Gempar! Terbongkar rahsia Guan Eng oleh Teresa

December 14, 2011 at 10:41 pm 25 comments

Cerita meledak ini mula-mula diteropongi blog MyMassa. (Hat-tip)

Saya akan mengolahnya dengan lebih lanjut.

Orang kuat DAP Teresa Kok baru-baru ini ditemuramah TV Selangor dalam rancangan Fokus Berita bersama Ahli Parlimen PAS Khalid Samad dan Pesuruhjaya PAS Selangor Dr Rani Othman. (Baca Harakah hari ini.)

Tajuk perbincangan ahli-ahli panel ialah ‘Politik konspirasi Kristianisasi’ untuk menangkis tuduhan dibuat Umno tentang puak evangelis yang dianggap sebagai suatu ancaman.

Pada minit 13:20 (lihat YouTube bawah) Teresa ditanya oleh Khalid tentang keadaan yang sebenarnya kerana sering disalahfahamkan DAP sebuah parti Kristian.

Teresa menjawab:

“Pengerusi DAP Karpal Singh seorang Sikh, penganut agama Sikh. YB Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng ini saya ingat mereka tak ada apa-apa agama tertentu lah. Dan saya rasa di parti DAP penganut agama Hindu lebih ramai daripada penganut agama Kristian. Penganut agama Kristian di kalangan keahlian DAP ini memang yang paling kurang sekali … paling minoriti.”

Saya pernah mengulas status minoriti orang Kristian Cina dengan merujuk kepada Banci Penduduk Malaysia 2010. Dianggarkan bahawa orang Cina yang beragama Kristian mungkin kurang dua setengah peratus (lihat carta pai dan perangkaan sini).

Namun Kristian yang berkuasa di DAP dan mempunyai pengaruh kuat. Di zaman kolonial dahulu, pun penjajah British yang berkuasa walaupun bilangan pegawai-pegawai orang putih di tanahair tidak ramai.

Boleh juga membaca ‘Suara ‘silent majority’ lemas‘ di mana saya mengatakan penganut Buddha ditenggelami evangelis Cina yang begitu lantang serta galak menyinsing lengan (umpamanya Bishop Paul Tan).

Meneladani gelagat agresif Si Bishop

Yang menjadi isu bukanlah lunas-lunas fahaman Kristian mahupun para pengikutnya tetapi bagaimana DAP mempolitikkan agama demi menambah undi. Tindakan agresif inilah yang meningkatkan ketegangan kaum.

Persengketaan antara tamadun (‘clash of civilizations’) bukan sahaja membabitkan politikus tetapi juga media pro-pembangkang yang menyokong golongan Kristian.

Contohnya kolum yang paling popular dalam portal berita The Nut Graph adalah yang bersangkut-paut dengan hal-hal agama (misalnya mendakwa orang Kristian ditindas).

Kolumnis tersebut, yang juga pengarang TNG, adalah Bishop Paul dalam bentuk wanita. Anda bacalah sendiri tulisannya, ‘Allah’ issue: Who started it?

Menggambarkan Kristian sebagai ‘mangsa’

Begitu juga orang Kristian mengadu sampai ke Amerika Syarikat bahawa mereka dikambinghitamkan oleh pihak berkuasa semata-mata kerana pertaruhan politik di negara kita.

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 13 — Many Christians feel victimised and are convinced they are being used as political pawns to win Muslim votes in the next general election, a number of church leaders have said.

The church leaders told the New York Times in a report published today that there was generally a feeling of Christian-bashing among the community which makes up less than 10 per cent of the population and consists of most major denominations. — The Malaysian Insider

Berbalik kepada kenyataan Teresa bahawa YB Lim Guan Eng “tak ada apa-apa agama tertentu”.

Evangelis DAP

Guan Eng bukan Kristian?!

Mungkin Teresa bercakap benar.

Hakikatnya tidak apa-apa sekiranya Kit Siang dan anaknya atheis. Ianya hak seseorang untuk tidak beragama, dan falsafah hidup ini tidak asing di sesetengah negara Barat.

Atheis atau tidak, yang sah Guan Eng memang seorang oportunis.

Pada hari Ahad berikutan peristiwa pemeriksaan/serbuan JAIS atas Damansara Utama Methodist Church, Guan Eng – diiringi Teresa dan Hannah Yeoh – menghadiri upacara keagamaan mingguan di DUMC untuk memberikan sokong moral kepada gereja tersebut. — laporan Utusan.

Jadi, Guan Eng hadir di DUMC hari itu untuk tujuan sembahyang jemaah ataupun untuk berpolitik?

Adakah politikus DAP 2.0 yang tidak tahu menghormati masjid [Teo Nie Ching juga Kristian evangelis, sini] turut memperlekehkan kesucian gereja?

‘Perang salib’

Satu lagi tajuk berita Utusan pada 18 Mei 2011 berbunyi ‘Guan Eng cuba hasut penganut Buddha, Hindu’.

Naib Ketua Pemuda Gerakan Pulau Pinang mendakwa Guan Eng cuba melaga-lagakan penganut pelbagai agama di negara ini melalui perutusannya sempena Hari Wesak.

Kata H’ng Khoon Leng, seolah-olah Guan Eng menghasut penganut Buddha dan Hindu supaya membenci orang Melayu yang beragama Islam. “Apabila saya baca [perutusan tersebut], saya amat kecewa kerana Guan Eng mempolitikkan ucapan tersebut yang sepatutnya menyeru kepada kebaikan,” kata Khoon Leng.

Satu repot polis juga telah dibuat terhadap Guan Eng berkaitan dakwaan hasutan itu.

Hari Wesak ialah untuk memperingati Gautama Buddha tetapi perutusan Guan Eng (yang berjumlah 421-patah perkataan) tidak menyebut nama ‘Buddha’ walau sekalipun. ‘Buddhist’ hanya dipakai Guan Eng untuk merujuk kepada pertubuhan Malaysian Buddhist Association.

Sebaliknya perkataan ‘Kristian’ disebut Guan Eng lapan kali walhal hari itu sambutan Wesak. Dia juga menuduh Ibrahim Ali sebagai menyeru supaya Muslim berjihad menentang orang Kristian. Apa kena-mengena ketua Perkasa dengan Hari Wesak atau pengasas agama Buddha untuk Guan Eng mengungkitkannya?

Antara kandungan perutusan Guan Eng yang berbaur hasutan dalam perutusannya pada Mei 17 selaku setiausuha agung DAP ialah:

Perenggan 3: “Malaysians are shocked and outraged at the inaction by the Home Ministry against Umno-owned paper Utusan Malaysia, for publishing dangerous lies of a Christian conspiracy with DAP to set up a Christian state, that is clearly intended to incite hatred against Christians. The BN government has also refused to act against Perkasa’s Ibrahim Ali for making Christians an object of hate by calling for a crusade (perang jihad) against Christians. Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishamudin Tun Hussein Onn even refused to call Ibrahim Ali an extremist for launching this crusade against Christians.”

Perenggan 4: “DAP is willing to work with all Malaysians including non-Umno component members in BN to oppose this crusade …”

Perenggan 5: “Are non-Malays and non-Muslims an easy target to be blamed and kicked around …?”

Manakala sehari awal pada Mei 16, Guan Eng telah berkata dalam perutusan Wesaknya selaku Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang:

“Even though Christians and not Buddhists are targeted by Umno and Utusan Malaysia this time, what is there to stop Budhhists and Hindus from being the next targets in future”?

Guan Eng juga memetik sebuah sajak terkenal oleh paderi Kristian bernama Martin Niemoller yang menggambarkan penindasan Nazi terhadap kaum-kaum minoriti.

Sekiranya apa yang didedahkan Teresa adalah betul, dan Guan Eng sebenarnya tidak memeluk apa-apa agama, adakah keasyikannya menimbulkan isu-isu Kristian sekadar memperkudakan agama untuk membuak politik benci DAP?

Mungkin atas sebab itu juga, Guan Eng sanggup membayangkan dirinya paling berminat mencontohi Khalifah Umar Abdul Aziz.

Agama boleh ditukar-tukar mengikut musim asalkan ada imbuhan politik.

Anda mungkin juga meminati:

Bangsa dan agama memisahkan umat manusia

Himpun: Bukan akidah digugat tetapi politik evangelis menggugat

Evangelis dan ciri-ciri politik gereja (dikemaskini)

Entry filed under: Evangelis. Tags: , , , , , , .

Tamak betul mereka ini Why blame MCA for Chinese being Chinese?

25 Comments Add your own

  • 1. wewe  |  December 15, 2011 at 12:33 am

    freemason !

    Reply
    • 2. Forsaken Machina  |  December 23, 2011 at 11:23 am

      yup might be freemason. Athiestism can be a very dangerous thing as there’s no religous fundamental that they hold on to. Even a hippy has peace and love.

      Reply
      • 3. Helen Ang  |  December 23, 2011 at 11:46 am

        There were a variety of religions predating Christianity & Islam. I don’t think the world was a more dangerous place before the advent of the monotheistic (Abrahamic) religions than it is today.

        There are many famous people known to have high morals who confess to not being religious.

        Among atheists and agnostics are Bertrand Russell, John Stuart Mill, George Santayana, Albert Camus, Immanuel Kant, Spinoza, Rene Descartes, David Hume, Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Carl Sagan, Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, George Orwell, George Bernard Shaw, Jonathan Swift, Jean-Paul Sartre, Alexis de Tocqueville, Maxim Gorky, and of course Karl Marx as well as personalities in Chinese history.

        The Church considered some to be atheist although they were spiritual men (deist) – e.g. Thomas Paine, the author of Age of Reason and Thomas Jefferson, the author of the American Declaration of Independence.

        Abraham Lincoln disagreed with how Christianity was practised b’cos American white Southerners, although devout Christians, saw nothing wrong with the slave trade.

        However, if Guan Eng were really an agnostic, he’s giving conscientious unbelievers a bad name by his chameleon behaviour!

        Incidentally, the winter solstice was yesterday. There a theory that says it’s the inspiration for Christmas falling on Dec 25.

        Cheers

        Reply
      • 4. BenG  |  December 23, 2011 at 3:55 pm

        @Forsaken Machina
        Awkwardly, freemasons believe in God, but they are not a religion. http://www.ugle.org.uk/static/masonry/A2L-religion.htm

        Secondly, thats where you’re confused. It is an assumption that you need RELIGIOUS fundamentals to be all peaceful and loving and kind. The true answer is any fundamental, whether religious or not will suffice. There are countless of them only if you are willing to read up on them. Social morality theory, Kantian (from Immanuel Kant which Helen gave as an example) ethics, deontology, consequencialism and existentialismn are just a few examples. Also, if you define religion strictly, then Buddhism is not a religion as well (look it up). But from what I observe in Malaysia, Taoist (it is a religion) are considered as Buddhist. And thank you Helen, yes those individuals are indeed free-thinkers (except maybe Einstein? Haha it is been a while since I last read his letter on science and religion).

        And is it a dangerous thing? Whats your stats? Just in case you use a specific to general fallacy on Helen: To be honest with you, do you even know why are there people who are atheist? Its because they think (Infact, most scientist are atheist (or agnostic), this is the US study http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html ). Also, look up on the atheist vs other religions in jail in US study (But there are many many more factors involved, like socioeconomical factors (most atheist are in the higher income spectrum while Christians occupy the entire spectrum) which is why I am awaiting for a more comprehensive set of data which considers all those factors before passing judgement, but the 0.2% is just too big a variation to be frank such that even if you consider the other factors to increase that 0.2%, it is unlikely you can reach 8% !).

        However, chameleon or not, that is how we roll. Help those who needs it (regardless of religion and race). Just because someone else believes in God, we shouldn’t help him/her? We believe that whatever your belief is is strictly your personal life. But we expect you to treat us with respect as much as we respect your religion (ie don’t bother preaching to us, its futile and rude to be honest).

        By the way, to Helen: Interesting theory you have there. ;)

        Reply
      • 5. Forsaken Machina  |  December 23, 2011 at 7:45 pm

        I just got back to ur blog Helen. BenG, sorry i should have written a comprehensive comment before so dat other people wouldn’t misinterprate it but didn’t have the time. U know lah at the office and crammed with work and spying eyes looking at my work station to check either i’m working or reading people’s blogs. hahaha….

        Ok my comment “yup might be freemason” actually reffering to the whole Muslim-Christian conflicts. I think it might be the freemason scheme trying to fuel the conflict. Many people believe including me, most of the world conflicts are or were fuled by the masons. But no conclusive evidence on this statement though.

        Atheism i’m referring to is not of the freemason but Guan Eng. I know freemason believe in God and were part of Christianity but seperated themselves because they did not share the ideas projected by the churches under the Vatican rule. Were believe formed by the surviving Knights of Templar after the crusade. The danger part is that I am just afraid that Guan Eng is being used as a tool by the masons cause if one an atheist, might not understand the same sentiment that a believer has towards the higher power and in context God of that particular religion. Thus might blatantly give out remarks that touch the sensitivity of both religion. Hence the religious fundamentals. Yes any fundamental will suffice, but in this matter religious fundamentals are the priority especially when it’s being politically exploited.

        Sorry again i should have written a clearer comment. Some of the names Helen gave were not really atheist as they were also the founding members of the freemason. A freemason must believe in God right, so they cannot be atheist but they do accept agnostics from time to time. As so to what i read :)

        My stats: a Muslim but not really a religious one. Definitely not a pious and i’ve broken almost every rule of the religion as to a fact that i have tattoos on me.
        ___________________________________________________________________________

        Some of the names were agnostics (as stated earlier). Whatever faith LGE is or is not, he’s an opportunistic politician cynically exploiting religious sentiments. — Helen

        Reply
      • 6. BenG  |  December 27, 2011 at 9:31 am

        @forsaken machina, no worries and it is perfectly understandable :)

        Freemasonry are often linked with various conspiracy theories which may or may not be true. But I believe that is the wrong question to ask now. The correct question would be how to solve the Muslim-Christian conflict that is rampant worldwide. Once the conflict is resolved, then maybe you can ponder on this theory provided that there aren’t any other pressing issues.

        That is where I would disagree with you. Yes there are people like me who are brought up in a religion that has no personal God (buddhism, especially theravada buddhism), and from there I mixed some aspects of buddhism with atheism and sciences, thus forming my philosophies and ideologies from there. However, there are also individuals who previously are Christians, and that in a point in their life they “rejected” the idea of God and became atheist from then on as well. I am not certain how LGE became an atheist, as it depends strictly on his upbringing. But to say he is a tool of the masons is another conspiracy theory (refer to paragraph 2). Does he spew out religious sensitive remarks? I think, if he ever did that, then that would be the end of his political career, as I will not be surprised Utusan, the NST and even Star will be ever waiting to pounce on that opportunity. And you’ll be surprised to know that atheist doesn’t need to practice religious fundamentals to understand religious sensitivity and the fundamentals itself. Go to any atheist hangout spots in forums and ask how did they become an atheist. Some of them will answer that they had read the Bible cover to cover! Personally I have read the bible as well despite not being a christian in my life, and I am planning to read the Quran as well when I am free. It is also surprising that atheist are more knowledgeble in various religions. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/us/28religion.html
        When it comes to addressing religion, I believe that we are not stupid as to address some stupid remark which invokes sensitivity among religions. We still know our limits (but some like Christopher Hitchins and Richard Dawkins are more vocal and they practice true freedom of speech, which whether you like it or not involves some hard cold truth and lies). But as I stated previously, there must be mutual respect for each other. Only then there will be peace. Most of my friends know what my beliefs are, and we try our best not to question each other’s religion (frankly, what is the point of my religion is better than yours kind of remarks?), unless of course the person wants to enquire or ask anything about it.

        It is understandable, so relax about it :) But I guess not many people are that open about religious issues and as a result, tensions arises.

        I respect anyone of any religion, so long as the individual can think for him or herself rationally (which in most cases, going against some plain dumb rules ;) ). A theravada buddhist who rejected the supernatural beliefs of buddhism and replaced it with science.

        PS: Helen, although I understand the freedom of speech, but the vicious ad hominem attacks aren’t really improving things around here.

        Reply
  • 7. HM, Bne  |  December 15, 2011 at 8:28 am

    Macam mana kamu boleh mengatakan pemimpin seperti Guan Eng boleh mengamalkan atheism sedangkan Rukun Negara yang pertama ada lah Kepercayaan Kepada Tuhan? Bukan kah itu bercanggah dengan Rukun Negara sedangkan seorang pemimpin itu di kehendaki mendukung Rukun Negara?
    __________________________________________________________________________________________

    Hmmm, I see your point but I dunno how to answer. Saya ni sebenarnya jenis liberal, jadi bagi saya, tak kisahlah kalau pun seseorang itu ‘Flat Earther‘ iaitu pengikut aliran kepercayaan yang mengatakan dunia sebenarnya datar dan bukan sfera. Agaknya kita kena tanya pada pengasas ajaran sesat M’sian First tu. — Helen

    Reply
    • 8. Darlyn Azlinda  |  December 15, 2011 at 11:57 am

      Betul juga cakap HM, tapi, jgn lupa, orang asli ada juga yg atheis. (LGE mungkin orang asli?) Kepercayaan kepada undang2 itu lebih kepada kebebasan mengamalkan kepercayaan masing2.saya terbaca daripada Prof Khoo (kalau tak silap saya) dalam artikel The NutGraph. mungkin bukan tuhan tapi, dewa dewi ke.tu pun kepercayaan juga. Lagipun peratus Malaysian yg atheis adalah minoriti dalam kalangan minoriti. Perlembagaan Negara adalah guidance. memangla kita kena dukung, tapi kalo org itu tidak mempunyai agama, kita kena paksa dia peluk mane2 agama ke? di Malaysia ni ada toleransi la. even dalam borang yg kena isi untuk pun ada ruangan lain2. Wallahualam.

      Reply
  • 9. BenG  |  December 15, 2011 at 5:27 pm

    There are atheist in Malaysia. And as for the Rukun Negara, we take it as doing the right and sensible thing instead of believing in God (If you have doubts on this, may I recommend reading up on Social Morality Theory, Kantian ethics, Ethical Altruism/Egoism, Deontology, Consequencialism and many many more). Its not orang asli or anything, rather it depends on how an individual thinks. Theravada Buddhist (Note: not Taoism, or even Mahayana Buddhism) strictly do not believe in a personal God, but there are a number of us in Malaysia and we just mix together with society. However, being an “atheist” myself, I can tell you that we support anyone, regardless of race or religion, or even the believe in God(s). We fight alongside our friends if and only if we consider it as wise (And this is dependent on the individual). What LGE did by going to the church is pretty much reasonable by my standards(Although there MAY be a vested interest, we will never be able to confirm it, so I should advice you not to limit yourself to only 2 possible outcomes (politiking and prayers)) as he may be there to provide support for them. I know I would.

    Also, for the record, please take Utusan’s or any material as a matter of fact with a pinch of salt. You should do some research on your own on the said issue instead of just copying and pasting nearly the entire thing. By the way, I read that they were charged with defaming LGE just yesterday. Can a leopard change its spots? Who knows, anything is possible!

    Reply
    • 10. Helen Ang  |  December 15, 2011 at 6:48 pm

      While I understand your caution about Utusan, I do not see the two links I provided above as posing any credibility problem.

      The police report by Pg Gerakan Youth was reported by the English press too. I chose to link Utusan because I priotize BM reports as url references due to my postings and this blog’s language medium being Malay.

      The Wesak episode referred to occurred half a year ago in May. You’ll have to understand that when we Google, the most relevant searches turn up first. Since Utusan has been playing up the Christianization issue, then quite naturally material from the paper turns up at the top of the search results.

      Since you say you’re an atheist, let me ask you this: How often do you go to church? Since this story blew up, I’ve been reading in blogosphere that LGE has made many, many church appearances here and there.

      And one can’t get away with his constantly using Christianity as political capital in the controversies. If he is indeed an atheist as Teresa has let on, what can one make of his cynical exploitation of Christianity when he does not practice any religion himself?

      Reply
  • 11. ching  |  December 15, 2011 at 9:56 pm

    http://myibrah.com/debat-abu-hanifah-dengan-atheis

    Reply
  • 12. BenG  |  December 15, 2011 at 11:46 pm

    Sorry about not seeing those links that you have included into the article. Somehow my browser on my work computer was unable to load them due to certificate errors.

    Now with that fresh info, I think I have to clarify a few things. Wesak day, as I understand it (I do celebrate it as I am part Buddhist) is more on remembering the teachings of the Buddha, not celebrating Buddha himself (tho that day is called Wesak day as the Buddha was born, enlightened and passed away on that day). But frankly it is up to individual interpretations, That is my interpretation, as I see that you can celebrate Buddha, but it would be pointless, whereas understanding and remembering his values is more significant. Thus even if you do not mention Buddha’s name, doesn’t mean he is insulting (is that what hasut means? cause my BM is a little rusty) Buddhist. His speech on further analysis, the first half is quite reasonable within the context of Buddhist teachings (middle path) and some minor (you can see it as major, but it is a problem/plague that has to be solved no matter what) political undertones. But his second half is highly, if not purely political, and I agree that it is not very nice to be included into the message. But as a hasut? Maybe to those who are highly sensitive, but you can’t expect much from a politician anyway (even UK and particularly US politicians).

    I have been to a few churches in my life, but only on specific events which I see fit. Like I said, it is up to the individual. Consider the church’s state: You have just been ransacked by JAIS, who claims you’re converting Muslims, who do you go to for help? The police? They are busy entertaining themselves with bribes. If you want to go to court, you need some knowledge on the system. Thats where politicians step in (unless some Bar members/lawyers want to do a pro bono (I doubt the church will pay)) . Some prefers to apologize over the phone (Khalid), others prefer to provide advise (can be next course of action/law/constitutional rights etc) face to face. And if it coincides with Sunday (why visit on sunday, prayers, anything lah, as long as I don’t disrupt the sermon (If he did disrupt the sermon with political speeches, then I’m sure some paper particularly Utusan would have caught it) (I also had participated in some Christian prayers myself, and I just act along with it because I respect them as a different religion).

    Blogospheres I’m sure you’re wise enough to judge for yourself as pretty much 90% of it are hearsay. Unless it is backed with valid sources such as your article here with those (some) links.

    It became a political opportunity once someone (you know who) decides to drag it into the political arena. I can tell you no one can get away. However, one must also see the other side of it other than just politics. If this issue is unresolved, then what will happen to our beloved country, more segregation. Is this what you want?! At least now there is someone who is willing to fix it, it automatically becomes his advantage because that is what all of us wants! Also I believe in action than words, and as in his Penang gov, so far so good (yes there were mishaps here and there, but I don’t see any racial outbreaks, unless you’re willing to consider the “weekly” mat rempit gatherings outside komtar). Maybe its because I don’t live in Penang, but I asked my relatives, and they say it is better there.

    Your last sentence irks me the most. If I am not mistaken, you stated that he should not exploit Christianity for the sake of political mileage. And as an added bonus to this “cynical exploitation”, he is an atheist! I think you are looking at it through the perspective of an individual who is thinking strictly politically. Christians had been targeted due to a certain individual, saying a Christian Malaysia bla bla bla, but the point is a rift is made. We are drifting apart from each other, when we are suppose to merge. So here is this individual who champions equality, to uphold the freedom of religion (DAP is a secular political party), and he sees this rift, and tries to repair the damage. If people like it, its because it is the right thing to do! You can call it exploitation, I call it the fix. And his personal beliefs have nothing to do with this. It is better for a political party/individual to be secular, as then there will be no favouritism. Its an added bonus to be an atheist personally. Infact, studies/surveys show that atheist understand other people’s religion better than others! So do not assume an atheist is someone who is ignorant of religion, on the contrary, its someone who knows more about it. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/us/28religion.html

    From my perspective, I am not surprised of Christians are caughts converting Muslims, or other people as well, because (not to offend anyone, it is my experience), I do know that they are somewhat more “aggressive” in converting than other religions (except Islam). Buddhist are more laid back, and technically speaking, our religion forbids us to forcibly convert anyone. It has to come from your own will thats all. But I will not be surprised if Buddhist get the other end of the Perkasa stick someday and I would want someone to stand with me to fight this racism(Even if he is Malay/Hindu/Christian/Atheist/Jain/Jew/).
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    BenG,

    I agree with you that “It is better for a political party/individual to be secular, as then there will be no favouritism”. However, I disagree that DAP 2.0 is secular.

    I also disagree that LGE upholds the freedom of religion. (See here.)

    As to whether he’s mending the rift or widening it, I’d plump for the latter. I cannot think of any other Chinese individual as hated & distrusted by the Malays as LGE is. He’s second only to Chin Peng in this regard.

    Helen

    Reply
    • 13. BenG  |  December 16, 2011 at 11:35 am

      Sorry, but could you post up the link again? Can’t say much as a result. Hmm, I can’t argue on your POV definitely, but I don’t think we have many choices here. Its also mainly public perception/education/upbringing, and there aren’t many people in Malaysia who are critical thinkers like you. If considering your POV, they are not secular, then we have to choose between 2 evils in this scenario. The best for us is to choose the lesser evil and hope for our (and our children’s) sakes that a 2-party system (In theory, a 2-party system should be effective as one will keep the other in check, but so far this is not exactly working in Malaysia yet) will bring sense into both parties, unless a third force (or the people themselves) step up and make a revolution which is highly unlikely.

      I am not too sure on your views regarding LGE, so far as to compare him with Chin Peng. Frankly speaking, it is “that” close to an ad hominem. However, may I post my theory on why this is as such. It is I believe due to the NEP abolishment. Don’t get me wrong, but I am in favour of this action. The NEP’s goal was to bring up the rural/semirural or even urban Malays economically and also the other aspects like employment etc. The goals are good, but the method which they used is not accurate. “Give a man a fish, and he will go hungry the next day; Teach a man to fish, and he will never go hungry forever”. The NEP is equivalent to giving a man a fish, but not teaching them the proper attitude/workmanship etc. Also, it is interesting to note that because of the NEP, nons are infact more hardworking and overachievers solely because in Malaysia, you don’t work hard, you “die” (ask any non-Malay student, and I experienced it myself. Also, if I may add, our chinese are infact more hardworking than Singaporean chinese. I asked a middle-income Sing before and he said thats why the gov likes to bring in those people, which caused the public to be angry and thus their lower support). Whether or not this is a racist policy I don’t care, it is not the right question to ask. But the right question is, is this the correct policy to fix the problem. Sadly, I would have to say no.

      PS: What LGE did was too sudden. If I were him, I would have developed another “Malay self-sustenance training” system alongside the NEP, which once it is fully operational, will make the NEP obsolete as now we can have meritocracy with the Malays as competitive as the Chinese in all sectors. Also would do the same for Indians and now we can have meritocracy (Which is what we all want really, to be judged solely on merits and not colour).
      ___________________________________________________________________________________

      The link you asked for is this, https://helenang.wordpress.com/2011/08/20/butir-butir-kes-murtad-di-pulau-pinang/

      As for weaning Malays off the NEP, what LGE has done is to entrench (not reform) the system. For the 30% bumiputera quota under BN, he increased it to 98-100% in Pakatan Pg to bodek and get Malay votes.

      https://helenang.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/pg-bumi-contractors-rm61-4m-non-bumi-400k/

      https://helenang.wordpress.com/2011/07/30/chinese-indians-are-useless-buggers-implies-dap/

      Reply
      • 14. Helen Ang  |  December 16, 2011 at 12:18 pm

        POSTSCRIPT: Zaid Ibrahim seorang-seorang sahaja tokoh politik yang pernah menunjukkan keprihatin terhadap kes Tan Yi Min — https://helenang.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/penjelasan-edmund-bon-tentang-tweet-murtadnya/

        Not a squeak from anyone in the Penang and S’gor Pakatan state govts over her snatching, and the evident breach of the law pertaining to unilateral religious conversion of minors.

        Prior to March 8, 2008, DAP & LKS would have been the ones shouting from the rooftops over cases like this.

        Reply
      • 15. BenG  |  December 16, 2011 at 1:07 pm

        AH! THAT case. Its a sad thing really. But I don’t think anyone can really speak out once you have done the research into syaria. Firstly, unilateral divorce is acceptable in syaria, both husband and wife can apply for it, but they have only a slight difference in terms. Secondly, the custory of a child after a divorce in Syaria is generally awarded to the mother, until the child is “independent” enough, which is around age 7 or 8. As a result, the Syariah court’s ruling is solid. To speak up against this is to effectively speak up against Syaria. That is why, even if any DAP/PKR/PAS politician speak up against this, they are in a way insulting Islamic Syaria, and you know what happens (Yes I consider politicians to be selfish, as it is the only conclusion you can make with mathematical models). Zaid, ah just look at his support. If you want to prevent this from happening, I think the only way is to change Syaria itself. If you want to argue that it violates Article 11, truthfully, it does, but there is nothing you can do about it, or even politicians as a matter of fact (The fact that the PAB was passed and also violates the constitution makes our constitution seem null and void).

        Erm thats all the stats that you have? It is too hasty to make a conclusion solely on those stats (even if it is legit stats). For starters, stats showing the quota of people who actually applied for the job would be of much use (Who knows, 18 people applied and the 18 people got the job, and all 18 are Malay!). Unlikely, but certainly possible. The same can be said with any other stats (people just love manipulating their interpretation often, especially some research papers).

        The same applies to Yayasan Selangor Malaysia (and any other stats as a matter of fact). The best way to compare is to compare the percentages of those who applied, with those who got the offer. University (American Unis, and Cambridge) webpages do it like this so that you can judge for yourself better.

        PS: I am not pro nor against your reasoning. Also, I still have a lot more to learn as I am still “young” (can’t vote yet hahahaha :D ). You have very strong points at times, and I do agree politicians often do politiking most of their time (It is part of their job requirement! Otherwise, people won’t vote for them). I hope that this discussion of ours is mutually beneficial, and you are one of the few good bloggers out there. Keep it up! :)

        Reply
        • 16. Helen Ang  |  December 16, 2011 at 5:36 pm

          (1) Tan Yi Min’s parents contracted a civil marriage. The child was born to parents who were both non-Muslims at the time of her birth. Thus Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over father and child despite the mother’s later conversion to Islam, and her divorce and successfully gaining custody (enabling the child-snatching by officers of the Selangor religious authorities) through the Syariah Court.

          The several Indian cases of a similar nature – Shamala, Subashini, Indira Gandhi – indicate that the civil marriage should be dissolved first before custody is decided.

          In other words, you don’t marry under civil law and divorce under syariah law. (You marry under civil law, you should divorce under civil law – under the assumption that one partner might not have agreed to get married in the first place if he/she could have anticipated that the spouse would use syariah as a sure-win instrument to get hold of the children).

          (2) The law does not allow the unilateral conversion of minors (Yi Min is only 7) without the consent of the other parent. If DAP is a secular party as you claim, they would strive to defend the jurisdiction of the civil courts in cases such as these.

          (3) The statistics regarding contracts awarded by the Pg state govt were excerpted from the chief minister’s own website. I cite them b’cos those were the very stats that LGE was boasting about to the world.

          (4) In 2008 when Pakatan began ruling Selangor, the number of loan applications jumped 68 percent and the whole pie went to bumiputera students while the ‘nons’ received crumbs. http://tinyurl.com/79mdcf2

          About the lack of Chinese applicants, if the Foundation had advertised only in Sinar Harian, Selangor Times and Makkal Osai, how could you possibly expect potential Chinese students who are interested to know about the offer? Neither they nor their parents would likely be reading the 3 publications named above.

          Since the Foundation did not seek to make it widely known – say through announcements in the popular Chinese newspapers – then what can we say about their sincerity?

          In fact, since 2008, the number of non-Malay recipients have been plummeting. In 2010, out of 1,500 Yayasan Selangor scholarships, only two went to Chinese.

          If the Foundation had wanted to redress the gross imbalance given the complaints since 2008, then the figures by 2011 would have rectified the bias.

          And if the Pakatan govt of S’gor were truly sincere about eradicating racial discrimination (which they claim BN practises), they would have taken action to ensure that the percentages of the applications were not so preposterously skewed.

          Furthermore, despite the Pakatan claim that they reject the BN race-based formula, Teresa Kok in responding to this scholarship issue had produced the classification of applicants by race — meaning that the application procedures/selection process had asked for ethnic identification after all.

          http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/06/07/yayasan-sgor-under-fire-over-scholarships/

          Reply
      • 17. BenG  |  December 21, 2011 at 12:16 pm

        (1) http://confinder.richmond.edu/admin/docs/malaysia.pdf Read page 181 and 175. “The constitution, organisation and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall
        have jurisdiction only over person professing the religion of Islam and in respect only of any of the
        matters included in this paragraph.”

        Thus, Syariah has jurisdiction over the mother and not on the other 2 individuals (which you have said). However, having said that, since she is under syariah, she will be able to apply syariah law as it is considered as Islamic personal law (pg 175) which includes divorce and guardianship and it will not be under civil law (for her that is). As for your “you don’t marry under civil law and divorce under syariah law. (You marry under civil law, you should divorce under civil law – under the assumption that one partner might not have agreed to get married in the first place if he/she could have anticipated that the spouse would use syariah as a sure-win instrument to get hold of the children)”, can’t be found in the constitution. Which is one of the many flaws in our constitution.

        (2) I beg to differ. Article 12 (pg 8), clause 4. As now the mother is the daughter’s legal guardian under syariah law, she is able to convert her daughter as she has the power to decide.

        (3) I very well know where those stats came from. So what is your point? Moreover, in addition to this stats, I would want to know what is the quota of the people who applied for it (which you have yet to provide).

        (4) I am very confused on the thing right now. At a point you mentioned loan, in another its a scholarship. Do note that the 2 are different. A loan has to be repaid back, whereas a scholarship may or may not be repaid (depending on the conditions imposed). So please fix this before continuing.

        However, assuming that you are infact mentioning scholarship which is this http://www.yayasanselangor.org.my/bia_am.html . I’m sure you can read those eligibility criteria. A few interesting things to note.
        A) Pemohon mestilah pelajar Rancangan Khas Pendidikan Yayasan Selangor dan sedang belajar di tingkatan satu hingga lima di Asrama Yayasan Selangor.
        – So what is the quota of race for these individuals? Considering that this scholarship is strictly limited to these individuals only. Your assumption is that this scholarship is open to all, which is not. Also, even if we had that quota, its still not accurate to extrapolate that quota as the percentages of races who applied (this will be most accurate).

        B)Pelajar tidak mendapat sebarang bantuan dari mana-mana badan.
        -Why is this of significance. Because of this http://www.yayasanselangor.org.my/bia_jenis.html
        -Seems like petty cash really. Assuming a 4 year course, the total will be RM6160 (for the special scholarship with higher pay). Also, (assumption) if someone could find this scholarship, I am sure that the person would also be exposed to other (better) scholarships (especially JPA and some GLC/private scholarships) than this. Then if the person had to choose between 2 scholarships, I am certain he/she would choose the one with higher returns. Also, if he/she has obtained this scholarship, I wouldn’t be surprised if they obtained other scholarships as well.

        Remember that this scholarship is only open to a few individuals with the right background. Now to apply for the “special education plan” I am sure that they would have gone online and probably have looked at the biasiswa as well. http://www.yayasanselangor.org.my/ Thus, I doubt they require such major advertising. Do remember also that advertising requires funding and also it is probably cheaper to advertise with those papers as compared to more popular ones. Also, your statistics is confusing. You said that in 2010, 1500 people got the scholarship? Isn’t it the sum of 2009 and 2008?! Check that.

        What action can you take if the number of applicants are low themselves (this is a scenario). Accept all? Then its not with merit anymore. Also, what can you do if you offered them but they decline. Not much right?! It would be a very different story if they increased their offer money (unlikely) and open the scholarship to the public instead of a selected few.

        Ahha, so your point is for them to not have the race section in the form? Well we may never know for sure whether they had used this for selection, but one of the reasons it is there is to obtain data for census or whatever (guess they didn’t put a disclaimer there). Moreover, where did you get Teresa Kok saying that. Or is it all hearsay?

        Went on a 5 day hiatus enjoying peace and happiness.

        Reply
        • 18. Helen Ang  |  December 21, 2011 at 1:47 pm

          (1) Civil or Syariah Court? ‘Whose jurisdiction’ is the field of contention following on from the amendment to the Constitution introduced by Dr M, i.e. Article 121 (1A). The custody cases involving several Indian moms whose husbands converted to Islam, preceding Yi Min, have still not brought us any closer to sorting it out. Hence the Constitution is has to be definitely interpreted but the lawyers still arguing over interpretation. However, if DAP claims to be a secular party upholding secularism, then we should hear the party’s voice on this quarrel. Not a single squeak from DAP on Yi Min’s case.

          (2) You’re saying that the Muslim convert mother – after unilaterally obtaining custody from the Syariah Court & having officials from the religious dept snatch the child from school – is allowed to convert a minor (7 years old) to Islam without the consent of the Buddhist father. And remember that Yi Min was converted 24 hours after her kidnapping. How can a traumatized child forcefully transferred hundreds of miles pell-mell from Pg to S’gor by strangers (the Muslim officials) who’s been brought up in a Chinese Buddhist family & studying in Chinese school suddenly and overnight bear witness to Allah (mengucap dua kalimah syahadah)? What does she know about Islam for her to be inducted into the faith? How can a conversion under such circumstances be valid?

          (3) We’re talking about the Pakatan policy which claims that it is race blind & constantly accuses BN of racial discrimination. If the Chinese & Indian students
          are a mere handful out of thousands of successful recipients, then the question reverts to how the Pakatan govt in S’gor is conducting itself and its efforts to redress the old problem that was prevalent under BN and for which they’ve been criticizing the govt when DAP was the opposition pre-2008. The DAP politicians keep bashing & slamming BN for their communal formula (Umno-Malay/MCA-Chinese/MIC-Indian). So the issue: If Pakatan truly rejects race discrimination, then how come after 3 years in power and annual complaints, a state agency under their administration has not attempted to remedy the situation where less than 1 percent of the scholarships go to the ethnic minorities. The onus is not on the applicants (i.e. shortage of Chinese applicants), it’s on the giver to rectify the imbalance.

          (4) According to media reports, it’s both Loan & Scholarship. The stats refer to different years.

          Remember that S’gor is the richest state in the country. And pls don’t give me the excuse that the foundation doesn’t have enough money to advertize in a Chinese paper. Read this on what Yayasan S’gor is spending its money on, ‘Sultan, MB to give RM300,000 dinner a miss‘ & Google which agency in S’gor sponsored the lavish wedding of the Angkasawan Negara.

          For the foundation to only place advertisments in Sinar Harian & S’gor Times (plus one Tamil paper) & say that by doing this they’ve tried to make known the scholarship to Chinese students is just a load of.

          Every scholarship is welcome. Of course, those that qualify for a higher quantum (straight As, head prefect, etc) — good for them. But for the lesser quantum scholarships, there are still more applicants than offers. Don’t look down on RM6,160. I’ve personally interviewed hundreds of financial aid applicants myself. The sum we gave out varies from case to case.

          As for Teresa Kok’s defence on the performance of S’gor in the uneven distribution of the scholarships, pls Google for yourself. It was in the news.

          Reply
      • 19. BenG  |  December 21, 2011 at 3:03 pm

        (1) Yes the lawyers are the ones who have to interpret the constitution and each interpretation may vary (such as yours and mine). But who are the ones who amend, create laws? That is where the parliament comes in. Do you honestly think that the majority in parliament now will ever pass/amend this in the constitution? Moreover, should DAP decide to speak a single word on this, I think the majority (especially UMNO and perkasa) will say they are “Christian/Chinese agents whatever whatever whatever with the republic and all”. The conclusion is that Malaysians are not prepared for this shift in thinking yet. This can be somewhat linked to tons of atheist bashing here in Malaysia. Change the mindset of the people before changing the laws. Also, should DAP (already being labelled the Christian/republic etc) speak on this, I think public perception of them based on the labels will be reinforced. You should place yourself in their position before justifying their actions. Try being a secularist / atheist in Malaysia for a month and speak your mind in public and see what will happen. With the right crowd you’re fine, with the wrong crowd, you’re gonna get bashed.

        (2) The unfortunate answer is in the constitution. As stated in my previous comment (2nd point), the mother has THAT right as now she is the LEGAL guardian. Thus she is indeed following our laws (I can say our laws are “dumb” for allowing this). Also, are you that ignorant in how the various Islamic departments (JAIS, JAKIM and co) do things? They are known to raid motels to find any “wrongdoings” by Muslims (even when the motel is occupied by non-muslims), raid a church (I detest the raid, if there was evidence, they should have done something more civilised). Frankly I am not surprised if they even converted a 7 year old and forced the “oath” down her throat to convert her. If they had ever been civilised, I think Malaysia would be a much much better place as compared to now.

        (3) I’m just gonna lump P3 and P4 into one here. Point taken that it is yayasan’s responsibility in publicising the scholarship or loan. However, could some newspapers be biased in allowing space for advertising it? It is an interesting question to ponder. Heck it, even my school was in the middle of a political debatacle once where one opposition politician was disallowed to attend a function although the individual was from my school. Also, the media reports are wrong (sorry if I misintepreted your statement, but it is kind of fuzzy). It is not a loan/scholarship, the 2 are different. A loan is a loan (pinjaman), a scholarship is a scholarship (biasiswa), both with different criteria and eligibility. As for the scholarship, like I said, we have to see the stats for the people under the special education plan as only they are eligible. Also if that is the case, then the issue would have been caused around 5 years back already (the intake is form 1). If it is the loan, this one is different. The applicants are those who have offers from local unis (which you and I know the quota system is in place). To add to this, the money they offer is much lower than the PTPTN loan (I read up on it and nearly applied for it before).
        Moreover, please reread my line. 6k for 4 years. which means 1500 for a year, or 125 per month. I don’t think I am underestimating the value at all. Last I checked, 125 per month can barely get you through (even if you perform some heavy cost-cutting measures as well). I tried 200 a month, and it was rough. And this is for the special one, for the small scholarship its 73 per month! Also, there are no varying amounts for different applicant backgrounds (unless you consider the small and special scholarship as that). This is no US college where they consider everything and calculate the amount you need to pay.
        Oh and I google and found this instead. Do know that I know that there may be a vested interest, but yeah http://teresakok.com/2011/06/10/selangor-state-government-education-loans-is-open-to-all-malaysians-with-no-racial-quota-imposed/

        Reply
        • 20. Helen Ang  |  December 21, 2011 at 6:29 pm

          (1) DAP is supposed to be a secular party. Now it behaves like an evangelist party. ‘Jom ubah’ — they changed themselves first, obviously.

          (2) Some DAP Chinese have been quite vocal in their support of hudud.

          (3) The offer includes hostel (which means food, lodging and presumably books etc already provided for) if I’m not mistaken. Hence the cash should be just extra pocket money.

          Reply
      • 21. BenG  |  December 22, 2011 at 10:48 am

        (1) I will never know for sure how you can prejudge an individual or a party for being “evangelical”. However, it is good practice to always judge people’s actions without bringing in any prejudgement (the best way is to place yourself in their own shoes like a thought experiment). Certain articles (such as this) are an example of it. Also, the slight lack of research on our parts are partially at fault. An article speaks volumes on the subject, but it also speaks volumes on the writer (as observed when you were responding to Selena Tay’s articles). However, I will give credit when credit is due and that some of your articles are indeed worth reading (and sharing, such as aku Cina) as it is well thought out.

        (2) I am fully aware that some members in DAP are for hudud, whereas the party’s stand is against it. To go deeper into the issue, we need to trully understand what is hudud. I asked a Malay teacher of mine once and she said hudud has different punishments (such as chopping off one’s hands for stealing). The arguments can go both ways to be frank if this is the case. My personal beliefs would be against it (as I believe that it is the mind that steals, not the hands. As such I am also against the prison and capital punishment system). However, others may see it as an effective scare tactic in preventing crime, so long as only malays practice it (which violates the equality requirement in the constitution and its another story again). Thus the agreement by certain individuals.

        (3) I am also not certain. For the loan it is less than PTPTN, and I highly doubt the loan will pay for the tuition fees. As for the scholarship, book are already provided by the government (SPBT). The only issue would be housing, food, facilities, and possibly PTA funding. If I am not mistaken, even school fees are abolished sometime back (or did they reintroduce it?). But I doubt so, as one criteria of the scholarship is that the parents’ monthly income should not be greater than 2000. Which I am guessing the student would have to pay for something.

        Reply
    • 22. Hussin Rahman  |  December 24, 2011 at 6:27 pm

      I hate LGE more than I hate Hitler.

      Reply
  • 23. BenG  |  December 15, 2011 at 11:50 pm

    *Sorry, forgot to add. Erm why on a Sunday. Primarily because its a weekend and he would probably be free. Why not Saturday? That I do not know, because there are other factors at play here (can be transport, other events, meeting up with the other people) but also possibly he can meet more people.

    Reply
  • 24. mohd maiyidin  |  December 16, 2011 at 7:22 pm

    Dulu saya kata saudari ni salah seorang diantara 1000 penulis blok yg dilantik barisan, anda nafikan. Nampaknya tulisan saudari lebih kepada politik untuk menghemtam pakatan rakyat.
    Saya baca blok ni kerana fikir ada isu berkaitan kelemahan kerajaan sedia ada (bukan kelemahan barisan tetapi kelemahan kerajaan pilihan rakyat yg memerlukan pendapat bagi menambahbaikanya)
    Jadi macammana sekarang? nak sanggah lagi ke tidak?

    Reply
    • 25. Helen Ang  |  December 16, 2011 at 8:07 pm

      Okay, beginilah.

      Dalam satu posting saya yang awal pun ada seorang pembaca pernah memberi komen: “Helen, how many BN mps hold two seats? Or you’re not allowed to write about that?”

      Biar saya sekarang melayan kedua-dua aduan sekaligus.

      Daripada asyik merungut kenapa saya tak tulis ni lah dan tu lah untuk menghentam parti pemerintah, saya cadangkan baik Maiyidin saja yang dok buat research, buat write-up dan sekiranya kandungan releven dengan tajuk, saya akan publish.

      Misalannya merujuk kepada contoh pembaca yang disebutkan tadi, kalau dia sanggup menyiapkan jadual para wakil-wakil YB Umno yang memegang dua kerusi iaitu pada peringkat negeri dan persekutuan -‘Tamak betul mereka ini’ (Dis 14) – saya bersedia muat-turunkan di blog ini sebagai satu posting untuk tatapan semua pembaca.

      Tawaran yang sama (yakni memberi ruang) saya hulurkan kepada saudara juga.

      Reply

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


FOREVER record: World’s oldest PM

Countdown to Mahathir’s 100th birthdayJuly 10th, 2025
5.4 years to go.

Recent Posts

My blog, my like

Helen Ang

Archives

Pengunjung

  • 8,553,126 hits

Kalender

December 2011
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

%d bloggers like this: