion are not mutually
exclusive. Can the Madani regime give an example of racial and religious
extremism?
These days, fighting for secular or democratic rights
is defined as "extremism", while those fighting to keep the racial and
religious barriers up are defined as following the Constitution.
There
is a disconnect between the state security apparatus (or at least those
who want to do their jobs) and their political masters.
These
committed security personnel who tread where angels dare not, do the
rough work necessary for the rest of us to sleep peacefully in our beds,
have their work hampered by policies of the state and politicians who
have used the religion of the state as a weapon and now find it turned
on them.
The Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH)
scandal is more than just a horrific instance of child sexual abuse but
also how the state security apparatus, the religious bureaucracy, and
the political class, for whatever reasons, allowed this to happen under
their watch.
This is why this programme is a punchline to a tragic joke. The enemy has always been within.
First, it means that these
cops were not going “rogue” but were acting under the instructions of
these “outside religious groups”.
Now, why they were following the
order of these outsiders is yet to be determined, but the Global Ikhwan
Services and Business Holdings (GISBH) scandal has exposed the extent
of how religious and political influence is hardwired into the state
security apparatus.
We
know from the Suhakam inquiry into the kidnapping of Amri, for
instance, that his wife, Norhayati Ariffin, had claimed that her husband
was taken by the Special Branch.
It
was because this was relayed to her by Perlis Special Branch officer
Shamzaini Mohd Daud, who later denied revealing any such information.
However,
“…the panel accepted Norhayati’s version of events as they had found
the police officer’s testimony to be ‘incongruous’ and ‘full of
inconsistencies’.”
Keep in mind that the Suhakam found that not
only were the two kidnappings similar, but the tradecraft displayed in
both kidnappings were nearly identical.
So, what we can surmise is
this was a professional removal, which is a far cry from how the state
security apparatus treated these two cases of kidnappings.
Furthermore,
Suhakam noted that a Special Branch asset, Saiful Bahari Abdul Aziz,
whose car was present in both cases, has persistently refused to
testify.
But wait. The task force created during the Pakatan
Harapan regime led by former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was also
a troubling read.
It’s because, as reported in the press, not
only was Saiful a person of interest who needed to be questioned, but 10
other people attended a meeting in October, a month before Amri’s
disappearance, which included “Perlis state mufti Mohd Asri Zainul
Abidin and several police officers.”
The fact that both men were under observation by the Selangor and Perlis state religious boards should tell us something about these kidnappings.
Keep
in mind that the state security apparatus had attempted to paint Koh’s
kidnapping as related to a 2017 shootout in Kedah, which the panel
refused to accept because – “they had found testimonies on this
operation from the police and former inspector-general of police Khalid
Abu Bakar to be distorted, illogical, and ‘full of inconsistencies and
material contradictions’.”
Citizens of this country were kidnapped
in a paramilitary style, and all circumstantial evidence points to the
connivance of the state.
At this point, I am less interested in why Koh and Amri were kidnapped, but I am keen to know who ordered it.
While
the former Umno state may be complicit in covering these crimes, what
we have witnessed so far is that because the country was run by an
incompetent kleptocrat, there have been factions within the government
who may have been operating without supervision.
This is what
happens when the machinery of government is used to cover up the alleged
crimes of their political masters, and nobody is interested in minding
the house.
Learning from GISBH scandal
What
has the GISBH scandal taught us? It showed us that the state security
apparatus, the religious bureaucracy and the political class, for
whatever reasons, turned a blind eye or were wilfully ignorant of crimes
and abuse going on in a big Muslim enterprise.
Now, you can
either believe that these institutions were staggeringly incompetent (do
not get me wrong, I could make a case for that) or they are elements
within these organisations which were sympathetic to GISBH.
And we have to apply the same kind of thinking to the disappearance of Koh and Amri.
Who had the power (if this allegation is true) to order a tactical squad to kidnap Malaysians for whatever reasons?
Who
had the authority to issue such commands, and who felt secure enough
that their crime would go unsanctioned by any elected government?
And
who had the political influence to concoct such a manoeuvre that
bypassed the traditional state security apparatus and mete out whatever
fate befell these people?
Whoever these people are, they are
confident that the narratives of the state security apparatus would
shield them from whatever repercussions or sanctions of the Madani
regime.
Anwar's dangerous false premise By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Wednesday, September 25, 2024
Malaysiakini : What Anwar can point to are organisations, political parties and
individuals who have reacted against the intrusion of Islam into
non-Muslim economic and social spheres, which we were told would not
happen under the so-called social contract or Muslim voices who fear
that the religion of the state would curtail their democratic rights.
Has the prime minister condemned the hate speech of religious extremists who have labelled non-believers “kafir”?
Has Anwar condemned the persecution of non-Muslim businesses by provocateurs from his own coalition?
Has he stood up for progressive Muslims, who stand alone most often against the extremism of the far religious right?
Has
the premier offered a religious narrative which is removed from
hate-filled rhetoric and policies of those on the “other side, who claim
to be the only Islamic party“?
Snake in the grass
Religious provocations come from the practitioners of the state-sponsored religion and not from minority belief systems.
Such
provocations include threats to burn holy texts, disrespecting
religious symbols or icons, investigations into possible proselytising,
claims against other religions, banning of words, and imposing dress
codes in public institutions.
Unilateral conversions, unlawful
conversions of minors, religious kidnapping in custody cases,
rehabilitation centres, and seditious comments against specific
religions are also part of this.
Two points need to be made about the prime minister’s claim on people who do not want any mention of Islam.
The
first is that this type of strategy is employed by politicians who do
not want any form of pushback against Islamic policies, even if said
policies encroach into non-Muslim rights.
Secondly, when it comes
to the non-Muslim political class, they have bent over backwards in
their attempts to be supportive of such policies, and when it comes to
objecting to such religious intrusions into non-Muslsim rights, they
have to object with one hand tied behind their backs, lest they are
accused of stirring up 3R (race, religion, royalty) issues.
Islamophobia
is something religious political operatives use when attempting to
impose religious policies or restrict free speech.
Non-Muslims hit by ricochet
Mind
you, if there was a strict separation between policies which affect
Muslims and non-Muslims, and there was empirical evidence to support
such a position, then non-Malays would not have a fear of Islam.
Instead,
the rules that apply to Muslims only have always touched non-Muslims
and defined our economic, social and political realities.
Have you noticed that “the other side” also uses the same kind of strategy when it comes to religious policy?
These
days, anyone who objects to religious policy encroaching upon their
democratic rights is considered Islamophobic or does not want any
mention of Islam.
If, for example, you object to any Islamic
policy which affects non-Muslim economic interests, are you Islamophobic
and do not want any mention of Islam?
Inter-religious rivalry
Meanwhile, claiming the other side thinks other Muslims not of their tribe are deviant, evil and oppressive misses the point.
We
have religious bureaucracies, state and federal, who are the
gatekeepers of Islam. They are always on the lookout for deviancy and
evil and have been called oppressive in their overreach and
policymaking.
Hence, inter-religious rivalries and schisms for religious dominance are the basis for political power.
The recent Global Ikhwan Service and Business Holding (GISBH) horror story
is an example of how factionalism, schisms, religious personalities and
the religious bureaucracy, coupled with big business, form the central
narrative of religious hegemony.
The
threat has always been the enemies within and not the propaganda that
non-Muslim faiths are a threat to the religion of the state.
Furthermore,
Anwar’s other side argument only makes sense if you can point to a
religious narrative that is different from PAS/Perikatan Nasional’s.
Can
the prime minister do this? For example, a religious bureaucracy has
labelled Sisters in Islam as deviant. Has any religious bureaucracy
labelled anything PAS has said or done as deviant within the confines of
the religion of the state?
Sure, you can say that Pakatan Harapan
states are not like PAS-run states, but this is a function of ethnic
democracy and not religious ideology.
Keep in mind that religious
bureaucracies still hold sway in Harapan-controlled states, but they do
not have the overreach they do because they lack the political capital
in terms of vote share to make their presence truly felt.
Anwar’s
false premise is self-serving and extremely dangerous because it
conforms to far-right religious narratives and further marginalises
voices that actually want reform.
The factual premise is that the
prime minister, on one hand, wants to strengthen the position of Islam,
and, on the other, claims that Islamophobia is a threat to the religion
of the state.
The reality has always been that religious fascism is a threat to national unity.
GISBH exposes underbelly of M'sian religious enterprise By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, September 16, 2024
Malaysiakini : “In addition, they were also made to watch other children undergo the same predicament.”
So,
the question becomes, what exactly was Jakim doing all this time?
Furthermore, it says a lot about how child welfare agencies in this
country were carrying out their duties.
Jakim’s
defence that they are not an “enforcement agency” when it comes to this
issue is laughable because they have made it their mission to be front
and centre when it comes to any kind of perceived trespass into their
religious domains.
Indeed, they have publicly played a central role in everything from the “Allah socks” issue to the recent outrage that Teresa Kok finds herself embroiled in.
Keep
in mind that the IGP has said all this was based on six months of
intelligence gathering before this issue gained traction on social
media. All these conflicting timelines, when children were allegedly
abused, do nothing for the credibility of the state security apparatus
or Jakim.
Also, note where the IGP said, “I urge former GISBH
members who lodged police reports before retracting them to come forward
and help in investigations.”
Oblivious, passive authorities
We
should ask ourselves why the reports were retracted by these former
members. What exactly is going on when it takes traction in social media
before a case warrants attention by the state security apparatus,
especially where children are abused and the state security apparatus
has to make fait accompli declarations to reassure the public?
What we are talking about here is a federal agency funded to the tune of billions of ringgit,
whose presence is felt in every corner of this country and is a
cornerstone of the current Madani regime. And despite that, in an effort
to consolidate the religious narrative in this country, it was unaware
that children were sodomised and were taught to sodomise by their
caretakers.
Asri, one of the sacred cows of the mainstream
religious establishment, whose task which history has shown is to root
out “deviancy” in mainstream religious narratives - for him to claim
inaction on the part of Jakim is demonstrative of the kind of internal
machinations and schemes currently going on in the religious mainstream.
This
gives some sort of probative value to what the GISBH CEO said in the
quote that opens this piece and gives weight to what Asri implied. Was
there some sort of leniency that led to inaction, in the name of
religion?
Covering up crime
GISBH CEO
Nasiruddin Mohd Ali claimed there were cases of sodomy but they were
handled internally because ”GISBH recognised they constituted a legal
offence”.
So, in other words, they covered up a criminal offence and, so far, nobody from the state discovered this.
PAS
president Abdul Hadi Awang says his party has regulatory bodies that
can prevent sexual abuse from happening at schools run by the party.
“The situation in PAS is under control, Insya Allah. We have lajnah-lajnah (committees) led by our leaders to regulate (the institutions).”
The
situation is under control in PAS? Is Hadi admitting there is a similar
situation but it is under control in PAS? And really, GISBH had its own
mechanism for this kind of situation and it merely meant that criminal
activities were covered up.
Who’s responsible?
Remember the tahfizschool fire in 2017, which killed 21 children and two adults, and later, two 16-year-old boys were charged for starting the fire?
The
same kind of institutional malfunction contributed to the deaths of
these children and adults. The religious school where 21 children and
two adults died was operating illegally and had been warned for safety
violations.
The
manager of the school claimed that he registered his school with the
Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council, which apparently, unlike
the Kuala Lumpur City Hall, did not carry out safety checks.
Two
questions - does an Islamic body trump a civil one and does this mean
because the owner registered with an Islamic body, neither the owner nor
the state religious body in question bears any responsibility for the
deaths that occurred during their watch?
Then-federal territories minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor said, “Checks showed
that this particular premise had breached security guidelines, as it
only has one way in and out, which is dangerous in times of an
emergency.”
But of course, nothing was done about it at the time,
which resulted in the deaths of 21 children and two adults. So it is not
far-fetched to think that when something heinous happens when it comes
to religious enterprises in this country, especially those which are not
regulated, there is some sort of institutional malfeasance.
As
long as there is no independent oversight when it comes to religious
enterprises in this country, the lives of children will always be in
danger. This is a reality Malaysians are forced to live with.
Weaponising Teresa's discourse on halal cert issue By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, September 09, 2024
Malaysiakini : This Madani problem is solved when it comes to the unnecessary burden
for Muslim businesses in this country, but well, for non-Muslim
businesses, I suppose they can carry this unnecessary burden.
This perhaps points to the deeper policy-making impetus of successive ruling governments.
Bersatu’s Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal’s warning
to a sitting MP that her refusal to retract her statement would result
in an avalanche of police reports is merely further evidence that any
form of dissent or objection or differing political perspective when it
comes to the religion of the state has been weaponised.
Wan Fayhsal claimed that what Kok said had touched on the 3R (race, religion and royalty).
Another
recent example of this weaponisation comes from Malaysian Muslim
Lawyers' Association president Muhamad Hisham Marzuki who claimed that
any objections to the report that Jakim officers would be placed in government offices was seditious and reeked of Islamophobia.
"Moves
by certain quarters to continue playing to the propaganda that anything
Islam or syariah has no place in the public sphere in our country, save
for minor ceremonial purposes, reek of Islamophobia, rooted in hatred
towards Muslims and religious bodies in Malaysia,” he said.
So
what does this make MCA Youth secretary-general Saw Yee Fung who said:
"If Jakim is involved in the policy-making process of various
departments, it means that future governance will be guided by the core
values and principles of a particular religion, which will undoubtedly
compromise the principles of neutrality, objectivity, and fairness that
the government should uphold.”
In all these situations, Kok, the
Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism,
Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) and the MCA Youth were in effect defending
the democratic principles of this country, namely in the preamble of
the Rukun Negara which states -
Achieving a more perfect unity amongst the whole of her society;
Preserving a democratic way of life;
Creating a just society where the prosperity of the country can be enjoyed together in a fair and equitable manner;
Guaranteeing a liberal approach towards our traditional heritage that is rich and diverse;
Building a progressive society that will make use of science and modern technology.
So I guess this makes them seditious and Islamophobic or touching on the 3R?
Speakingup for rakyat
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim enabled Kok’s detractors when he said that her stance did not reflect Pakatan Harapan's position.
"There
is a problem... regulations are necessary so that Muslims do not feel
apprehensive. But if she (Kok) feels that the regulations are not
necessary in a certain area, discuss it properly," he said.
First off, Kok was voicing concerns about a religious Jakim policy that would affect non-Muslim businesses.
Secondly, she never said that there was no need for Jakim regulations. Kok is a seasoned politician in a ketuanan
(Malay supremacy) paradigm; hence, it is odious to imply that she meant
that regulations for Muslims, which are the purview of Jakim, were
unnecessary.
Lastly, she was right about placing an unnecessary
burden on Malay businesses, which is why the Umno ulama wing made the
suggestion it did.
Indeed, in response to the manufactured
backlash, Kok acknowledged that this country's halal certification was
one of the best in the world and that she supported it.
However,
she was also a representative of all ethnic communities in this country
and thus had to voice concerns that would affect everyone.
But
the most cogent point she made to rebut the prime minister, who claimed
she should have made her concerns known through the proper channels, was
to rightly point out that the de facto religious minister had mentioned
the Jakim proposal in “an open forum without prior engagement”.
So
the question then becomes, why wasn’t there prior engagement with
Harapan partners, and why are ministers suddenly making declarations
without discussing them with coalition partners?
More importantly,
in a public forum, Kok has every right to respond to another minister
without fear of inviting sanctions from the state security apparatus.
Not the first time
And all of this is not new.
In
2016, the Rubber Industry Smallholders Development Authority (Risda)
and the Malaysia Institute of International Islamic Cooperation (Ikiam)
proposed a “halal certification” that differentiated between halal
products produced by Muslims and non-Muslims.
Why, you ask? Well,
according to Risda at the time - "The need for another halal logo is to
distinguish products that were produced by Muslims against that of
non-Muslims besides helping Risda smallholding entrepreneurs and Muslim
entrepreneurs make forays into the halal markets locally and abroad."
Of course, Jakim had to issue a reminder.
"If Ikiam and Risda proceed with using a new halal logo for Muslim-made products (without Jakim's approval), it is an offence under the Trade Descriptions Act 2011 (Halal certification and identification) Order," it said.
Former law minister Zaid Ibrahim said:
“The deep understanding I can think of is that Jakim will make a lot of
money. Already, it’s a billion ringgit business, and if the purpose is
to make easy money, say so.”
Quashing dissent
Non-Muslims
are always warned not to interfere with the religion of the state. We
are told that the religion of the state only affects Muslims.
We
are told that secularism, progressive democratic values and the right to
defend them should not be at the expense of the religion of the state.
Indeed
the Madani regime has created a political climate which is detrimental
to dissent because DAP claimed to be the ones to hold the line against
the creeping Islamisation of this country. Now we are told to be fearful
of the “Green Wave”.
What are we really talking about here? Well,
it means that non-Muslims standing up for their rights would be going
against the 3R. It means that if you object to a policy based on
religious grounds, you are going against the 3Rs.
The fact that Kok is under investigation
is further evidence that any kind of dissent with regard to a religious
policy which affects non-Muslims would involve state security
intervention.
This, of course, is bad but what is worse is that
all the Madani regime is doing is laying the foundation for when a
theocratic state takes over.
Non-Muslim dissent against religious
extremism or interference has been weaponised. This is one of the first /
principles of a theocratic state.
All this is merely the logical conclusion to the don't spook the Malays mantra.
I
have no idea why anyone would defend policing through licensing or
legislation of social media platforms when the history of the press in
this country is one of self-censorship and clampdowns.
Do social
media companies need to operate in some sort of regulatory framework?
Yes, but in this country, regulatory frameworks are not used to
ameliorate the detrimental excesses of free speech as they do elsewhere.
Instead, it’s rather to curtail speech that the state deems offensive.
This is it in a nutshell.
Think about this for a minute. Every
other day we read about how posts on Facebook, Instagram or whatever
have resulted in the arrests and criminal proceedings of someone who
insulted the religion of the state, the royalty, or whatever it is that
spooks the majority. They were arrested and charged using existing laws.
Now
whether this goes against free speech or the principles as espoused by
Harapan is not the point, only that when it comes to acts that
jeopardise the (argued) safety and stability of this country, we have
more than enough laws to handle these problems.
There was a lot of schadenfreude when former prime minister Muhiddin Yassin was charged with insulting the royal institution. Bersatu political operatives bemoan that freedom of speech and expression are going down the drain.
These
people are hypocrites, not to mention architects and enablers of such
laws when in power, so nothing they say about this issue really matters.
However,
I do think that Muhyddin should not have been charged, because I do not
think someone like Fadiah Nadwa Fikri should have been investigated for
sedition for what she said about the royal institution.
In case some folks missed it, Fadiah was investigated
in 2018 for writing an article about the royal institution sparked by
the image of Anwar kissing the hand of the current Agong Sultan Ibrahim
Sultan Iskandar.
As
reported in the press - Fadiah’s article questioned Anwar’s move to
perpetuate a “feudal culture” at a time when monarchies in many other
parts of the world had been rendered supposedly obsolete.
Lest we spook the Malays
What
these laws are used for is not only to stifle discussion but also to
detract from the real issues facing this country. I’ll give you another
example. You know that recent AI-generated “Welcome to Afganu” image which had some political operatives’ knickers in a twist? What is the real issue here?
The
real issue is that a state in Malaysia has banned women from competing
in sports events because it went against the syariah-compliant dress
code. The real question is what does the prime minister, who talked
about the freedoms and rights of men and women in India, think about
this?
This
is the issue and not what the PAS Youth wing claims - “Day by day,
those who make fun of Islam are getting worse because they feel they
have strong connections that allow them to hide behind fake accounts.”
Remember the time PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said the people were confused about the Taliban and that the regime has now changed and is wiser, though still steadfast in its struggle to uphold Islam?
And
what of legitimate criticisms of the Islamic faith by various NGOs like
Sister in Islam, who are always on the receiving end of police reports
for tarnishing or insulting Islam; what about these types of “insults”?
Does quoting from religious texts which put religion in a bad light
qualify as an insult to the religion?
Look, we have a mainstream
political dogma that warns against spooking the Malays. We have a
political opposition that warns that the Malays are divided and
susceptible to manipulation by non-Malay political factions which are
detrimental to the well-being of the Malay community.
Less free
speech means that these ideologies will flourish further because we have
a mainstream political ideology that proclaims some are more equal than
others.
Keep this in mind, what this Madani regime is doing by
curbing free speech and expression in the name of safety and stability
is merely enabling the far religious right in this country.
This is not the kind of Merdeka people deserve. Or maybe we do.
Are you sure about
that? Sure, the MCMC can use its bully tactics on local enterprises.
Just last year, a group of veteran media professionals issued a
statement calling for the MCMC to stop acting like big brother and block news sites.
“We
absolutely cannot accept any attempts to use government agencies like
the MCMC to question, censor, or block portals and online news content.
“The
current government is chosen on the basis of its promise to enable the
free flow of information and to guarantee freedom of the press.
Complaints from media practitioners that their websites are being
blocked are on the rise; this is an unhealthy trend that must be stopped
immediately.”
What would happen if the state decides to shut down
social media platforms that government agencies rely on to transmit
information to citizens?
What would happen to local businesses that rely on these platforms to generate business and communicate with their customers?
What
would happen to state security services that rely on these platforms to
warn citizens of possible danger or state rescue services that rely on
these platforms to communicate with citizens in danger relief areas?
Facebook
and WhatsApp go off for a couple of hours and the whole country is
plunged into some sort of existential crisis, and the government really
thinks that it could shut down these platforms and there would be no
blowback from the citizenry, but more importantly, how it would affect
essential services from healthcare to security?
All about control
What
the government hopes to do with this licensing scheme is to attempt to
regulate the flow of information in this country. Why? Because the state
understands that the opposition has a far better grasp of social media
tactics than it does.
What
PN has demonstrated, for instance, with its use of social media
influencers and viral memes mocking the government is that they can sway
voters, especially young voters.
The Straits Times under the headline “Social media censorship in Malaysia surges during PM Anwar’s first year in power” highlighted this exact issue.
“Political
content on TikTok is dominated by the opposition alliance Perikatan
Nasional and critics have accused the government of silencing dissent by
targeting content on the popular video-sharing platform.
“PN’s
success on TikTok was widely credited for the unexpected gains it made
at the 2022 general election, with both PAS and Bersatu more than
doubling their seat haul from four years earlier.”
Let me be very
clear. Social media companies are not the victims here. Indeed,
revelations by Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen argued that
Facebook prioritises profits over safety.
Her opening remarks before the US Senate are a good indication of how social media platforms operate.
“I’m here today because I believe Facebook’s products harm children, stoke division and weaken our democracy.
“These
problems are solvable. A safer, free-speech-respecting, more enjoyable
social media is possible. But there is one thing that I hope everyone
takes away from these disclosures, it is that Facebook can change but is
clearly not going to do so on its own.”
However,
this is a separate issue from what is going on here. If Malaysia really
wants to have a discussion with Facebook about its algorithms and how
hate speech and elements detrimental to a secular democracy are in
danger because of the corporate practices of Meta, then, by all means,
have that discussion with Mark Zuckerberg.
But this is really not about defending secular democracy, is it?
Licensing won’t curb cybercrimes
Deputy Communications Minister Teo Nie Ching
as reported in the press said: “…that the measure is essential to curb
the rising cases of cybercrimes, particularly sexual crimes against
children and online fraud in Malaysia, which have become increasingly
alarming.”
I submit there are more than enough laws and personnel
to handle such issues if (and this is a big if) these laws and personnel
were not used by the government to clamp down on every person or
organisation which it views as a threat to their political survival.
As reported in the Straits Times
piece above, “According to sources involved in social media in the
public and private sector, these demands for restrictions are continuing
to grow in 2024, with the authorities dedicating personnel to trawl
platforms for offensive content. ‘A vast majority are political in
nature. Over 90 percent possibly,’ said a person involved in the content
restriction process.”
Furthermore, when it comes to the issues highlighted, there is no evidence that any such licence would reduce such activities
What
reduces such activities is good, old-fashioned police tradecraft, which
means laws and personnel have to work diligently with these social
media platforms to curb activities and this involves a sustained working
relationship with these platforms.
It
also means engagement with the public but, more importantly, training
personnel in the latest methods to curb such criminal activities, which
would mean of course close relationships with state security personnel
from other countries and learning from them how they deal with such
activities.
Ultimately, what the Madani regime is doing is
building more dictatorial foundations for the theocratic state to
further build on.
To be honest, I don’t think even PN would have
come up with such a gambit because they understand that there are enough
dictatorial tools in the box to handle dissent.
This is another way the Madani state shoots itself in the foot.
Flight Attendants for Islamic Airline Hijackers By Daniel Greenfield
Friday, August 02, 2024
Robert Spencer : Other flight attendants wearing terrorist flag pins were seen on
Spirit and JetBlue: whose flight attendants are represented by AFA-CWA.
JetBlue was accused of “blatant antisemitism” after calling the police on a Jewish passenger after he objected to a terrorist flag pin.
The AFA-CWA may be ‘ground zero’ for the explosion of terrorist flag pins on planes.
Sara Nelson, the president of AFA CWA, had previously weaponized the
union for partisan attacks, but this is the first time a union of flight
attendants is working to help terrorists.
Some of the same Islamic terrorists who butchered flight attendants on September 11.
Hamas, which the AFA CWA is trying to save as part of the so-called
National Labor Network for Ceasefire (NLNC), is an arm of the Muslim
Brotherhood. As was Al Qaeda whose core emerged out of a splinter group
of the Muslim Brotherhood. Osama bin Laden had been a member of the
Brotherhood. Intervening to save Hamas in Gaza is the same thing as
saving Al Qaeda.
The AFA-CWA press release described President Sara Nelson as a “a
consistent social justice supporter” and claimed that the union was
trying to stop Israel’s attacks on Hamas because “aviation’s first
responders bring people together around the world. Saving lives comes
first.”
As Americans found out on September 11, saving lives in the air
requires fighting terrorists, not surrendering to them. The AFA-CWA’s
attempt to save terrorists will only cost more lives.
Including those of flight attendants.
Unlike the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, which is an
independent union that represents American Airlines flight attendants
and maintains a memorial to the heroic flight attendants killed on 9/11, the AFA CWA is an extremist organization linked to the far left.
While the AFA part stands for the Association of Flight Attendants,
the CWA part means that the union is actually a subset of the
Communications Workers of America. The CWA had already issued its own
demand that Israel stop attacking Hamas. As has the AFL-CIO that the CWA
is affiliated with. Rather than representing flight attendants, the
AFA-CWA is part of a larger leftist political machine whose roots are
not in the workplace, but in the government-union complex.
AFA-CWA President Sara Nelson, who was being considered for a ‘labor’
cabinet position in the Biden administration, has done quite well at
the expense of actual labor. Records show that while the average flight
attendant earns less than $70,000, Nelson made nearly $180,000.
Nelson is married to fellow union honcho, David Borer, who is the
general counsel for the American Federation of Government Employees.
Borer’s salary has been estimated at $290,000. Together this ‘union household’ pulls down nearly half a million dollars a year.
That may explain how Sara Nelson and David Borer’, whose unions are
both under the AFL-CIO umbrella, can afford to live in Chevy Chase, an
extremely wealthy D.C. area neighborhood where the elite reside and
other political government operatives make their home.
Nelson is an ally of Sen. Bernie Sanders who has repeatedly attacked
Israel for defending itself. And like Sanders, Nelson has learned to
live quite well while shouting about class warfare.
The AFA CWA’s efforts to save Islamic terrorists, who murder flight
attendants, show that the union no longer represents flight attendants
or Americans, but a class of radical activists who hate America and
support its enemies. And they want to fly the colors of those enemies.
Flight attendants, like all of us, have a choice. We can be like
Betty Ong and Amy Sweeney who resisted the Islamic terrorists on
September 11, or like Sara Nelson who defends them.
On September 11, Arab Muslim had to hijack planes to fly them into
buildings. But now there are radical flight attendants who don’t even
need to be hijacked to support airline hijackers.
Olympic attire and the propaganda of diversity By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, July 29, 2024
Malaysiakini : Some folks may have missed this but Malaysia recently experienced the
passing of one of our great sportspeople - M Dattaya. He was a
gold-winning hammer thrower and a silver-medal discus thrower at several
international meets.
A gentle giant who left an impression on his
fellow athletes and whose passing reminds us of the complex bonds
non-Malays have for their beloved country. He was also a freelance
journalist in the 1980s for a couple of national publications.
Even in his day, the spectre of racism brought him to rage but he soldiered on.
Pervasive racism in sports
As
reported in the press by the great former sports journalist George Das
in 1973, Dattaya’s career suffered a blow - “… the late sprinter
Sabapathy told him the then Malaysian Amateur Athletics Union president
Ghazali Shafie was not happy that the team was made up of all Indians,
calling them the Madras team.”
Dattaya was so furious that he
brought down the door to his room in Maba House. His brutal punch
knocked the door down, said Das.
Sabapathy wrote in an article
- “All of us were angry, totally dejected and offended by the racial
labelling. We felt let down and rejected by our own country.”
Depending
on what you believe, things are supposed to be different now, or are
they? What are we talking about when we talk about diversity? Is
diversity really celebrated here in Malaysia or is it really just
propaganda meant to justify political and social paradigms?
Just last year, football coach B Sathianathan highlighted pervasive racism in sports after the whole conversion to Islam fiasco that was highlighted in the press.
He
said: “Since 10 to 15 years ago, I have been getting complaints from
parents, usually ethnic Indians or Chinese, saying their children are
being sidelined from joining football teams.
“Most of them would
say that teachers only picked Malay students to join the team, even
though their own children have talent and potential.
“Such issues
did not occur during my childhood. This can be seen in the national
hockey team of the past, which was led by various races. There was even
more non-Malay participation.”
Was it all just a mirage?
Keep in mind what Yeoh said when she was castigating
the admittedly racial and religiously provocative statements of former
Malaysian badminton player Bong Guang Yik (for which he has apologised).
“I believe that religion has never disturbed the performance of athletes and sports. This has never been a problem in Malaysia.
“I
repeat my position - sports must be free of racism and politics. All
national athletes are a source of inspiration for the country and are
advised to be careful with their social media content.”
So I ask you, is diversity of any kind a foundational value in this country or is this all merely propaganda?
Now,
of course, this may not always have been the case, as many old timers
like myself like to point to, but are our experiences reflective of the
reality of how things are or were? Was all this diversity just a mirage?
So in a way, this Malaya outfit reflects what Malaysia truly is.
Enflaming brewery donations par for the course for PAS By R Nadeswaran
Thursday, July 25, 2024
Malaysiakini : Why is the issue being resurrected?
For over
30 years, breweries in Malaysia have been raising money for vernacular
schools and charitable organisations without a fuss.
Deputy Education Minister Wong Kah Woh said Tiger Beer raised over RM400 million for Chinese primary schools in that period.
But
last week, the Education Ministry raised a related issue: “The ministry
takes this seriously, and we wish to remind school administrators to
adhere to existing guidelines when it comes to organising programmes and
receiving donations.
“And this covers the prohibition of
receiving donations from gains made through gambling activities,
cigarette manufacturers, alcoholic beverage makers, and its likes as
they could jeopardise our students physically, intellectually.”
Why
the resurrection after all these years? The practice has been going on
for 30 years without any problems. When religion is intertwined with
politics, the whole issue takes a different and, perhaps, a dangerous
dimension.
What prompted it was a group photograph of a
presentation mock cheque with the brewery company logo on it. Deputy
Housing and Local Government Minister Aiman Athirah Sabu was among the
dozen people in it.
Selangor PAS Youth chief Mohamed Sukri Omar (top pic) took to Facebook to criticise Aiman, calling the matter an embarrassment.
“If
this is how an Amanah leader is going to behave, Islam’s sanctity will
be under threat by liberalisation masked as Islam,” he said on Facebook.
How does holding a piece of cardboard with a beer logo pose a threat or challenge the purity of a religion?
This
happens when two parties compete to see whose shade of green is
brighter. The party that shouts louder wins, regardless of how illogical
or irrational their conduct is.
Instead of standing on her ground, Aiman issued a condescending apology.
“I
believe people understand the situation and will not fall for the
slander being spread. People make mistakes, and in any case, I apologise
to those who may have been slighted by this,” Sinar Harian reported her as saying.
Transport Minister Anthony Loke said he would seek the cabinet’s view about revising the ministry’s guidelines at the cabinet meeting today.
“The
guideline should not have such restrictions, at least not for Chinese
primary schools,” he said. However, Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek
ruled out providing exemptions or reviewing guidelines that bar schools
from receiving funds generated from selling tobacco products and
alcoholic beverages.
So, will the issue be discussed and debated
or will the Madani government bow to the wishes of the majority who use
race and religion to pander to the Malay-Muslim electorate?
Will Teoh Beng Hock be a reckoning for MACC? By Commander S THAYAPARAN (Retired) Royal Malaysian Navy
Monday, July 22, 2024
Malaysiakini : Harapan to blame for state’s inaction
Teoh’s
demise is also an indictment against the Harapan alliance and the
political operatives who stood by the former DAP political aide’s family
when it was politically profitable but abandoned them when in power.
What
we have to understand is that the questions and possible answers to
Teoh’s death are political. It should not be but it is just as the
Indira Gandhi case is a religious one, these cases tragically point to
the dysfunction of the investigative services of this country.
It
is not malicious (even though partisans may feel that it is) to recall
the justifications of political operatives for the inactions of those
with power when it came to the closure of the death of their fallen
comrade.
Lim Guan Eng attempted to shift the blame for the failure
to get justice for Teoh’s family to former prime minister Muhyiddin
Yassin.
This was just another example of how totally ineffectual
Harapan political operatives were in solving long-standing issues that
are important for a certain section of their supporters but also
reframing a system they campaigned on.
Can you see the same pattern today?
The
fact of the matter is that Harapan is to blame for the inaction of the
state when it came to discovering the truth behind Teoh’s murder.
How
dare Lim peddle the nonsense that it was “agreed” by the cabinet to
reopen the investigation but the then-home minister, Muhyiddin, was not interested in pursuing the case.
Indeed,
linking the inaction on Teoh’s death to the then-Harapan government
with the political manoeuvrings of the Sheraton Move is extremely
deceitful.
Where were all the high-profile ministers who had no
problem lurking around when it came to attending Teoh’s memorials, but
suddenly found themselves “voiceless” in the New Malaysia that we were
promised?
Political malfeasances
It must
have been a spit in the face for Teoh’s family that the personalities
involved in the death and farcical investigation of his murder seeped
into the Harapan bureaucracy and strutted around as if their sins had
been washed away.
Contrast
this to the death of firefighter Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim, who was not
only compensated by the state but whose death remains a mystery only
because the events that led to it are mired in the kind of corporate and
political malfeasances peculiar to Malaysia.
These days, the Madani state and the state security apparatus warn the public when it comes to “speculating” on the malfeasances that occur in the country’s administration of law and justice.
The
state is quick to clamp down on news coverage of hot-button issues when
it comes to the bureaucracy, but the reality is that this is the system
that Harapan promised to reform if they managed to claim power.
Mutually beneficial
There
is a connective tissue between the MACC and the political class, and it
is mutually beneficial for the MACC and the political class to be
simpatico.
Mind you, I am not making this claim. In 2020, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad twice warned the MACC to stop harassing his comrades or “…we have to be very active in exposing all the wrong things that they carry out”.
It
says a lot about the dysfunction which could be classified as
criminality, when the person who once led the Harapan government can
threaten to expose the alleged malfeasance of the MACC if they continue
harassing his political operatives and ignore the fact that he
supposedly has “evidence” of wrongdoing, which should have been reported
to the “relevant” authorities.
And keeping silent when the MACC
is engaging in wrongdoing if they harass your political party means what
exactly? That you keep their sins and omissions to yourself if they
aided your coalition when in power?
It should make rational
Malaysians wonder what the relationship is between the political class
and the MACC at this moment in time.
Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail has said that the investigation papers on Teoh have been passed
to the Attorney-General’s Chambers. He also claimed - “the Royal
Malaysia Police has called back the witnesses to complete the
investigation papers…”
I hope that Teoh is the reckoning MACC
deserves but the question is, will the Madani state dare spook the
security establishment?