Malaysiakini : Moving the Najib piece

The questions rational Malaysians have to ask is what does Madani want to do with Najib? We have to ask this as no Madani member has said that Najib getting his house arrest or even a full pardon is a calamitous thing.

The only folk playing it somewhat straight is Umno. For the most part, they want Najib to walk or at least walk around his house.

The worst thing about this hiding is that it gives legitimacy to a whole range of voices who only have mala fide intentions to the idea of a secular and democratic Malaysia.

Zahid the saviour?

Khairy Jamaluddin was right in that there was an intention to hide this addendum for whatever reasons.

The former Umno man was right when he claimed that there was a conspiracy in Madani to keep Najib in jail or that some people in Umno want to keep Najib in jail.

He was also right to claim that party chief Ahmad Zahid Hamidi wants to be a saviour but a saviour to who exactly, Khairy is unsure.

I hate even writing this, but as a former minister, Khairy is right again when he questioned the believability of the legal apparatus of the government claiming that it did not know about this addendum’s existence.

Bridget Welsh, one of the best hands when it comes to Malaysian politics, reminds us in her opinion piece “Partial pardon poison” that with Najib staying behind bars, Zahid’s position as Umno president remains secure.

“He (Zahid) is the only clear winner of the partial pardon decision. He can claim some leniency was gained through pressure, but does not have to fear displacement - at least for now.”

The “for now” part, at least, is urgent now. Mind you, the reduced sentence was merely the tenderising process and I am sure Najib will get his get-out-of-jail card eventually or at the very least his house arrest, which for Malaysia and a man of his resources, means the same thing.

His acolytes in Umno are already plotting their next move, and no doubt the rakyat would be subjected to another “sandiwara” (show) very soon.

Rakyat’s trust eroding, kleptocrats getting away

With the way Madani operates, I am sure that the only people who will benefit from this are the illiberal forces of this country.

All the prime minister has done with this issue and the high-profile corruption cases is to muddy the waters. And rational Malaysians have to wonder why.

Indeed, when a convict – this would be the former prime minister – uses the current premier’s words as a point for his political persecution defence, you know you are in Madaniville.

“I believe Anwar’s recent remarks on flaws in the prosecutorial process strongly validate my longstanding concerns about the legal proceedings against me.

“For six years, I have maintained that these proceedings exemplify rushed and flawed prosecutions,” Najib told the court last week during the defence stage of his RM2.27 billion 1MDB corruption trial.

In justifying the dismissal not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) for Zahid’s corruption case linked to millions of ringgit from Yayasan Akalbudi, 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 said the same thing points to the narrative that is being shaped by the mainstream political establishment when it comes to how it deals with kleptocrats.

Of course, when Anwar made those remarks, which occurred when Najib’s wife Rosmah Mansor was acquitted of money laundering charges, he said - “Why (ask me about Rosmah’s case outcome)? Do you want me to interfere in the judicial process? I have my personal view and I have my personal reasons, whether I like it or dislike it.

“But we have to talk about judicial independence. How do you want judicial independence?"

How do I want my judicial independence? Well done, of course. But this has nothing to do with judicial independence.

Indeed when it comes to this addendum no matter what the prime minister says, there were operatives in the justice system who knew of this addendum and they all kept their mouths shut hiding the truth from the rakyat. This is a pattern when it comes to the justice apparatus in Madani.

As former MACC chief Latheefa Koya, who belled the cat in the Zahid case, reminded us - “Stop trying to fool the people by repeating endlessly that Zahid’s DNAA was the court’s decision.

“Article 145(3) is clear, the court had no choice in the matter. So don’t blame the court.”

Former Bersih chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan’s public statements in the Zahid case were prophetic.

“We saw the evidence. The judge found a prima facie case.

“You insult our intelligence and the judge for pursuing this line of argument.

“Don’t defend the indefensible and then talk about reform,” the lawyer said.

This is another self-inflicted wound that the men from Madani have engineered. What the prime minister has done is cast a shadow over every operative in his administration, but worst of all, he has given the PAS-led Perikatan Nasional a new narrative to hang their hat on.

Now we know why all these laws restricting free speech are in play. This is not about the opposition’s hypocrisy. Any rational person knows they are mendacious and hypocritical.

This is about how people can trust the good ship Madani and the person steering it.

Malaysiakini : The king and his royal brothers are there to protect the interests of the rakyat. So, why is Najib driving a wedge between the rakyat and the royals?

Some people claim that the Madani government has acted as if it has been muzzled, and badly mismanaged the royal addendum saga, thus enabling Najib to crow non-stop about his house arrest. The administration must work harder to bolster its image before the rakyat is further disillusioned.

Members of the opposition are taking full advantage of Najib gloating in public about his royal addendum and house arrest. Will the Madani administration stop them from undermining the government?

Like night follows day, many Malaysians fear that a full pardon will possibly follow the move to allow a house arrest. They strongly believe this will happen especially after the unexpected reduction in his sentence.

Najib has been through three courts. The High Court, the Appeals Court, and the Federal Court. He was tried by nine judges. The apology which he offered, years after his sentencing, was made almost as an afterthought and sounded most insincere.

The rakyat was shocked by last year’s reduction in his sentence and the discounted fine. They worry about the two-tiered system of justice in the nation. They compare people who were jailed after stealing food to feed their families with Najib who stole billions of ringgit, not to feed his family, but to satisfy his and his family’s greed.

We are aware that when the Pardons Boards for the various states meet and consider the appeals of prisoners, their decisions are not announced in the media. The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Federal Territories) Dr Zaliha Mustafa has confirmed that decisions are never made public as they are confidential.

We also understand, perhaps rightly or wrongly, that when prisoner appeals are submitted to the Pardons Board, the applicants would naturally be told whether their appeals have either been denied or approved.

However, Najib’s appeal is mired in controversy. If he was given house arrest or a pardon, the whole nation would be horrified. The reduction in his sentence and discount for his fines has already angered us.

Why are the authorities lenient with Najib? He dominates the media at a time when we want to hear Putrajaya discuss important things about Malaysia, like the protection of children and young women, ways to combat rising crime, the failures and corruption of Puspakom which we’ve known about for decades, the environmental degradation, flood mitigation measures, the healthcare system, and cost of living crisis.

Master manipulator

Don’t ignore Najib’s seven-minute video which he made a week after his conviction. He claimed that the SRC International money had been used for Umno-Baru’s “welfare programmes” and “corporate social responsibility” (CSR) initiatives for orphans. Apparently, none had been used for himself.

Well, he would say that, wouldn’t he? Prisons are full of people who claim to be innocent.

These welfare programmes were not mentioned during his trial, the witnesses failed to mention these welfare programmes, and he omitted to mention the orphans.

Najib is not just a common thief who stole the rakyat’s money, he is also a liar and a desperate one, who is still trying to convince his gullible supporters, that he is innocent of all the charges.

He is a convicted felon and he should be left to serve his sentence. He should not be allowed house arrest or further reductions of his fine and sentencing.

On the day Najib was convicted of all seven charges, for abuse of power, money laundering, and criminal breach of trust, a succession of Umno-Baru leaders expressed their sympathy for the convicted criminal.

Where was their sympathy for the rakyat?

Despite overwhelming evidence from overseas supplied by governments and financial institutions, Najib continued to be economical with the truth about 1MDB.

Najib appears to wield more power now than some ministers in Putrajaya. He is a master manipulator and good at controlling people.

The Madani administration should stop him from issuing statements from Kajang.

Malaysiakini : So it is better for these Malays to think of DAP as whipping boys rather than a political party that opposes a theocratic state because God knows, nobody wants to spook the Malays.

These recent attacks by Akmal and the “Green Wave” were humiliating and extreme, but what was made clear was that DAP could not rely on the Madani establishment to counter the extreme attacks of the religious far right.

When Kok was embroiled in the halal certificate fiasco, what did the prime minister, the one that DAP would sacrifice anything for, say?

"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," Anwar had said when Kok raised the matter.

Keep in mind that Kok was only responding to public statements from the religious head of the prime minister’s cabinet.

The fact that Kok is still under investigation is further evidence that any kind of dissent concerning a religious policy which affects non-Muslims would involve state security intervention.

‘Sin of secularism’

Meanwhile, PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang is linking DAP to the scourge of secularism. Oh, how I wish DAP defended secular principles as enthusiastically as they bend over for Madani.

I would use this platform to defend nearly everything it says and do. It is not as if DAP has not touted its secular pedigree when it suited its purposes.

Loke had previously said that his party need not drop the secular nation agenda and its slogan “Malaysian Malaysia” merely to reap support from other ethnic groups.

“Before forming the unity government, all parties agreed not to touch on each party’s principles and constitutions,” he added.

Mufti bill perfect test

The Federal Territories Mufti Bill, a bill which would radically change the power dynamics between secular and religious law of this country, is still in play.

This would be the perfect opportunity to test DAP’s commitment to secularism. DAP not only has to object to this bill but this should not come as a surprise to its coalition partners because everyone knows where DAP stands on the issue of separation between mosque and state, right?

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.

Death of free speech

Remember that DAP supported the death of free speech - albeit in a most cowardly fashion - seeing as how the Communications and Multimedia Act amendments were pushed through.

DAP and Harapan would have virulently opposed these amendments if they had been done by PN.

Madani has gift-wrapped a set of legal but oppressive tools for the “Green Wave”.

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.

Bridget Welsh talked about this betrayal in her comment piece “A politics of betrayal?”.

“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,” she said.

Easy surfing for ‘Green Wave’

We are always told that if it was not a Madani government, then we would have to accept the “Green Wave”. I say why make the “Green Wave’s” job easier? Why lay the foundation in terms of policy and governmental procedure, or lack of it, for the “Green Wave”?

A good example of this gaslighting is Howard Lee’s latest piece about PAS’ “derhaka” (treason).

The hypocritical and mendacious PN has demonstrated that it is willing to slay Malay establishment sacred cows to gain political power.

However, the greatest threat to the non-Malay community came from within this unity government when the Umno youth leader inflamed the KK Mart issue, which caused domestic terrorist attacks against the convenience store chain. Not to mention, the founders of KK Mart were humiliated and dragged through the court system.

The grand old man of Malaysian politics, Lim Kit Saing, said in a recent speech, that we should learn from life experiences, I concur. DAP shouldn't play the victim card if they are willingly a punching bag for the illiberal forces.

Malaysiakini : Points raised by PAS

Let us look at the three points raised by PAS when it comes to the National Fatwa Council and keep in mind that this is supposed to affect Muslims only but more importantly, these are guidelines.

Point 1: Symbols and elements that contradict Islamic beliefs such as symbols of other religions and religious songs.

This would mean there are no religious symbols of non-Muslims in PAS/Perikatan Nasional-controlled states. If these guidelines are followed by PAS/PN, this would mean any non-Islamic religious symbol anywhere would be an affront to Islam.

Is PAS really claiming this? This would also mean that anyone wearing a cross or any kind of religious iconography around Muslims would be in violation of this guideline.

Point 2: Holding such celebrations at government premises and involving Muslim staff.

Is there a legal provision and not merely a guideline for this? Are non-Muslim government employees banned from holding any kind of celebration or activity on government premises?

PAS cites a religious guideline but is the minister contravening any laws? This is an extremely important point and perhaps one that Madani should address.

Point 3: Causing unrest among Muslims and affecting national harmony.

Who is causing unrest? The Muslims who participated in the carolling? So this would mean that any time Muslims celebrate any kind of religious or cultural festival with non-Muslims this would cause unrest and affect national harmony.

Really? So all this time, when prime ministers, royalty, and politicians who held open houses in their personal residences or government offices for non-Muslim festivities, were affecting national harmony?

Celebrating non-Islam religions

Kepong MP Lim Lip Eng has the right of it when he says - “If PAS is truly serious about this issue, they should clarify whether they also intend to ban official Deepavali celebrations for the Indian community, Gong Xi Fa Cai for the Chinese community, or Kaamatan and Gawai festivals in Sabah and Sarawak, which are organised by government agencies.”

As for Section 298A of the Penal Code, what exactly was the minister’s blasphemous act which insulted a religion? What exactly did the minister say or do which insulted a religion?

By merely celebrating or acknowledging a religion other than Islam, is that blasphemous? Maybe to PAS and perhaps to Madani if the minister is investigated on this charge.

So this would mean that any time anyone acknowledges another religion other than Islam, no matter the context, it would be considered blasphemous?

What is important to remember here is this. Non-Muslims are constantly told that Islamic law will not affect us. We are constantly told to mind our own business and not to interfere when it comes to Islamic law.

PAS and perhaps Madani by its silence have demonstrated that this is a complete lie. What PAS is attempting to do, is destroy a DAP politician by claiming that even when he is doing his job as a minister and politician and promoting the diversity of this country, it is an affront to Islam.

This is made worse by the fact that the prime minister of this federal government is yet again leaving a non-Muslim member of his cabinet out to dry.

With friends like this the government, who needs enemies?

Malaysiakini : Public flogging in Terengganu

To quote Suhakam on the public caning of a repeat khalwat offender in Terengganu - “Punishments that inflict physical violence and public humiliation have no place in a modern justice system.

“They undermine Malaysia’s commitments to human rights, tarnish its legal integrity and erode the dignity of individuals - a value upheld by all religions, including Islam.”

As someone who is against state caning, the issue here is not about this form of punishment but rather PAS’ intent.

What is PAS’s intention when it comes to this public form of barbarity? It intends to instil fear into the Muslim community.

You will not see hands being chopped off for corruption or high-ranking factotums or their hangers-on being whipped for this sort of thing.

Instead, you will see the average Joe rakyat who most probably voted for them bearing the brunt of these forms of punishment.

This was pure, unadulterated hypocrisy, not to mention the mendacity of the PAS political apparatus, and PAS is essentially thumbing its nose to the secular and constitutional guardrails of this country.

The fact that Madani was completely silent on the matter indicates how much the federal government fears the “Green Wave”.

With the Perlis mufti and his fait accompli announcements, we witnessed the agitations within the religious establishment, which is characteristic of theocracies.

PAS is demonstrating that while it will sustain the elites and the scores of apparatchiks within its theocracy, average Muslims will feel the harsh glare of their atavistic religion on their backs.

CMA amendments

What the government hopes to do with amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) is to attempt to regulate the flow of information.

Why? Because the state understands that the opposition has a far better grasp of social media tactics than it does.

Keep in mind that for most of the denizens in the corridors of power in Madaniville, freedom of speech was of paramount importance to get their message across when they were out of power.

Now, because of their inability or unwillingness to execute reforms, they resort to "shooting the messenger" type tactics.

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 Perikatan Nasional would have come up with such a gambit because they understand that there are enough dictatorial tools in the box to handle dissent.

Mufti bill

Together with the amendments to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act (Act 355), the Federal Territories Mufti Bill only consolidates power with the religious class, which includes PAS and the far religious elements in all mainstream political parties and further diminishes the influence of the supposedly secular DAP.

If Madani assumes that it would control the religious message by passing these bills, it is sorely mistaken.

The far religious right has demonstrated that they are willing to slay sacred cows in their quest for dominance.

Over the decades, ever since these types of bills were proposed, the religious far right, the deep Islamic state and culture war warriors have been pushing for these amendments as an amelioration of secular democratic first principles.

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 and the purpose of such laws is dominion over everyone, believer and non-believer.

Rogue cops blamed for forced disappearances

Rational Malaysians have to decide - is the state’s narrative that the disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh and Amri Che Mat the work of rogue police officers, or was there something more sinister at play?

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?

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?

Make no mistake, the answers to these questions would offer no relief and would most probably demonstrate either how the political apparatus has lost control of the religious bureaucracy or how the two are no longer mutually exclusive.

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.

The enemy has always been within.

KK Mart socks fiasco

When Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh told his friends at KK Mart to find another business, you have to ask yourself why he didn’t care about “the livelihood of workers - most of whom are Malay Muslims” that Mydin hypermarket boss head Ameer Ali Mydin thinks would be in jeopardy if Akmal continued with his reckless religious agenda.

You have to ask yourself why Foreign Minister Mohamad Hasan would write a piece warning people not to be sympathetic to KK Mart and its vendor by describing the former’s business practices as “questionable”.

And what did the prime minister think of Umno wanting to destroy a viable business which hires many Malay Muslims? Did he really think that Umno, a partner in his government, acting this way was going to burnish his racial and religious credentials?

Mohamad is right about one thing. Malaysia is at a pivotal juncture.

---

READ MORE: My top five newsmakers of 2024

---

Ushering in the new year, I leave readers with this:

“The object of a new year is not that we should have a new year. It is that we should have a new soul and a new nose, new feet, a new backbone, new ears, and new eyes.”

- GK Chesterton

Malaysiakini : Fahmi Fadzil

Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil has a history of distorting the truth and deflecting blame to the press when the mandarins of his party are in trouble.

Even when he was the communications officer for PKR, Fahmi (above) had no problem playing heavy and causing confusion amongst Pakatan Harapan allies.

Take for instance in 2016, DAP’s Syerleena Abdul Rashid had to publicly correct Fahmi about the Kajang Move.

Remember when Fahmi blamed the media for spreading stories about the supposedly non-existent feud between Anwar Ibrahim and Azmin Ali?

“That is something portrayed by the media. I understand that there could be a perception of such, but the reality is, there are no camps. What we have now is a PKR that is strong and united.”

I have no idea if Fahmi really believes what he says but what I do know is that one of the more important ministries, which could be an asset to this government, is becoming a liability under Fahmi’s watch.

Teoh Beng Hock’s family

By visiting Teoh’s family, Anwar legitimised their grievances against the state, which is a good thing. However, it remains to be seen if the visit was part of a sandiwara (charade) to manage public perception.

Keep in mind that the Court of Appeal has ruled that - “The death of Teoh was caused by multiple injuries from a fall from the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam as a result of or which was accelerated by an unlawful act or acts of persons unknown, inclusive of the MACC officers who were involved in the arrest and investigations of the deceased.”

I hope that Teoh is the reckoning the MACC deserves but the question is, will the Madani state dare spook the security establishment?

M Indira Gandhi

At this point in time, this has become more than just how the state is endorsing a religious kidnapping. At every step of the way, Indira has met nothing but resistance from the state and a political apparatus, which has used her when convenient and discarded her cause when in power.

This is really about how this mother has confronted the state and the state security apparatus through its various permutations, which enabled the kidnapping of her child.

What this mother is going through, has been going through, is the existential struggle of state-sponsored religious oppression that one day soon, all non-Muslims will endure in a very overt manner.

One day soon, we will all feel her pain.

Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh

What Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh has demonstrated is that Umno continues to give the middle finger to Madani.

This is an operative who knows that he is untouchable. This is an operative who carries out the overt hostility the racial and religious establishment has towards non-Muslims.

The KK Mart obscenity demonstrates how state actors can bring non-Muslim commercial interests down to their knees in the most vile manner if it so chooses.

Akmal is merely following like a good student from the playbook of his elders. Akmal is the smug poster child for the Malay uber alles crowd.

While political operatives from Umno have claimed they have told him to stop these provocations, and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has told everyone to cease and desist during the KK Mart obscenity, and while he is under a sedition investigation, he understands that he has the power to give the middle finger to everyone.

Remember what former Umno, former Bersatu, and now Pejuang member Mukhriz Mahathir said - “Looking at Umno when there were big issues which we could not address, we would talk about DAP, Chinese chauvinism, and how Lim Kit Siang becoming prime minister would destroy Malaysia, that the Malays would disappear, and the mosques can no longer air the azan.

“I admit that I too have said such things, in front of a 100 percent Malay audience. Thinking back, I feel guilty and a sense of regret.”

The Umno Youth chief's war against non-Malay/Muslim participation in politics and social life comes at a time when political realignment of the Malay establishment is taking place.

Akmal will, of course, feel no guilt or regret.

Najib Abdul Razak

Former prime minister and convicted felon Najib Abdul Razak has had a good year.

While the young Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman may get caned for his offences, folks like Najib, his wife, and former comrades are thriving in Madani, with possible house arrests, discharges not amounting to acquittals (DNAAs) and acquittals.

In nearly every perversion of justice, the prime minister defects the blame to others, forgetting when he was in the opposition, he laid the blame squarely on the person in the seat of power.

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.

This is the message that the elites, especially those connected with the Umno establishment, are hearing loud and clear - especially with the elevation of Musa Aman in Sabah.

Who needs to fear justice when you have Madani?

Malaysiakini : ‘History lesson’

Tajuddin does not offer any differences, merely launches into a history lesson about Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew (he will always be Harry to me) both of who the author claims used realpolitik strategies in dealing with public perception and the business of governance.

The problem with these types of claims is the efficacy of these strategies is the long-term outcome of both countries. With one, we can see how the strategy used has had a deleterious effect on the country and its institutions of governance and the other, well the trains run on time.

Tajuddin likes to talk about the Islamic reform movement he was a part of back in the day, while I can only rely on the fact that I a non-Muslim, was serving king and country.

So, I may have no useful insight about Islamic reform or politics beyond firsthand experience in how it reshaped the various branches of the state and federal government.

I can make no useful contribution to this discourse beyond the first-hand experience of racial and religious prerogatives that seeped into the system alienating many serving officers. This was not confined to the security apparatus but also the civil service.

In fact, Malaysians of a certain age have nothing to contribute to this discussion because their experience as Malaysians – whatever their ethnic heritage – means nothing when it comes to politics and Islamic reform which swept through this country but which is apparently something we cannot comprehend.

Controlling narrative

Tajuddin talks of Mahathir wanting to control the narrative which is exactly the point I made in my piece he finds so objectionable – “Dr Mahathir Mohamad, when in power, played it both ways. He demonised PAS and allowed his bureaucracy to be shaped by religious forces which had deep roots in both the political Islam of PAS and whatever was shaping the Middle East back in the day.” This is the part that Tajuddin overlooks.

The author dismisses Sisters of Islam and I, which is fine because people should be free to express their dismissal of other people’s opinions as they see fit, but the problem with the strategy of controlling the Islamic narrative by empowering governmental agencies like Mahathir did, was an organisation like Sisters of Islam was deemed as deviant.

Now perhaps the author could explain the “good” this does when it comes to the religious discourse in the majority community. By controlling the religious narrative this way, did Mahathir change mindsets or merely get Umno the vote, while embedding the community with anti-democratic impulses and empowering a theocratic class?

Now what Tajuddin should explain to the reader is how exactly Anwar's religious narrative is helping subdue the religious forces in this country as Mahathir’s did at that time.

Mind you I do not think Mahathir was successful because in attempting to control the religious narrative what he did was plant the seeds for a theocratic class which Anwar and PAS are attempting to control and use now.

I get some people are fixated when Mahathir and Harry Lee are mentioned in the same sentence but what I find interesting, is that Mahathir with his run-in with the royalty for instance (for self-serving interests no doubt) enhanced the democratic processes in this country by curtailing their powers.

Of course, he messed up the judiciary but there you go. What is the upside of what Madani is doing?

Changing whose mindset?

Now for Tajuddin, all this sandiwara by Anwar is an attempt to change mindsets. We have to ask ourselves two questions.

The first is what mindset is Anwar trying to change? We know PAS’ religious positions, what is the different position that Madani wants the Malays to change to?

The second question, if there is no difference between these positions, then what was so egregious about my piece that warranted his response?

In other words, since I apparently know nothing about politics and Islamic reform, please enlighten us as to how this sandiwara helps us reinforce the democratic guard rails of this country and maintain the racial and religious equilibrium of this country? Or is this not what this reform is about?

When the democratic guardrails in this country have been supplanted by theocratic diktats, would we be shocked that “…. political change requires many other art forms and war strategies …” and wonder where it all went wrong?

Look how the country has changed over the years. You see, politicians do not use religion to empower people. They never have. What they use religion for, is to subjugate people. This is why the country has changed so much after all these brilliant art forms and war strategies.

Maybe if folks in power and people who gave them power, listened to people writing from conscience (which is never easy because you alienate so many people as people have always been tribal in their political allegiances and you open yourself up to abuse), we could have had a real chance for political change.

Malaysiakini : ‘Cowardly Madani’

Madani was too cowardly to put forward an alternative Islamic narrative. Dr Mahathir Mohamad, when in power, played it both ways. He demonised PAS and allowed his bureaucracy to be shaped by religious forces which had deep roots in both the political Islam of PAS and whatever was shaping the Middle East back in the day.

Both PAS and Madani do not think that Malaysia is a secular country. This is what PAS deputy president Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man said -"Malaysia is not a secular country. If it was, why should DAP include ‘to fight for a secular country’ in its own manifesto?

"Islam is the official religion of the federation. Then there is the idea of Malaysian Malaysia. No Malay can accept the concept of equality."

And here is what the prime minister thinks of secularism - “Sometimes these politicians will say that if Anwar becomes prime minister then Islam will be ruined, secularism and communism will gain a foothold, and LGBT will be recognised.

“This is a delusion. Of course, it will not happen and God willing, under my administration, this is not going to happen,” the Malay Mail Online reported Anwar as saying.

Now, to be fair to the prime minister, he did define secularism here in a more “moderate way” - “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.”

Limited secularism?

Keep in mind that this moderate form of secularism does not apply to unilateral conversion or the banning of words, films and any other things that would offend the sensitivities of Muslims in this country.

Hence, to claim that Islamic imperatives would not be imposed on non-Muslims is complete horse manure. It certainly does not apply to the new media bill which nobody voted for because they are cowards and charlatans, but non-Muslims were told this bill was needed to maintain stability and of course "think of the children".

These days, it is Putrajaya who is pursuing the Federal Territories Mufti Bill which would radically transform the powers of the religious far right in this country. This is something that PAS dreams of. This is something the deep Islamic state has been preparing for.

The bill is best defined by Sisters in Islam – “The Mufti Bill, which grants unelected officials the power to legislate without transparency or due process, exemplifies the dangerous erosion of democratic principles and constitutional rights.

“Such laws risk undermining the fundamental freedoms of Malaysians, fostering a culture of control rather than empowerment, and silencing diverse perspectives crucial for a progressive society.”

Keep in mind that the bill comes on the heels of a recent Federal Court ruling which struck down 16 criminal syariah provisions in Kelantan.

The Federal Court ruling is perhaps one of the strongest rejections by the diminishing centre-right establishment of the theocratic agenda, pushed by political operatives like PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang.

Theocrats do not like pushback and when this happens, they stir the pot even more. What this Federal Court ruling has demonstrated is that there are still constraints from the federal government.

When people say the atmosphere is charged, what they are really saying is that the people against this Federal Court ruling are spooked.

Now isn't the mufti bill, something that PAS desires? Think about it this way. Can anyone point to overt differences in religious policies when it comes to PAS and the government?

When a PAS operative decided to ban lotto shops in Kedah, what was the response from the federal government? What was Madani’s response to the caning of syariah offences in Johor?

What was Madani's response to rainbow-coloured Swatch watches? What was Madani's response to the socks controversy? What was Madani’s response to unilateral conversion? What was Madani's response when Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh viciously attacked a non-Muslim member of its coalition?

In 2017, while still incarcerated and Hadi was on a rampage using Act 355 to stake the religious high ground, as reported in the press, Anwar was not against the idea merely that he had his own ideas about strengthening religious law in this country. We now know what those ideas are.

In times of economic uncertainty, it benefits PAS to portray itself as an outsider. It gets to point to a convenient scapegoat - the Chinese community by demonising the DAP and playing the victim card when it comes to the way this government persecutes its political rivals. In or out of government, PAS is getting exactly what it wants.

Rational Malaysians are merely getting a view of the shape of things to come.

Malaysiakini : A product of her environment

Upbringing and social interaction in childhood are important. Siti’s immediate environment is a country that is compartmentalised into different races and religions. It is not entirely her fault because all she knows is what happens under her tiny tempurung.

If anyone is to be blamed, it is our leaders for failing to smash this coconut shell. Siti’s poor knowledge of Chinese surnames and family names showed that her integration with non-Malays was non-existent.

One does not need a PhD for this, but common sense and community spirit will suffice.

As a first-term MP, Siti probably received her guidance from her observations of our state assemblies and Parliament.

Day in, day out, all they ever talk about are race, religion and royalty. There are more important matters than these 3Rs but why would she know any better?

This is her limited exposure, from the time she was born, to the day she was in court to receive her judgement for defamation.

Moreover, she’d seen how MPs who made racist comments were rarely punished, if at all.

Would the police charge her for making the provocative remarks? Umno-Baru’s Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh and PAS’ Kedah menteri besar, Muhammad Sanusi Md Nor escaped punishment for their racist slurs, and Siti probably thought she too was “an untouchable”.

Umno-shaped elephant in room

Interestingly, Siti’s problems can be traced to Umno-Baru, the party that now stands tall in the federal coalition government. Siti claimed that she had sourced her information from an Umno-Baru/BN election pamphlet which has since been discredited.

When precisely was it discredited? Before or after Siti was taken to court. So, is the rakyat expected to say, “Oh, it’s all right then! Umno-Baru is a coalition partner, so the Lims and Teresa Kok should not create a fuss.”

What has happened to the police probe about this contentious pamphlet? What excuse has the Umno-Baru president concocted about this “source”, which Siti once treated as her bible?

Umno-Baru commissioned this pamphlet. What does that say about the integrity of our Madani administration?

Don’t just blame Siti, because the system in which she was raised is also at fault.

More importantly, we should apportion a large part of the blame on successive leaders who failed to change the narrative about Malaysia.

Malaysia has never been led by “true” leaders. Those who claim to be leaders merely have huge egos. They’re too timid to make a real difference, and not brave enough to initiate meaningful change.

Spiralling higher education standards

Siti would have spent at least three years working on her PhD but by the end of her 45-minute speech last year, during campaigning in the Kemaman by-election, her integrity was thrown into the gutter.

Malaysia mass produces thousands of PhD graduates every year, from 1,247 in 2010 to 4,560 in 2021. Siti’s failure to fact-check and list her sources, caused many Malaysians to doubt her PhD and thesis. They are right to blame her recklessness and irresponsibility.

However, they should also question the quality of our universities and academics. If standards have slipped, what is the Education Ministry’s response?

The minister should be held responsible for the low standard of education. Quality matters more than quantity.

Aping her seniors

Siti was failed by the system. She could have done so much good to improve the lives of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Malaysians, especially the Malays.

She could have used her influence as an MP to lift Malay women out of the poverty trap and to exercise their women's rights, especially in conservative Malay communities.

She could have taken advantage of her position as a politician to unite the rakyat.

Instead of doing all the wonderful things we hoped our politicians would do, Siti decided to stick to the same well-trodden path as her party elders, to bash the DAP, Chinese, communists, and Singapore.

She tried to emulate the male MPs in her party and continue their rhetoric about saving Islam and defending the Malays, but this time, she decided to raise the stakes.

She made defamatory remarks about three DAP leaders having blood ties with communist leader, Chin Peng and the late Singapore prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew.

Did she think she had successfully earned the praise and attention of the PAS leaders? They did not come to her defence after she made the inflammatory remarks. Poor Siti, even PAS leaders failed her.

However, don’t just blame Siti. Blame the system and the failure of our leaders to change it for a better multicultural Malaysia.

Islam does not allow for democracy because of its commitment to Allah Watch on You Tube Oxford Debate

Malaysiakini : In Malaysia, of course, the sensitivities of non-Muslims when it comes to free speech are not taken into account.

When it comes to Muslim hate speech, anything goes in Malaysia where even someone like Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali got away with threatening to burn Bibles in 2014 because in the words of the attorney-general, “This is not a sentiment or intention to cause religious disharmony, but this is defending the sanctity of Islam that is clearly defined in laws.”

Indeed, the Attorney-General’s Chambers, when touching on the bible burning issue said, as reported by The Edge - “As decided by the court, before a statement is said to have seditious tendencies the statement must be viewed in the context it was made... When studied in its entire context, Datuk Ibrahim’s statement is not categorised as having seditious tendencies.

“It was clear Datuk Ibrahim Ali had no intention to create religious tensions but was only defending the purity of Islam.”

Hoodwinking rakyat

It is amazing the lengths that Madani and its enablers would go to gaslight the rakyat into believing that this is for our own good. DAP MP Syerleena Abdul Rashid in carrying water for Madani attempts to use the “think of the children” gambit.

She writes: “This is our moment to act. By supporting these changes, we stand against the darkness of exploitation and for the light of safety, justice, and hope.

“In Malaysia, there will be zero tolerance for those who prey on our children and the protection of our children remains non-negotiable.”

Really? Adults who prey on children are mainstream in Malaysia. What do you think child marriage is? Why do you think that an organisation like Sister in Islam is hell-bent on leather urging authorities to end this practice?

Here is the latest dispatch from Sisters in Islam regarding this issue, as reported by the Malay Mail Online: “In Malaysia, there are several provisions within the Islamic laws which inadvertently may necessitate the child bride or her parent to choose marriage rather than other alternatives, often under the guise of ‘social protection’.

”This practice not only endangers young girls but also undermines Malaysia’s commitment to safeguarding children’s welfare.”

So, get off your high horse and your bellicose rant about having “zero mercy” and “non-negotiable” and attempt to correct a serious problem here in Malaysia without hoodwinking the rakyat with these appeals to emotions and gaslighting, for amendments that would irremovably damage freedom of speech here in Malaysia.

If you read all these amendments, which seem to have come from the “how to be a fascist and force people to like you” playbook, the Madani government is gaslighting people into thinking that these proposed laws are well defined but, as nearly everyone has pointed out, they are open to interpretation and gives the state obscene power to interpret it as it sees fit.

Of course, some people are still under the illusion that these laws would be used to contain the likes of Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh but the reality is that not only would they be used to go after whomever the state thinks aggrieve it but also be used to reinforce certain narratives at the expense of the moderate centre.

This is exactly what an operative like Akmal does.

‘Super liberals’

I’ll give you an example. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim talks of the “super liberals”. In this country, the Islamists, Malay far-right and even mainstream Malay political operatives demonise these groups which they consider anathema to their race and religion.

Is this a form of hurting the sensitivities of a specific group or is it a way how the state marginalise certain groups? Which narrative does the revised CMA favour?

Let us have another go at this. Recently, PAS MP Siti Mastura Muhammad said she would study the judgment made against her to pay Lim Kit Siang, DAP chairperson Lim Guan Eng, and Seputeh MP Teresa Kok for defaming them.

How exactly did she defame them? Well, she linked them to the defunct Communist Party of Malaya’s big cheese. Now we know what the state thinks of communists, right?

The state even took action against a coffee shop for allegedly using utensils featuring images of communist leaders, I can’t believe I typed these words but there you go.

So, would this PAS MP be sanctioned by the state using the CMA? If you believe that, then you would believe anything.

In fact, seeing how the state views communists, by claiming that members of the ruling coalition were part of some sort of communist identity, should have warranted intervention by the state security apparatus. But nada, this PAS MP got away with saying what she said.

Why? It is because although they got some form of justice from the courts, what she said was acceptable narratives by the mainstream Malay political establishment and have been used by Malay uber alles political operatives from the establishment and opposition to demonise specific communities.

And this is really what the CMA amendments are about. It is about the state wanting no dissent from the narratives that Madani is attempting to shape.

Worse, Madani is building the foundation for a theocratic state to inherit and build upon. The state wants you to believe that this is done for political stability.

Syrian rebel forces take Aleppo city center

During the first two centuries of Islam, Muslim armies faced the most prolonged fighting on the Syrian front, since it was here that Islam faced its most formidable enemy, the Byzantine Empire. Syria, therefore, is the key area for Islamic apocalyptic speculation. And the videos that are coming in prove it.

Syrian rebels in pick-ups with machine guns, carrying weapons supplied by Turkey, after having conquered Aleppo in a few hours, are on the road to Homs and Damascus. Alongside them ride British jihadists who converted to Islam after a privileged childhood spent in the Anglican Church.

The jihadists began kidnapping Kurdish girls, like the little Yazidi sex slave in Gaza.

A war of all with and against all for the sole glory of Islam.

Never has a book been so direct about Islam as “The Clash of Civilizations” by Samuel Huntington: “Islam has bloody borders”.

In Gaza, the barbarity of Hamas. In Lebanon, the barbarity of Hezbollah. In Syria, barbarians against barbarians. And in the midst of all this there is a small blue enclave, a land of Western civilization and culture: Israel.

In Syria there are the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the Hezbollah militias in crisis who are shooting at the militias of Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. The Syrian rebels are Sunni. The Syrian regime is Alawite, a small and heretical syncretistic minority that makes them natural allies of Tehran, which cannot afford the collapse of Damascus. Assad has an ostrich neck and shifty eyes, but he is cunning and brutal. And he will do practically anything to survive.

Meanwhile the barbarians have already started cutting off heads again.

The Christians, as usual, will pay. My thoughts are with them, with the women and with the Christians.

And since Qatar and Turkey and Saudis arm Sunni Muslims and Russia arms Shiites in a new Great Game, European countries should have armed Christians, like the Christian militias that fought against ISIS in Iraq.

America is historically in the Sunni axis (the Turks who send the jihadists are actually the second largest army in NATO) and the Eurocrats just hope only to calm their internal Sunni populations who are on everyone’s side, with Iran but also with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Distinguishing the right Syrian rebels from the wrong ones is a bit complicated.

Considered the greatest living Arab poet and a major figure in world poetry, the Syrian Adonis is one of the favorites for the Nobel Prize in Literature every year. He will not win it because he is “Islamophobic”. Adonis told Libération: “In more than sixty years, we see whether the life of the Arabs has progressed or declined. Where was Iraq and where is it today? The same goes for Syria, Libya, Yemen, Egypt… All are in continuous decline. Why have all the peoples of the world made progress in knowledge and the Arabs nothing? They lack nothing and yet they continue to decline. Because we live in the past and fourteen centuries later, the references remain the caliphs.”

And it is a religious problem, says Adonis. “My position is that the Arabs will never advance as long as religion is their political reference point. The relationship between Islam and man must be based on law and freedoms, while Islam gives more rights to Muslims than to non-Muslims. Syria, for example, is full of non-Muslims. But the non-Muslim will always be second class, without the same rights as the Muslim.”

The violence in the Middle East is not caused by Israel, it is caused by Islam.

And it should concern us, as the Algerian novelist Boualem Sansal said in 2016:

“The only force deeply rooted in Arab-Muslim society is religion. The Islamist movement occupies space and prevents the emergence of any other ideology. There is, of course, a competition between Salafi Islam and traditional Islam, between Shiites and Sunnis. However, today we see that the differences are fading within the Sunni world, while the confrontation between Shiites and Sunnis is taking place. But here too, strategic alliances are being formed. Little by little, the Muslim world is rebuilding itself and regaining its original ambitions and its hegemonic will. The frontier with the West is beginning to be abolished because political Islam is opening up spaces in London, Paris and Brussels. We can imagine that in thirty years Islam will govern the entire Muslim world that it will have unified. In sixty years it will set out to conquer Western civilization.”

We have already lived it, barely ten years ago.

François Hollande, called to testify at the trial for the November 13, 2015 attacks in Paris, confessed that the government "knew that operations were being prepared." The former president revealed in court that the socialist government of the time knew that "operations were being prepared and that individuals had put themselves in the river of refugees to deceive the surveillance."

"All the members of the commandos, foreigners or French who remained in Syria, took the migratory route from Eastern Europe," confirmed Jean-Charles Brisard, president of the Center for the Analysis of Terrorism, to Le Figaro. "They took the Balkan route, after Kosovo opened the passage in 2015, to get to Hungary."

The list of terrorists in Paris and Brussels and the borders through which they entered Europe a few weeks before the massacres: Ten members of the terrorist cell responsible for the attacks in Paris and Brussels stayed or transited in Hungary between July and November 2015, taking advantage of the flow of migrants. They will all pass through Budapest's Keleti station, which in those days was full of journalists there to tell us how bad Viktor Orban's government was in wanting to stop the flow of migrants. In those days Hollande was busy announcing that France would welcome migrants.

Here we go again. At this very moment, future massacres in Europe are being prepared.

Anti-Jewish hatred is exacerbated by political, media, and academic establishments that provide no counterbalance and instead rewrite history, for example, by denying the Jews’ unbroken connection to their homeland as reflected in the archeological record and whitewashing the persecution of Jews under Islam. They are quick to denounce any perceived affront to Arab or Muslim sensibilities and just as quick to denigrate any expressions of Jewish pride or Israeli sovereignty.

Indeed, the mainstream generally refuses to acknowledge Muslim antisemitism, the relationship between radical Islam and terrorism, or the history of jihadist colonialism. Liberal pundits instead wax poetic about claims of Islamic tolerance, while rationalizing any antisemitic or anti-western excesses as reactions to Israeli provocations or American imperialism.

Unable to tolerate criticism of their own warped and bigoted views, they invariably claim to be victims of censorship whenever their screeds against Jews and Israel are exposed as antisemitic vitriol (though it seems nobody ever prevents them from speaking). But they remain mute regarding the historical subjugation and negative imagery of Jews under Islam, the influence of this imagery on anti-Israel rejectionism, and the cultural justifications for the murder, rape, and torture of Israelis.

To most progressives, Hamas and Hezbollah are neither extreme nor radical; and in the historical context of Islamist supremacism, they might actually have a point.

Traditionally, life was difficult for non-Muslims under Islam – particularly Jews, who were dispossessed from their land by conquest, relegated to dhimmi status, and generally degraded, abused, and denied human rights. Despite claims of tolerance throughout the Islamic world, the general treatment of Jews was often no better than in Christian Europe.

During the early Islamic period, for example, Jews were forced to wear distinctive badges or metal seals around their necks. Starting in ninth-century Baghdad, they were required to wear yellow badges (a practice that was brought to Europe by returning crusaders) and were often physically branded, while in Egypt they were required to wear bells on their garments. Throughout the Islamic world, Jews were often isolated or confined to ghettos, forbidden from using the same bathhouses as Muslims, and subjected to pogroms, massacres and forced conversions just as they were in Christian Europe.

Despite the fantasy of equity and prosperity during the Golden Age of Spain, Jews in the Iberian Peninsula often fared little better than their brethren under Christian rule. This reality was illustrated by the experiences of Rambam (Maimonides) and his family, who left their native Cordoba, not because of Christian Jew-hatred, but because the ruling Almohads gave the Jewish community the choice of conversion, exile, or death – centuries before the expulsion from Christian Spain.

The idea that Jewish life in the Islamic world was idyllic until the establishment of modern Israel is preposterous. Antisemitism was ubiquitous after the rise of Islam and ultimately influenced Arab hostility towards the reborn Jewish nation. Those who believe the myth of peaceful coexistence are not typically of Sephardic, Mizrachi or Yemenite Jewish descent. If they were, they would be more likely to know from the experiences of parents and grandparents how precarious Jewish life was in Arab lands and how antisemitism there preceded Israel’s rebirth by centuries.

Anti-Jewish sources appear in both written and oral tradition, for example, in Quranic verses accusing the Jews of perverting scripture (e.g., Sura 3:63; 3:71; 4:46), eschatological passages from the Hadith foretelling their ultimate extermination (Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 56, No. 791), and references in both to the slaughter of the Jews known as Banu Qurayza in Medina. Thus, it is not surprising that Jews in Islamic society were scorned, demeaned, and subjugated; and given the doctrinal basis for this enmity, hostility for the state of Israel was inevitable.

The reality of Muslim antisemitism is ignored by those who believe that obsequious apologetics is necessary to atone for past colonialism. But Islamist Jew-hatred is fully embraced by radical progressives, whose chants of “from the river to the sea…” are really calls for genocide. The irony is lost on these useful idiots that the fundamentalist ideology they deem politically virtuous rejects the foundation of their woke identities. There are no “Queers for Palestine” or “CODEPINK” feminists who would be welcome in a fundamentalist Islamic state where women are subjugated, and gay people are killed.

What western apologists fail to appreciate is the integral persistence of dogma that divides the world into “dar al-Islam” (house of Islam) and “dar al-Harb” (house of war) and demands the subjugation of infidels. And in the absence of theological reformation, it seems unlikely that pandering dialogue will ever foster sincere acceptance of non-Islamic cultures or true peace with a Jewish state.

The affinity between radical Islamists and the progressive left seems counterintuitive given the left’s disdain for religion in its own cultural backyard. But the so-called “red-green alliance” makes perfect sense considering that leftists and Islamists share a common hatred of western democratic values – and of Jews and Israel.

It is this shared hatred that influences progressives to (a) rationalize tenets that justify atrocities against Jews and (b) cheer Hamas for resisting an “occupation” that only exists in the minds of leftists, terrorists, and Palestinian Arab revisionists. The progressive refusal to acknowledge the religious basis of anti-Israel hatred suggests a worldview shaped either by ignorance or a repudiation of history, democratic values, and common decency.

Whatever the motivation, the progressive coddling of Islamists clearly is no path to peace. Nor is pressuring Israel to cease defending herself before achieving her objectives against Iran and its terrorist proxies. The road to peace, moreover, does not require a two-state solution with people who deny Jewish history. Rather, it depends on genuine acceptance of the Jews’ sovereignty in their homeland, which necessarily requires a reformation of thought, ideology, and doctrine.

But what encourages such reformation, and can it be imposed from without?

The traditional peace process always ignored the elephant in the room – i.e., the faith-based foundation of anti-Israel rejectionism – and demanded unilateral concessions by Israel based on revisionist presumptions, e.g., the validity of a Palestinian Arab narrative that denies Jewish history. This was true of Oslo, the Obama-era strategy of bullying Israel and appeasing Iran, and the Biden embrace of anti-Israel and antisemitic progressives.

If anything, October 7th proved the fecklessness of these policies and the two-state concept.

The only deviation from the policy failures of past administrations was the Abraham Accords during President Trump’s first term, which sought normalization through shared economic, cultural, and strategic interests. Perhaps this strategy could facilitate the doctrinal change necessary for reformation – and perhaps not. But reinvigorating the accords as a paradigm while simultaneously renewing America’s commitment to a strong Israel might pave the way for real ideological change that could significantly influence the geopolitical landscape of the Mideast during a second Trump term.

And why not?

BBC : It was RSF fighters, along with allied Arab militias, who ran amok in el-Geneina last year, mainly targeting residents from the non-Arab Masalit community in what human rights groups, including UN experts, have described as ethnic cleansing and possible war crimes and crimes against humanity. Human Rights Watch concluded it was a possible genocide.

The Sudanese army has also come under sharp criticism. Arab civilians were also reported to have perished in this turmoil, many from shelling by army tanks, or in blistering air raids.

Both the RSF and the SAF deny accusations of war crimes and point accusing fingers at their rivals.

Joyce Liu / BBC

Lyse Doucet / BBC

In el-Geneina, our first stop is a modest health centre in the al-Riyadh displacement camp, where Sudanese women in brightly coloured veils sit in chairs along the wall, or huddle on bamboo mats on the floor.

A delegation of mainly elderly men, some with crutches, sit closer to the front under the shade of the corrugated metal roof and wide-boughed trees which frame an open wall.

It feels like a different el-Geneina. There's no visible presence of armed RSF men in a leafy neighbourhood lined with humble mud houses. Young boys turn cartwheels, women in vivid head-to-toe veils walk purposively past, and donkey carts ferrying water drums trot along dusty dirt roads.

“We have suffered a lot,” underlines a community elder, a white-turbaned teacher who is the first to address the visiting UN team in their signature blue vests. He speaks precisely and carefully.

“It’s true that when the war started some people supported SAF, and some supported RSF. But as displaced people we are neutral and in need of every kind of assistance.”

This camp was first established in 2003, a reminder that Darfur's agony erupted two decades ago when the infamous Arab militia known as the Janjaweed sowed terror among non-Arab communities and was also accused of multiple war crimes. It gave rise to the RSF.

The teacher listed a catalogue of basic needs – from food for malnourished women and children, to schools and clean water. He also explained that most women are now in charge of their families.

Some of the young women, only their eyes visible, film the meeting on their phones, perhaps wanting some record of this rare event.

Mr Fletcher addressed them directly.

“You must often feel that no-one is listening and that no-one understands what you have endured, more than anyone else in the population, and maybe more than anyone else in the world.” They respond with vigorous clapping.

The UN's next stop, behind closed doors, is even more forthright when Mr Fletcher and his colleagues sit in front of a gathering of Sudanese and international NGOs based in Darfur who are struggling to respond to this enormous catastrophe.

Unlike the UN, they haven’t waited for permissions from Gen Burhan’s government to operate here; approval for the UN’s international staff to be based here was recently revoked.

Twenty NGOs, working without reliable internet or electricity or even phones, and struggling to obtain more Sudanese visas for staff, say they’re trying to help the 99.9% of the population in need. Their message was clear – the UN system was failing them.

Joyce Liu / BBC

Yet, there must have been Arab hatred and resentment of Jews festering beneath the surface calm of Hebron because upon receiving the Mufti’s false message that the Jews were storming Al Aqsa, a mob of thousands of armed Arabs descended on the small unarmed Jewish community of Hebron, murdering, maiming stealing and destroying.

Having trusted their Arab neighbors, only a few of whom tried to help them (despite the Jews having helped them in many ways through the years, ed.) and protect them, the Jews of Hebron including the Yeshiva students, their rabbis, Jewish merchants, and Jewish women and children were murdered and maimed in gory and grotesque ways. The Arab pogromists murdered David Shainberg of Memphis, Tennessee that day along with many others. Schwartz does not spare the details of the butchery and those details are very reminiscent of October 7.

Although there were few officials and police available to protect the Jews in Hebron, most of the policemen were Arabs, some of whom joined in the pogrom. (Ed. See Rabbi Kook's efforts here.) To their credit, a few Arabs of Hebron not only refused to join in but protected Jews at some risk to themselves. Nevertheless, Arab pogromists killed more Jews in the Hebron Massacre of 1929 than European pogromists murdered in the more famous Kishineff pogrom of 1903.

From that pogrom Ghosts of a Holy War draws a straight line, mostly through the person of the Mufti, from the Hebron Massacre to the weak-kneed response of the British to the two year campaign of murder and destruction conducted by Arabs in Israel from 1936-1938 (sometimes called “The Arab Revolt”) to the Mufti being expelled from Mandate Palestine just before World War Two and obtaining refuge in Berlin with his hero, Adolph Hitler, who gave the Mufti the job of propagandizing the Arab world against the Jews and recruiting Arab soldiers to fight the Allies.

After Israeli independence the Arab world seethed with even more hatred for Jews, made all the worse because the Arabs were unable to defeat Israel on the battlefield, even with substantial aid from their Soviet sponsors. By the 1960s the Arab war against the Jews, which after consultation in Moscow the Arabs decided was a ‘national liberation movement,’ was led by the Mufti’s cousin’s son, Yasser Arafat, in his campaign of murder, bombing and kidnapping against Jews.

Schwartz recounts that Arafat was offered a so-called ‘two state solution’ on multiple occasions and turned it down rather than recognize the existence of Israel as a legitimate state.

More recently Schwarz visited Hebron to find that Hebron is an Arab city whose mayor is a convicted terrorist-murderer who was released by Israel in a prisoner swap and whose constituents see his status as terrorist and murderer as a feature not a defect.

She found that after October 7, the Arab lies about what had happened were similar to those which had been spread by the Mufti after the Hebron Massacre. After the Hebron massacre the Mufti had spread the lie that it was the British who had murdered the Jews of Hebron, or the Jews murdered themselves in order to cause a wave of sympathy for Zionism, or that it was the Jews who attacked the Arabs and the Arabs murdered the Jews in self-defense and that, in any event, it was not nearly as bad as the Jewish victims and survivors claimed.

Likewise, after the October 7 massacres across southern Israel, the common talking points in the Arab world have included that it was not so bad, not that many Jews were killed, no one was raped, the victims did not include civilians or women and children but were only soldiers on military bases and that the Israeli Defense Forces themselves killed most of the victims.

The Arab apologists don’t explain why Hamas is still holding Israeli hostages more than a year later, except to say that October 7 was a legitimate reaction to Israeli oppression. Even the Arab apologists don’t explain why, if that is so, something so similar happened on multiple occasions before Israeli statehood in Jerusalem in 1920, in Hebron and Jerusalem in 1929 and throughout the 1930s.

No one wants to say that some Arabs are so soaked in hatred of Jews that they will commit any atrocity and tell any lie to excuse it.

Shwartz is clearly ambivalent about the current situation in Israel and believes that Arabs within Israel ought to have full political and civil rights and be able to live in peace within Israel’s borders and that Israelis ought to have peace and recognition. She dislikes ‘settlers’ in Judea and Samaria who she claims unnecessarily provoke Arabs. She also dislikes the murder and violence perpetrated by Arabs against Jews. A sense of human decency permeates her book.

To her credit, Schwartz has done a good job of telling the story of the Hebron Massacre and its consequences and showing the connections between that event almost one hundred years ago and today.

If there is one failing to this well-researched and well-written book it is that Schwartz does not inquire deeply into the ideological, social and cultural factors that could turn Arab farmers and merchants into a howling, murdering, pillaging mob just on the say-so of one man most of them had never even seen or heard.

Still, Ghosts of a Holy War is worth the reader’s time and attention as a solid history and review of the Arab War against Jewish civilians.