Posted in Mama DAPster

Felixia Yeap: From mermaid to muslimah

427 komen ucapan syukur alhamdulillah & subhanallah oleh peminat di blog Felixia / Hannah Yeoh: From hypocrite to hidayah? Samax2 doakanlah

(140 abjad)

MermaidForHire

[Singapore] She can be your mermaid for $1,600‘ (The New Paper, 30 Aug 2013)

 

Disyorkan baca:

Adakah Puan Speaker memberi tazkirah di surau?

MAIS menjunjung amanah mentadbir dan melindungi Islam, bukan?

Author:

I have no Faceook or Twitter.

73 thoughts on “Felixia Yeap: From mermaid to muslimah

  1. Sebagai tanda Solidarity dan Ukwah sesama Muslim, saya memohon jasabaik Cik Helen untuk MEMADAMKAN gambar Saudari Rania Yeap. In previous report in other portal, she has made an attempt to delete all her “undesirable” photos and has pleaded that her followers will give her time to do that gradually. I admire and respect her effort to change for the better gradually, and I believe many born Muslims out there don’t have the same courage to do so. I have seen that before and now, myself included.

    I dare to say that what she had done before is rather mild compared to what I have done as a born Muslim. Bukan niat membuka aib saya sendiri, tapi untuk mengingatkan diri saya sendiri untuk berusaha lebih kuat lagi untuk berubah kepada kebaikan.

    Alhamdulillah, She is already a Muslimah and I pray that Allah swt will grant her strength, courage, patience, iman and taqwa as a Muslim. Setiap orang Islam itu akan diuji.

    “Dan Kami pasti akan menguji kamu dengan sedikit ketakutan, kelaparan, kekurangan harta, jiwa dan buah-buahan. Dan sampaikanlah khabar gembira kepada orang yang sabar. (iaitu) orang-orang yang apabila ditimpa musibah, mereka berkata “innalillahi wa inna ilaihi raji’un” (sesungguhnya kami milik Allah dan kepada-Nyalah kami kembali).” Al-Baqarah: 155-156

    1. LOL,

      re: “saya memohon jasabaik Cik Helen untuk MEMADAMKAN gambar Saudari Rania Yeap”

      Why you menyibuk when she herself is insisting that her past photos remain intact?

      In my blog you like to talk about the club-hopping and wild partying that you used to do all the time. But yet you now want to arrogate yourself the role of Religious Police and prevent Felixia from sharing the lessons she learnt so that orang lain boleh ambil iktibar.

      Some of her Malay fans have made the same request to her that you’re making here. She explained that she is not going to attempt to erase her past because it is her previous life experiences that has taken her journey to where it is today. If you don’t understand her past, how can you understand her present and where she wants to take her future?

      Don’t you think that it is precisely her past that makes the contrast with her hijab-wearing today all the more stark, and if you like (from the Muslim point of view) demonstrates the great light of hidayah shone on her? If a bespectacled librarian who always wears maxi skirt were to convert, do you think that it will make any impact on the public consciousness?

      This debate has been clarified before. Her own blog and Facebook are still carrying the sexy poses. If she had wanted her photos to disappear into a black hole, she would have junked it herself starting with her own social media. She didn’t and she has already explained why.

      Below is a screenshot taken just a few minutes ago of the Official Felixia website, http://felixiayeap.blogspot.com/

      null

      As you can see for yourself, she has retained her Playboy bunny logo in the website masthead right at the top of the page as well as the photo showing her cleavage.

      And below is a screenshot of her Facebook timeline, similarly taken just a few minutes ago. The photos currently available in her Facebook are those of her in micro mini skirts and her bunny suit. They have not been purged.

      null

      Furthermore, if you read her Facebook profile, https://www.facebook.com/FelixiaYeapOfficialPage

      she has listed her bunny history, her Playboy spreads and other modelling and photo shoots. She has not made the attempt to obscure her past. You are.

      Being in denial only creates a vacuum that leaves people wondering at the disconnect, “Eh, why Felixia so different from the other millions of Malaysian Chinese women?”

      She wants the public to understand why she is different (or why she changed). You are constraining her from explaining herself.

      1. “Gambar-gambar lama tu saya akan delete, tapi ianya akan memakan masa berminggu-minggu (tanpa kerja atau buat kerja lain) kerana ianya adalah gambar dari tahun 2010/2011 sehingga sekarang, jadi bukan satu dua gambar, tapi beribu-ribu”

        http://www.rotikaya.com/felixia-yeap-saya-akan-padam-gambar-lama-beri-masa/

        As a woman yourself, don’t you have little bit of sympathy for her. You don’t need to politicize everything, sometimes you need to draw a line. She is a just another human being, a woman, a sister daughter and a niece with a past. She has turn a new leaf, is it too much to ask you to empathize and show a little respect for another woman?

        Once I posted news about ugly dog or something demeaning about the dog, and without hesitation you asked me to not poking fun or further allow it to be the object of ridicule or hatred ( I can’t remember the exact words). Why can’t Rania Yeap case be any different?

        I strongly defended Ms Catherine Chin for being exploited by The J-Star via her photo. It is not about politics, but it is about learning to respect and empathize with the external party who has no interest in this cyber-war to be the object of ridicule. I don’t have to like her, but that is the only right thing to do.

        Most of us here don’t know her Helen, and there is high probability that she doesn’t know us too. One day, God Willing, our path may cross hers and God forbid that the circumstance should be less than desirable to our disadvantage, what would we do then? Ask for mercy, empathy and sympathy from her.

        You, yourself don’t like it if people criticize and make fun of you, although it is their personal opinion based on observation of your writing style, direction and motives which have become very clear. Though some of the times we disagree, still, without hesitation many of us come to your defense, and that is solidarity is all about.

        You are a PARADOX Helen, you defended her (I assumed based on your writing) when the Dapsters and Evangelista poking fun of her, but this morning a day after she becomes a Muslim you resort to this posting? MENJ is right when he commented “What is your problem with Felixia, really?”

        Why do you have to post old news with headline that is very demeaning ‘She can be your mermaid for $1,600‘ that spells EROTIC INNUENDO, while your main target is Madam Speaker? Sensationalism works many of the time Helen, but this one is way out of line.

        It is not just you Helen, in case you haven’t noticed I have done the same to all other Muslim followers who poked fun of Islam before i.e. from Lebai Malang, Syirik Kecil to Halal Ginger Alle. But I didn’t say it, I backed them up with references. and here is for the case of Rania Yeap, to show that I am not “MENYIBUK”.

        Rasulullah SAW bersabda yang bermaksud : “Tidaklah seorang hamba menutupi aurat (aib) orang lain di dunia kecuali Allah SWT menutupi auratnya (aibnya ) di akhirat “ (Hadis Riwayat Muslim)

        Dari Ibnu Umar radhiyallahu ‘anhu ia berkata : Rasulullah SAW naik ke atas mimbar, lalu memanggil dengan suara yang tinggi : “Wahai orang-orang yang beriman dengan lisannya dan iman itu belum sampai ke hati mereka, janganlah menyakiti orang-orang yang beriman, janganlah mencela mereka, dan janganlah mencari-cari aurat (aib) mereka, kerana barangsiapa mencari-cari aib saudaranya yang muslim, maka Allah membuka aibnya dan memalukannya walaupun dia berada di dalam rumahnya. (Hadis Riwayat Tirmidzi).

        http://bicarasantai.com/2014/03/21/kewajipan-menutup-aib-saudara-sesama-islam/

        It is very true that this is “My Blog, My like”, but why do you need another external party to hate you, while the best option is to remain supportive or neutral, and garner more support?

        1. LOL,

          Did Felixia appoint you her spokesman to speak on her behalf?

          re: “Gambar-gambar lama tu saya akan delete, tapi ianya akan memakan masa berminggu-minggu (tanpa kerja atau buat kerja lain) kerana ianya adalah gambar dari tahun 2010/2011 sehingga sekarang, jadi bukan satu dua gambar, tapi beribu-ribu”

          The Roti Kaya story you quoted also had this to say:

          “Salah satu perkara yang menjadi isu adalah KEENGGANAN Felixia Yeap untuk MEMADAMgambar lama beliau sepanjang berkecimpung dalam dunia model dengan menyatakan itu adalah hasil kerja keras beliau sebelum ini — namun model ini nampaknya mengubah fikiran.”

          Secondly about “bukan satu dua gambar, tapi beribu-ribu” excuse. Granted. I too have thousands of photos, charts, graphs, tables and cartoons in my blog archives. However if you will look at my masthead above, you can see that I’m featuring the ‘Alice in Wonderland’ Disney character.

          To delete the Alice cartoon at the top of the homepage will just take me two clicks to access from my website dashboard, as compared to archived stuff that may require some sifting.

          Now look at Felixia’s blog masthead where she has kept her pink Playboy bunny logo and the photos of her blonde look with the cleavage showing. If she had wanted to delete those blonde hair pictures, all she needs to do is make two clicks (unlike if dealing with old photos in the archives).

          But as of this morning, she has still maintained the bunny logo and the blonde hair pictures despite the heavy web traffic that her blog has been receiving of late.

          re: “As a woman yourself, don’t you have little bit of sympathy for her. You don’t need to politicize everything, sometimes you need to draw a line. She is a just another human being, a woman, a sister daughter and a niece with a past. She has turn a new leaf, is it too much to ask you to empathize and show a little respect for another woman?”

          As a man and of a different race some more, are you putting yourself forward as being better able to speak on her behalf than she herself?

          Like I’ve said since you insist on pushing it, anyone of her 816,000 Facebook fans has access to her photo timeline which still maintains all her sexy modelling and media photos — hundreds of them.

          If she’s keeping her dedah aurat photos still available for public viewing (as of this morning), who are you to play Religious Police and ban the snapshot of the Singapore New Paper mermaid centrespread? Don’t you think that being featured so prominently by the media of a foreign country signals a level of publicity success that she might be proud of?

          Why don’t you ask her first rather than presuming to be her spokesman?

          re: “Once I posted news about ugly dog or something demeaning about the dog, and without hesitation you asked me to not poking fun or further allow it to be the object of ridicule or hatred ( I can’t remember the exact words). Why can’t Rania Yeap case be any different?”

          Here, this is the page and I really don’t know why you had to post the dog pix, https://helenang.wordpress.com/2014/06/22/ambiga-masuk-bakul-ambiga-angkat-sendiri/

          Can you point out which comment of mine you’re referring to (or did you additionally cross post in another thread at around the same time – you can do the searching)?

          And why are you disrespectfully comparing Felixia’s mermaid costume with the world’s ugliest dog?

          re: “I strongly defended Ms Catherine Chin for being exploited by The J-Star via her photo. It is not about politics, but it is about learning to respect and empathize with the external party who has no interest in this cyber-war to be the object of ridicule.”

          Ms Chin is a chef. Felixia is a model. Her photos are her fame and fortune even now. Like you said, there are thousands of her photos in the Internet alone. Who are you to play Religious Police and impose your censorship on which one of the thousands can see reprint and which cannot?

          Mind you, I didn’t feature her photo per se in this page. I featured a scan of the newspaper page like how I’ve featured screen captures or scans tons of other newspaper/online articles (MCA, Wong Chun Wai’s column, Bible hearings, etc).

          re: “One day, God Willing, our path may cross hers and God forbid that the circumstance should be less than desirable to our disadvantage, what would we do then? Ask for mercy, empathy and sympathy from her.”

          To you your Religious Police path, to me to my Secular State path.

          re: “Though some of the times we disagree, still, without hesitation many of us come to your defense, and that is solidarity is all about.”

          That is fine. My posting here contains less than one-and-half dozen (18) words referring to Felixia. You can go and show your solidarity with her in TMI, FMT, The J-Star or Malaysia Chronicle. Maybe The Malay Mail too.

          re: “You are a PARADOX Helen, you defended her (I assumed based on your writing) when the Dapsters and Evangelista poking fun of her, but this morning a day after she becomes a Muslim you resort to this posting?”

          The evangelistas are the main theme of my blog. As of now, I’m neutral about Felixia. I’ve not questioned her motives.

          re: “MENJ is right when he commented ‘What is your problem with Felixia, really’?”

          I’ve already replied MENJ. You can read the same.

          re: “Why do you have to post old news with headline that is very demeaning ‘She can be your mermaid for $1,600‘ that spells EROTIC INNUENDO, while your main target is Madam Speaker?”

          I did not write or create that headline. If you will click on the url link, it takes you to the Singapore paper with the matching article carrying that particular headline as drafted by the New Paper editor(s).

          re: “It is not just you Helen, in case you haven’t noticed I have done the same to all other Muslim followers who poked fun of Islam before i.e. from Lebai Malang, Syirik Kecil to Halal Ginger Alle. But I didn’t say it, I backed them up with references. and here is for the case of Rania Yeap, to show that I am not ‘MENYIBUK’.”

          Yes, I’m aware that you keep picking “religious” fights with a number of my commenters including regulars Pedang, and Anak Jamil who has not returned after receiving a bout of your nastiness.

          re: “Rasulullah SAW bersabda yang bermaksud : “Tidaklah seorang hamba menutupi aurat (aib) orang lain di dunia kecuali Allah SWT menutupi auratnya (aibnya ) di akhirat “ (Hadis Riwayat Muslim)”

          I’m not sure that I’m interpreting this correctly (due to my inexperience) but from what I understand from the hadith you cite, Allah will jaga aurut Felixia in the akhirat. Perhaps you are being menyibuk. But if Felixia appoints you her spokesman, then by all means, go ahead.

          re: “It is very true that this is “My Blog, My like”, but why do you need another external party to hate you, while the best option is to remain supportive or neutral, and garner more support?”

          I’m not a popularity seeker who writes or does things to pander to the populist taste or political correctness or the lovey-dovey, touchy-feely things that people like to hear.

          And while I do value reader support (yours included for which I’m grateful) in general, I’m nonetheless not a politician and hence I do not require tangible support to be translated into votes.

          1. I have to say, I’m with Helen on this. A bit boggled by all those who suddenly become white knights overnight O_o

            I mean, it’s good that people want to be chivalrous and all, but Miss Yeap strikes me as quite internet savvy and probably won’t need any ‘defending’. If she wants those photos deleted, she’d be the first to lead the way.

            but ah, just by saying this pun I’m sure byk ‘white knights’ will cap me as ‘jealous’ and ‘dengki’ XDD

            1. Very Internet-savvy. She’s on Twitter, Blog and Facebook (816,000 followers) and takes paid adverts in her social media.

              And like I mentioned earlier, her conversion to Islam is the “biggest” event of its nature in Malaysian history. So she’s clearly someone who know how to max her media buzz.

              Plus look at all the press coverage across the board, from mainstream J-Star to pro-Christian TMI to the Malay tabloids and gossip/entertainment sites to even staid publications like Berita Harian and Utusan. And I suppose TV as well but I don’t keep tabs on broadcast media.

              I don’t see how LOL has to mount his white horse and charge out to defend her, at least over in my blog. Not a single soul said anything unkind about her on this page. Surely by now LOL would be familiar with the kind (temperament) of audience that we have here.

              1. i also realized something interesting when you mentioned that her conversion had press coverage across the board: The actual conversion itself was not covered in any way (she specified no media were invited), but the news of the conversion was amplified far and wide nevertheless.

                1. Yes, it was public relations very well handled in that sense. She got the best of both worlds — privacy (so that the moment did not turn into a media circus) but at the same time, saturation coverage.

                  I believe she provided a decoy, i.e. the media waited in the morning at some (red herring) place where she did not turn up and the angkat syahadah was carried out at TDDI mosque in the late evening, according to media reports.

                  Be that as it may, with the widespread publicity blitz, I don’t see why LOL must kick up a fuss over my blog’s single “tweet” coverage.

                  1. Re. Be that as it may, with the widespread publicity blitz, I don’t see why LOL must kick up a fuss over my blog’s single “tweet” coverage.

                    Read my original comment and tell me whether I made a fuss over it? It is you who went berserk when MENJ and I were merely asking a question and requesting, with your unnecessary ranting.

                    Are you going to deny that you have exploited Felixia’s photo to your advantage for your own agenda? Look at the photo and the given Headline below. What purpose do they serve? What kind of perception do they relay? What are the motives?

                    You are a professional journo, you don’t simply pick photo or headline for nothing.

                    1. re: “It is you who went berserk when MENJ and I were merely asking a question”

                      You were “merely asking a question” [??]

                      Hullo, look at the length of your rants: ” … She is a just another human being, a woman, a sister daughter and a niece with a past. She has turn a new leaf, is it too much to ask you to empathize and show a little respect for another woman? …”

                      This is not asking a question. This is self-righteous, born again pontificating.

                      As for my reply to MENJ, it was to the point and no “berserk”ness there.

                      Since he’s not a regular commenter and I’m not sure if I’m going to be receiving a rejoinder from him (and since you seconded what he said), you can answer my counter questions to him if you like/if you can.

                    2. LOL, I understand your intention, and I think it is indeed noble. But I’m also a pragmatic person who thinks that Ms Yeap already has the backings of hundreds and thousand of people, some of them very influential, and I think – judging from her very good and efficient handling of her public persona – is VERY aware of what she’s doing and how she goes about doing it. So for that matter, I think she’s pretty much set. I see her as a very self-assured young woman rather than a damsel in distress.

                      There’re lots of other people who, like Ms Yeap, is either a new convert or thinking to convert but do not have as much support as she has. They may not be as charismatic nor as internet savvy nor have as much resources to do so. Therefore perhaps they’re more deserving of this energy that you (and lots others on the internet) are currently exuding.

                      Tak usah lah kerana manusia seorang kita jadi bergaduh sesama sendiri di sini. Banyak lagi orang yang boleh kita tolong dengan masa yang kita habiskan berbincang hangat mengenai si polan.

                    1. I suppose you think of him as a Cina bukit?

                      At least he doesn’t pretend. It’s so easy for Melayus to be taken in by hypocrites, no?

                      Just put on tudung, pay a visit to the mosque – Facebook or Instagram your selfie – ucap sekerat ayat Al-Quran, petik secebis Hadis, puji tamadun Islam zaman silam …

                      … and you’ll immediately have the khatib praying for you during sembahyang jemaah that you will masuk Islam anytime soon.

                    2. Cut me some slack will you, Cinas are calling him worst than what I did. Talking about cheap stunt, there you go, 101 cheapo stunt!

                      As for Ms Yeap, I would like to bersangka baik with her, but I can’t do the same for HY. I maybe wrong, but its fine too.

                      When some of us sided with Ridzuan, it is due to our bersangka baik nature. Same goes to when Ms Yeap, masuk Islam, rich bf or not.

                    3. You can bersangka baik with Ridzuan over his reasons for embracing Islam but usually the courts will give custody of young children to the mother.

                      Have you come across the Tun sharing his opinion on the custody battles issue? I’m wondering because recently he wrote that hudud cannot be implemented here and that justice comes first in an Islamic state, with or without hudud.

                    4. ‘You can bersangka baik with Ridzuan over his reasons for embracing Islam but usually the courts will give custody of young children to the mother.’

                      My stand on Ridzuan.

                      ‘ Saudara Islam kita, En Ridhuan Abdullah telah mendapat perintah dan hak penjagaan ke atas anaknya Ummu Habibah dari Mahkamah Syariah. Sebuah keputusan dari sebuah Mahkamah yang diiktiraf kewujudannya oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Sebuah keputusan yang menurut Perlembagaan Persekutuan tidak boleh diganggu atau dimasuk campur oleh Mahkamah Sivil menurut artikel 121 (A).

                      Saudara Islam kita ini, telah mengislamkan anak perempuannya yang berusia bawah 18 tahun dan diberikan nama Ummu Habibah. Perlembagaan Persekutuan pada artikel 12 (4) membenarkan salah seorang dari ibu atau bapa atau penjaga menetapkan agama anak yang berusia 18 tahun ke bawah.

                      Ia sebuah hak yang diiktiraf malah diperkukuhkan Mahkamah Persekutuan di dalam kes kes Subashini Rajasingam V Saravanan Thangathoray & Lain (2007) dan kes Nedunchelian V Uthiradam lawan Nurshafiwah Mah Singai Annal & Lain (2005). Mahkamah. Dalam kedua-dua kes, Mahkamah Persekutuan secara jelas menyatakan bahawa perkataan “parent’ di dalam Artikel 12 (4) adalah merujuk kepada bentuk mufrad atau singular. Jadi ibu atau bapa atau penjaga boleh menentukan apa agama bagi anak yang berusia di bawah 18 tahun.’

                      http://www.bangkit.info/2014/06/ridhuan-abdullah-pelarian-muslim-di.html

                    5. re: “Saudara Islam kita, En Ridhuan Abdullah telah mendapat perintah dan hak penjagaan ke atas anaknya Ummu Habibah dari Mahkamah Syariah.”

                      Isterinya mendapat perintah dan hak penjagaan ke atas anak dari Mahkamah Sivil. Malaysia bukan Islamic State. Kita masih ikut undang-undang sivil. Civil law has precedence.

                      re: “Sebuah keputusan dari sebuah Mahkamah yang diiktiraf kewujudannya oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Sebuah keputusan yang menurut Perlembagaan Persekutuan tidak boleh diganggu atau dimasuk campur oleh Mahkamah Sivil menurut artikel 121 (A).”

                      Mahkamah Syariah tidak mempunyai bidang kuasa atas kanak-kanak tersebut yang bukan Islam.

                      re: “Saudara Islam kita ini, telah mengislamkan anak perempuannya yang berusia bawah 18 tahun dan diberikan nama Ummu Habibah.”

                      Pengislaman kanak-kanak tersebut adalah tidak sah kerana tidak direstui ibunya.

                      re: “Perlembagaan Persekutuan pada artikel 12 (4) membenarkan salah seorang dari ibu atau bapa atau penjaga menetapkan agama anak yang berusia 18 tahun ke bawah.”

                      Agama anak yang berusia 18 tahun ke bawah perlu dipersetujui oleh KEDUA-DUA orang ibubapanya.

                      Sila rujuk Majlis Peguam bagi interpretasi Perkara Perlembagaan Persekutuan tersebut.

                    6. ‘Isterinya mendapat perintah dan hak penjagaan ke atas anak dari Mahkamah Sivil. Malaysia bukan Islamic State. Kita masih ikut undang-undang sivil. Civil law has precedence.’

                      Islam is the Religion of the Federation. Muslims affairs govern by Shariah laws.

                      ‘Mahkamah Syariah tidak mempunyai bidang kuasa atas kanak-kanak tersebut yang bukan Islam.’

                      I disagree.

                      ‘Pengislaman kanak-kanak tersebut adalah tidak sah kerana tidak direstui ibunya.’

                      I subscribe to this.

                      ‘Perlembagaan Persekutuan pada artikel 12 (4) membenarkan salah seorang dari ibu atau bapa atau penjaga menetapkan agama anak yang berusia 18 tahun ke bawah.’

                      ‘Agama anak yang berusia 18 tahun ke bawah perlu dipersetujui oleh KEDUA-DUA orang ibubapanya.’

                      No.

                      ‘Sila rujuk Majlis Peguam bagi interpretasi Perkara Perlembagaan Persekutuan tersebut.’

                      Persatuan Peguam Muslims and some FC experts had different take on this!

                      ‘Perkara 121 1A Perlembagaan Persekutuan menyebut kedudukan Mahkamah Sivil dan Mahkamah Syariah sama tarafnya. Ini bermakna Mahkamah Sivil sama skali tidak boleh mengatasi perkara-perkara dalam bidangkuasa Mahkamah Syariah,” tegasnya.’

                      http://www.bangkit.info/2014/06/kes-ridzuan-abdullah-arahan-igp.html

                    7. re: “Islam is the Religion of the Federation. Muslims affairs govern by Shariah laws.”

                      Yes, marriage, divorce, inheritance, etc.

                      If a Muslim robs a bank or kills someone, he is tried under civil law.

                      re: “Persatuan Peguam Muslims and some FC experts had different take on this!”

                      There’s a dispute but originally, the reading was both parents. Every day that passes, we become less and less secular. The amendment to Article 121(1) that gave more power to the Syariah Court was made in 1988.

                      Every day that passes, we become less and less secular. This can be visually seen in the dressing of Malay women who cover up more and more.

                      At the same time, The J-Star, Wong Chun Wai and their co-religionists scream louder and louder that Malaysia is a secular country.

                    8. ‘There’s a dispute but originally, the reading was both parents.’

                      Lets just stick to ‘There’s a dispute’, because I disagree with your ‘both parents’ reading.

                      ‘Every day that passes, we become less and less secular. This can be visually seen in the dressing of Malay women who cover up more and more.’

                      All praise be to Allah SWT.

                      ‘At the same time, The J-Star, Wong Chun Wai and their co-religionists scream louder and louder that Malaysia is a secular country.’

                      The jokes, Insya Allah will be on them! Allahuakbar!

                    9. re: “The jokes, Insya Allah will be on them! Allahuakbar!”

                      You used two exclamation marks. Both sides – Christian and Muslim – are each getting louder.

                      I believe it would be instructive to go back to the first time the Herald took the gomen to court. It was probably around that period that the conflict (religious antagonism) came into the open.

                    10. ‘I believe it would be instructive to go back to the first time the Herald took the gomen to court. It was probably around that period that the conflict (religious antagonism) came into the open.’

                      I agree. But most liberals can’t see that, ala the modern2, english speaking one la. I wonder why?

                      And it is not exaggerating also to claim that the Malays/Muslims and their NGOs had been getting louder and louder since then. But then again some of us, would simply chose to deny it outright.

                    11. re: “the Malays/Muslims and their NGOs had been getting louder and louder”

                      The Christians see it as extremism and religious bigotry, and racism of course. They “fail” to see that Isma, for example, is only a recent REACTION.

                      If you were to ask any DAP supporter, he’d portray May 13 as victimizing the Chinese. Somehow they can totally miss the fact that there was severe provocation which triggered the outbreak.

                      Like I posted yesterday, the “in denial” is deeply entrenched.

                      null

                    12. ‘The Christians see it as extremism and religious bigotry, and racism of course. They “fail” to see that Isma, for example, is only a recent REACTION.’

                      I hope more and more Christians, especially Bumiputra Christians can think and act like Maximus Ongkili

                      ‘Maximus Ongkili mengatakan seperti berikut :“… if ‘Allah’ is critical in my prayers, then I can understand the sentiment. But if other words carry the same meaning (in addressing God), then I will not want to hurt others whose views are different from mine …”
                      “Besides Allah, I can always address God as Bapa Syurga in Bahasa, my native dialect ‘Kinorohingan’ Bapa Syruga, or Latin/Hebrew Jehovah, Yahweh and Trinity God in English. Using such terms does not in any way affect the quality of my worship.”

                      http://www.bangkit.info/2014/07/jika-maximus-ongkili-boleh-faham-kenapa.html

                      God is Tuhan in Malay. Tuhan is Ilah in Arabic. It does not help, some Muslims, like Mujahid, Anwar and Khalid approached the ‘Allah’ saga with ABU mentality! But the Malays in general are shying away from these people.

                      The professional Muslims may not be joining UMNO now due to obvious unfaltering reasons, but ISMA and other NGO’s are really where they’re at!

                    13. re: “Tuhan is Ilah in Arabic.”

                      Can you provide me a good link for this one, thanks.

                    14. Thanks but now it’s more confusing when the article introduced “Illah” (double ‘l’).

                      I’m look for an Arab grammar explanation.

                    15. Oh.

                      La (Ilah)-a Ill-(allah)

                      Why don’t you all explain it to the Christians using this example?

                  2. you are far more bersangka baik than me, Helen. I didn’t think she actually did it (convert, that is) at first XD

                    I mean, who’s gonna check for real? Sharon Stone led everyone to believe she’s a Mensa member for years before it’s recently exposed she never was one to begin with.

                    (yes, I’m a paranoid bitch, sobs)

                    1. Perkim has a list of the converts, so can check although I’m uncertain whether every mualaf is required to register or if there’s a master roll with the government.

                      I’m not surprised that she converted. Under the psychological circumstances, it’s the believable thing that she would do. I’m not even surprised at the warm embrace of Felixia’s taubat given her by the Malays.

                      I’m just puzzled at the insistence by a bunch of other Muslims that anything to do with her past must be completely erased from the records.

                      She herself is using a Playboy bunny logo for her blog (see below – the “W” logo is WordPress and the “B” logo is Blogspot).

                      null

          2. Re. Did Felixia appoint you her spokesman to speak on her behalf?

            No. I am just stating fact, just like when you “mempersedakan Nabi Noh” but refuse to acknowledge it.

            Re, “Salah satu perkara yang menjadi isu adalah KEENGGANAN Felixia Yeap untuk MEMADAMgambar lama beliau sepanjang berkecimpung dalam dunia model dengan menyatakan itu adalah hasil kerja keras beliau sebelum ini — namun model ini nampaknya mengubah fikiran.”

            Don’t forget the final line.

            Quote ” namun model ini nampaknya mengubah fikiran.”unquote

            Re. Secondly about “bukan satu dua gambar, tapi beribu-ribu” excuse. Granted. I too have thousands of photos, charts, graphs, tables and cartoons in my blog archives.

            Are those pictures mostly similar to hers undesirable photos of her past which need to be deleted?

            Re. To delete the Alice cartoon at the top of the homepage will just take me two clicks to access from my website dashboard, as compared to archived stuff that may require some sifting.

            The hassle is understandable, likewise you should understand what Rania Yeap is trying to do when she said give her time.

            Re. Now look at Felixia’s blog masthead where she has kept her pink Playboy bunny logo and the photos of her blonde look with the cleavage showing. If she had wanted to delete those blonde hair pictures, all she needs to do is make two clicks (unlike if dealing with old photos in the archives). But as of this morning, she has still maintained the bunny logo and the blonde hair pictures despite the heavy web traffic that her blog has been receiving of late.

            She is a new revert, thing won’t change over night, in Islam a Muaalaf is given grace period of 2 years to adopt Islamic value. I have explained about this before. Anyway look here:

            https://www.facebook.com/FelixiaYeapOfficialPage

            Re. As a man and of a different race some more, are you putting yourself forward as being better able to speak on her behalf than she herself?

            Ini tanggungjawab kami sebagai sesama Islam. Kerana setiap orang Islam itu bersaudara.

            Re. who are you to play Religious Police and ban the snapshot of the Singapore New Paper mermaid centrespread?

            When did I ban it? Read my first comment, is there a sentence that says I DEMAND it to be deleted?

            Re. Don’t you think that being featured so prominently by the media of a foreign country signals a level of publicity success that she might be proud of?

            That was her past and I am sure at that point of time she must have felt that way. Why bringing up her past when we are talking about her present now.

            Re. Why don’t you ask her first rather than presuming to be her spokesman?

            I don’t have to ask her . In fact I was only politely asking you to delete it, but you went BERSERK over it. WHY? Please show me in my first comment that I offended you in any way.

            RE. Here, this is the page and I really don’t know why you had to post the dog pix, https://helenang.wordpress.com/2014/06/22/ambiga-masuk-bakul-ambiga-angkat-sendiri/

            My mistake not this one. There is another one which I used the dogs news and your reply was something to the effect that you don’t want people to further abuse the dog or something. I can’t remember which one, but it was during the dog abuse case.

            Re. And why are you disrespectfully comparing Felixia’s mermaid costume with the world’s ugliest dog?

            In which way that I compared the two. I was merely trying to relate that if you can ask people to respect the dog which is something your believe in, why can’t I ask you do the same over different situation.

            Re. Ms Chin is a chef. Felixia is a model. Her photos are her fame and fortune even now. Like you said, there are thousands of her photos in the Internet alone. Who are you to play Religious Police and impose your censorship on which one of the thousands can see reprint and which cannot?

            Yes. But that doesn’t give you the right to employ the same antic as J-Star did. Please don’t try to whitewash this.

            Re. Mind you, I didn’t feature her photo per se in this page. I featured a scan of the newspaper page like how I’ve featured screen captures or scans tons of other newspaper/online articles (MCA, Wong Chun Wai’s column, Bible hearings, etc).

            Yes. But you indirectly have brought attention to her past unnecessarily? Why? Isn’t there any other better way to do it, just to show and give her some respect?

            Re. To you your Religious Police path, to me to my Secular State path.

            Dunia ni bulat dan sentiasa berputar Helen. Think about it?

            Re. That is fine. My posting here contains less than one-and-half dozen (18) words referring to Felixia. You can go and show your solidarity with her in TMI, FMT, The J-Star or Malaysia Chronicle. Maybe The Malay Mail too.

            Why should I? Care to explain further especially when I don’t root for them? Just because I disagree with you on this one?

            Re. The evangelistas are the main theme of my blog. As of now, I’m neutral about Felixia. I’ve not questioned her motives.

            But you have used her photo intentionally or unintentionally to your advantage. You have used them in previous entry as well, but I don’t make fuss over it for she is not a Muslim then. It is not NEUTRAL by standard. There is motive behind it whether you agree or not.

            Re. I’ve already replied MENJ. You can read the same.

            Hamdan has replied “You’re so grossly misunderstood :-(”

            MENJ and Hamdan basically questioning your motive by using the picture with the headline.

            Re. I did not write or create that headline. If you will click on the url link, it takes you to the Singapore paper with the matching article carrying that particular headline as drafted by the New Paper editor(s).

            Yes but you intentionally or unintentionally have used that headline to garner attention and create perception. That’s what Headline is for, and in this case it doesn’t sound positive at all.

            Re. Yes, I’m aware that you keep picking “religious” fights with a number of my commenters including regulars Pedang, and Anak Jamil who has not returned after receiving a bout of your nastiness.

            Pedang insults Islam so do you expect me not to retaliate?

            Popos also did the same, Islam1st had pointed it out, but you let it go.

            As for Anak Jamil, he asked for it. Anyway, I have apologized.

            As for the rest, I was basically giving facts to correct things. Mundu, Lanun, MCA…and many others, but I have never been rude to them ( I think).

            Re. I’m not sure that I’m interpreting this correctly (due to my inexperience) but from what I understand from the hadith you cite, Allah will jaga aurut Felixia in the akhirat. Perhaps you are being menyibuk. But if Felixia appoints you her spokesman, then by all means, go ahead.

            Nope. As Muslim were are brothers and Sisters. Thus there is a need to advice and protect each other in any way that we deem fit. “Menjaga Aib antara satu sama lain”, is one of them and this is what I am trying to do.

            Re. I’m not a popularity seeker who writes or does things to pander to the populist taste or political correctness or the lovey-dovey, touchy-feely things that people like to hear.

            Then why go BERSERK ON ME with your ranting, when my original comment was merely asking you to delete? I didn’t even demand for it to be deleted. Did I insult you in anyway with my first comment? Isn’t it much easier to just leave it as it is like you always do with most comment.

            Re. And while I do value reader support (yours included for which I’m grateful) in general, I’m nonetheless not a politician and hence I do not require tangible support to be translated into votes.

            Do you think your blog will exist or for that matters any other blog, without readers and followers? They determine your alexa (I think that is what it is call) ranking in case you forget.

            1. re: “Did Felixia appoint you her spokesman to speak on her behalf?” / “No. I am just stating fact, just like when you “mempersedakan Nabi Noh” but refuse to acknowledge it.”

              In which case, you should have left your speaking up for her in Felixia’s own blog. Then she can tell you whether you have correctly (or not) represented what she has in mind.

              re: “Salah satu perkara yang menjadi isu adalah KEENGGANAN Felixia Yeap untuk MEMADAM gambar lama beliau sepanjang berkecimpung dalam dunia model dengan menyatakan itu adalah hasil kerja keras beliau sebelum ini — namun model ini nampaknya mengubah fikiran.” / “Don’t forget the final line.”

              The final line = “namun model ini NAMPAKNYA mengubah fikiran” which is an observation made by the RotiKaya reporter … in English, “seems as if” (nampaknya) whereas the “keengganan Felixia untuk memadam gambar lama beliau” is her own words when she was explaining to her readers why the sexy photos are still there.

              Between (a) “seems as if” editorializing by RotiKaya and (b) Felixia’s own words, why do you sledgehammer something that is “NAMPAKNYA”.

              re: “Quote ‘namun model ini nampaknya mengubah fikiran’ unquote”

              Quote “NAMPAKNYA” unquote — di”nampak” atau dilihat pada pandangan pemberita RotiKaya.

              re: “Secondly about “bukan satu dua gambar, tapi beribu-ribu” excuse. Granted. I too have thousands of photos, charts, graphs, tables and cartoons in my blog archives.” / “Are those pictures mostly similar to hers undesirable photos of her past which need to be deleted?”

              The point is not “desirability” but file storage.

              re: “The hassle is understandable, likewise you should understand what Rania Yeap is trying to do when she said give her time.”

              I understand the hassle as I’m a webmaster myself. That’s why I explained to you that while it may understandably (“granted”) take some time to sift through the thousands of old photo files held in storage, it is very easy to amend the masthead … just two clicks. This is the mechanics of a dashboard. Anyone who mans his own blog will be aware of this operations.

              re: “She is a new revert, thing won’t change over night, in Islam a Muaalaf is given grace period of 2 years to adopt Islamic value.”

              She has only been a convert a day. So why don’t you give her time to find her own footing instead of presuming to speak on her behalf and playing Religious Police to purge her photos when she has not chosen to do so in her own various social media?

              re: “As a man and of a different race some more, are you putting yourself forward as being better able to speak on her behalf than she herself?” / “Ini tanggungjawab kami sebagai sesama Islam. Kerana setiap orang Islam itu bersaudara.”

              Right. I’m sure all the other Muslim readers are thrilled also that you’re taking over the shared responsibility of policing their morals.

              re: “Read my first comment, is there a sentence that says I DEMAND it to be deleted?”

              Well, since you now claim that you’re not demanding that it be “PADAMKAN” then why not just let the matter slide instead of expending another several hundred words pushing the same “request”?

              re: “That was her past and I am sure at that point of time she must have felt that way. Why bringing up her past when we are talking about her present now.”

              Why are you talking so much about her, as well as speaking on her behalf when all I published was about one dozen-plus words? (remember, I’m adhering to the 140-character Twitter limit).

              re: “In fact I was only politely asking you to delete it, but you went BERSERK over it.”

              I politely declined. So why do you need to use up so much of my space … now your input running to over a thousand words … if you’re willing to accept that your “polite” ask was equally “politely” turned down?

              re: “WHY? Please show me in my first comment that I offended you in any way.”

              Show me where I have been rude to you or what you call “berserk”. Feel free to cut & paste.

              re: “There is another one which I used the dogs news and your reply was something to the effect that you don’t want people to further abuse the dog or something. I can’t remember which one, but it was during the dog abuse case.”

              I vaguely recall. That’s why I said it could have been cross-posted at around the same time and you’re free to search for it yourself. Searching can be a hassle (takes time) — same excuse you gave for Felixia not having the time to do spring-cleaning.

              re: “In which way that I compared the two. I was merely trying to relate that if you can ask people to respect the dog which is something your believe in, why can’t I ask you do the same over different situation.”

              Locate our respective comments on this matter and then we can discuss it further.

              re: “Yes. But that doesn’t give you the right to employ the same antic as J-Star did. Please don’t try to whitewash this.”

              There are thousands of her photos in the Internet. Are you going to arrogate yourself the right (jurisdiction) of Religious Enforcer and sort them into two piles (a) hijab photos can use, (b) non-hijab photos cannot use anymore?

              Or take the case of Aziz M. Osman’s Chinese wife who wore tudung when she was married to him, took off her tudung and wore bare shoulder dresses after they divorced, and put the tudung back on when she remarried a Malay Datuk. So are you also going to play Religious Police and ask bloggers to padamkan her photos taken in Phase (A) or Phase (B) or Phase (C) of her colourful artiste career?

              re: “just to show and give her some respect?”

              What kind of respect are you demanding on her behalf? She has made her conversion into national news gossip. Look at all the headlines in TMI, FMT etc. All said “Playboy bunny”.

              re: “To you your Religious Police path, to me to my Secular State path.” / “Dunia ni bulat dan sentiasa berputar Helen. Think about it?”

              Think about it, and the putaran coming back a full circle: You may revert to your club-hopping and wild partying ways, LOL, just like Nur Aliah Lee’s on-again, off-again, on-again tudung.

              re: “Why should I? Care to explain further especially when I don’t root for them? Just because I disagree with you on this one?”

              There is no need for you to defend her. If she had wanted to delete her photos, she would have done it herself starting with her blog and Facebook. Her modelling portfolio is still there. Or you can go to her blog and advise her that she should quickly delete them all rather than preaching here over one scan of the Singapore New Paper mermaid page.

              re: “It is not NEUTRAL by standard. There is motive behind it whether you agree or not.”

              I featured the NP mermaid story because mermaid is a “new” story angle.

              Isn’t her conversion about the change FROM X TO Y (muslimah). Your blinkered, one-track approach is to announce Y to the whole world as the New Leaf but conveniently blanco the X-factor. So she turned over … from what? … not allowed to say b’cos any mention of her past is taboo according to the LOL Pious Police. So what is X? You’re the one WHITE-WASHING.

              re: “MENJ and Hamdan basically questioning your motive by using the picture with the headline.”

              Golly. Not content with being the unappointed spokesman of Felixia Yeap, now you are speaking for Hamdan too.

              re: “Yes but you intentionally or unintentionally have used that headline to garner attention and create perception.”

              The headline matches/belongs to the picture. It is the online version of the same article in the same paper.

              re: “Pedang insults Islam so do you expect me not to retaliate? / Popos also did the same / As for Anak Jamil, he asked for it / As for the rest, I was basically giving facts to correct things. Mundu, Lanun, MCA…and many others, but I have never been rude to them ( I think).”

              That’s a looooong list of fellow commenters that you’ve picked a fight with and doing your Religious Policing over.

              re: “Thus there is a need to advice and protect each other in any way that we deem fit. ‘Menjaga Aib antara satu sama lain’, is one of them and this is what I am trying to do.”

              Please ask those whose aib you volunteer to jaga (i.e. the long name list above) whether they want to be advised by you or they already have their own religious councillors.

              re: “when my original comment was merely asking you to delete? I didn’t even demand for it to be deleted”

              If you’re not DEMANDING, then you would have dropped the matter instead of prolonging it to this length and up to this point.

              re: “Isn’t it much easier to just leave it as it is like you always do with most comment.”

              I just leave it as is with most comments because the other commenters do not “ask”/”demand” and so I’m not required to respond.

              re: “Do you think your blog will exist or for that matters any other blog, without readers and followers? They determine your alexa (I think that is what it is call) ranking in case you forget.”

              My Alexa ranking would be higher if you hadn’t scared away my readers like AnakJamil (as one example) and calling them all “non-Brahmin”/sometimes the P-word-” P***** ” and imputing that they’re Indians (like you said Oleg Skilgannon is). You’ve scared away some of Annie’s readers too, I’m sure.

        2. LOL, hadis/hadith is so yesterday.
          You are beginning to sound like Dapsters.

          Just refer to the Qur’an.
          Anyway, playboy bunnies are nice. :-)

          1. Heh-heh-heh, bunnies are so yesterday too, and no mention of it in my 140-character pseudo tweet.

            Mermaid is the novelty. Also first in Malaysia, and one of its kind. Felixia is a trailblazer.

            1. Re. Heh-heh-heh, bunnies are so yesterday too

              Indeed they are, but you have gladly used it to your advantage to create perception and motive.

              Re. Mermaid is the novelty. Also first in Malaysia, and one of its kind. Felixia is a trailblazer.

              I thought you said you are neutral about Felixia?

              1. Like I said, I made no mention of “Playboy” or “bunny” in my original posting. It was only in reply to you in the Comments box that it was brought up. And only because of your general demand that all photos of her pre-hijab must be expunged from cyberspace.

                What’s un-neutral about saying she’s a “trailblazer”? Is this a negative word?

                Is “novelty” a negative word? Is being the “first” to do something a negative factor?

          2. Re. LOL, hadis/hadith is so yesterday.

            As Muslim we live and are guided by Al Quran and Hadith. If you are not a Muslim, who are you to tell me that Hadith is so yesterday?

      2. Ms Ang biaselah sesetangah org melayu ni memang suka jadi moral police.. they have this mentality of forgetting their own past.. as if the past is evil, vile and shame… while it’s actually apart of life that you one need to preserve (as a reference from previous experiences) and valued.. it’s human life.. not everything is all good and beautiful.

        same thing with culture.. you do notice that some malay tend to diminish their own heritage and culture for the sake of being real muslim while actually it’s more of being overtly arabize.

        1. Mundu,

          Ambilah sedikit masa untuk pergi belajar ilmu agama, supaya tidaklah perlu ada “moral police” untuk mengigatkan kita antara satu sama lain.

      3. We cannot change the past but we can change the way we look at our past. Those people talking about erasing their past, these are the born again type. They have this self righteous complex and they think everyone should subscribe to it.

        No wonder Muslim extremists and Christian evangelicals are the perfect bed mates. Just look at the collusion between DAP and Pas.

        1. Yup, the new Christians are rebirthed (Born Again) and the new Muslims are reverted (consider Born Again also lah).

          Then there are those in mid-life like the ladies who don tudung or the men in their later years who bertaubat and become more Pak Aji-like.

          1. Re. Then there are those in mid-life like the ladies who don tudung or the men in their later years who bertaubat and become more Pak Aji-like.

            And this wrong or an offense because?

            1. Who said it was “wrong”?

              Who said it was “an offence”?

              It’s merely pointing out an observation, like similarly … some women past 50 will dye their silver hair black (compared to women at 35 who will likely not have white hair yet). It has to do with age and ageing.

              Or in your case, whatever reason it was that put a stop to your club-hopping and wild partying and turned you holier-than-thou.

        2. Re. We cannot change the past but we can change the way we look at our past.

          Very true. Yang buruk itu dijadikan sempadan, yang baik itu dijadikan teladan.

          Re. Those people talking about erasing their past, these are the born again type.

          I think in this case, she is just attempting to delete her photos, never her past for the past will always be there whether she likes it or not.

          Re. They have this self righteous complex and they think everyone should subscribe to it.

          I am not sure who are you refering to here, but in any case did “They” ever approach you and force you to accept their value?

          Re. No wonder Muslim extremists and Christian evangelicals are the perfect bed mates. Just look at the collusion between DAP and Pas.

          No argument on this side. I think it was my response to Oleg before.

      4. Aaaarrrgghhh! This is the 2nd time I lost 90% of my fasting benefits!
        &@%###*#%#4&&#&cleavage#*#*#6#&##/2&## again!. Why oh why did I click on the article.

    1. What is YOUR problem with my blog posting, MENJ, really?

      The title is her name FY and four words: “From mermaid to muslimah”. Which word is it that you have a problem with?

      My body content says: “427 komen ucapan syukur alhamdulillah & subhanallah oleh peminat di blog Felixia” (less than a dozen words altogether).

      Do you have any problem with the revelation that 427 well-wishers left their comments on her blog?

      Or do you have a problem that those hundreds of fans wished her “syukur alhamdulillah & subhanallah”?

      Please tell me, MENJ, I wanna know.

  2. I like this part in her blog
    P.S: Saya masih berbangsa Cina, dan akan berkeras mengekalkan nama Cina yang diberi ibu saya. Nama Cina saya dalam bermaksud “Ketenangan, Keanggunan” atau di dalam bahasa Inggeris, “Silent Grace”.
    Saya cuma akan menambah nama kurniaan dari mimpi saya di hadapan nama asal.

    She is still Chinese although Muslim. Sad to say this is not what we find of certain Christians.

    ” Saya pernah cuba mencari Tuhan.
    Cuba mendekati diri dengan Tuhan.

    Saya pernah pergi ke gereja Katolik setiap Ahad petang selama 2 tahun.
    Saya pernah cuba memahami agama Kristian.
    Saya pernah cuba mencari makna dalam penyembahan berhala Dewa Kuan Yin dan sebagainya.
    Saya juga pernah cuba mengamalkan amalan seorang penganut Buddha.

    Tetapi hati saya tidak pernah merasa dekat dengan Tuhan.
    Hati saya tidak pernah rasa tersentuh.”

    1. Muslims MUST give their doterly respects, love, be responsible and give their “doa” to their parents eventho they are non Muslims. Ini satu tanggungjawab seorang Muslim terhadap ibubapa kandung mereka.

      Alhamdulillah Felixia, jasa orang tua mu jgn sesekali lupa..tanpa mereka siapa la kita?

  3. Helen, ini adalah masalah orang Melayu. Yang baik bagi tahu satu kampung, bila ada keburukan sorokkkkkkk ketat2.

    Bila Awani post article pasal Felixia dekat FB, ramai Melayu yang melolong suruh tukar headlinelah, contentlah, so that the Playboy Bunny part boleh dipadamkan.

    Dia memang pernah jadi seorang Playboy Bunny pun, what is wrong with Awani publishing facts? Kadang-kadang Melayu ni pelik sket! Lainlah kalau nak erase history kat Timeline FB, yg tu anytime…

    1. The thing is she is Chinese, and she herself has resisted the same type requests to padamkan her old pictures and her past history.

      It’s some Malay-Muslims who are putting themselves forward to be her spokesman.

      1. Give her a chance.

        Let’s visit this sweet damsel again 100 days after her conversion to Islam. I bet she’ll charm us like a pro :-)

        1. Why not in the interim 100 days, all you Muslims yang sewaktu dengan LOL (i.e. those who have similarly been harassing Astro Awani to erase her past history as recounted by ‘hopeful’ @ July 4, 2014 at 9:40 pm)

          go on a gotong-royong CLEAN UP campaign, barge into every blog that has ever featured Felixia photos (plenty of blogs, if you Google) and “politely ask” the blog owner to immediately PADAMKAN any non-hijab photos

          so that when we all meet again in 3 months’ time, you’d have her WASH. RINSE. REPEAT. and coming out smelling like roses.

    2. She just had one last sexy photo spread in FHM last month I think (or was it last May). I almost wanted to buy that issue, could be priceless now- somebody could be auctioning it on e-bay or lelong.

    3. In Islam, one should not be proud of the bad thing in the past and by the way, the Malaysian culture “Yang buruk bagi tahu satu Malaysia/dunia, bila ada keburukan sorokkkkk ketat2 siap spin lagi”. I think that is more accurate

  4. The mermaid photo says how cheap Ms Yeap was, perhaps suggesting she’s not the angel some would like to imagine her to be. I personally did not know the fact that she was a mermaid for hire.

    What LOL did was natural for a Muslim, but some may not be as vocal as he was, thus chose to keep mum over the chosen mermaid pic and news clip.

    Perhaps LOL had failed to understand (perhaps his good intention has got the better of him), liberals don’t subscribe to his pious thinking. We simply can’t reason values.

  5. Raja Zainal Badri is her boyfriendlah. Patutlah convert. Demi cinta seorang Porsche driven ugly looking Malay guy. Samelah like that Marion Counter. (sorry ayat pedas sket).

    Sorry Helen, I kalau Chinese girl convert to Islam, memang scrutinize sampai ke lubang cacing, because I know Chinese are practical people, they are too practical that it sometimes can be irritating.

    Amalan hidup Islam sangat contra dengan budaya masyarakat Cina. Islam is a ‘leceh’ religion to them. (don’t worry I’m a practicing Muslim). Very few Chinese girl nak convert willingly la. Melayu kalau nampak orang puji Islam sket pecah kepala.

    Felixia convert sebab duit. Sanggup lelaki Melayu ni kahwin dengan former Playboy Bunny yang dah [deleted] dari perempuan Melayu virgin yang available di luar sana. Pui!

  6. One of the comments that I read on Rotikaya’s FB:

    “raja zainal badri berjaya dlm dakwahnya. jika dia kaya, tepat dia menggunakan kekayaannya”

    This is how bodoh Melayu can be sometimes.

    *sorry if this post has nothing to do with your thread Helen. :p

  7. In Islam it is not good to expose something which are bad. By showing your bad conducts of the past publicly, you do not show regret. As a Muslim, you must bertaubat. What you did bad in the past is between you and God. Muslims must be honest and sincere.

    I hope that Felixia converted to Islam is not because of something else but her faith in Islam. It is a sin for people to say something bad of her intention to convert to Islam as stated by some of the contributors. It is amount to fitnah, a big sin in Islam.

    We must always have a good faith (baik sangka) on people like Felixia. Let God be the judge not us. I really hope I don’t contradict myself in this blog.

    I suggest that Felixia consults a good ustazah to deepen her knowledge on Islam so that she can become a good Muslim.

  8. Let us review the crux of this post which started with where I was merely asking Helen to delete the photo. Ceteris Paribus (everything remain equal) this has been established:

    i. LOL is Religious Police (Given by Helen Before)

    ii. Moral Police (Given by Mundu)

    iii. Felixia’s Knight and Shining Amour (Given by Jamie)

    Suffice to say, I am glad and be happy to accept the labels, for if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck then it must be a duck.

    1. Let us analyze the issue in contention here. Helen has posted Felixia’s Mermaid Photo together with Headline which spells Erotic Innuendo a day after Felxia embraces Islam. And here are the photos from the pro-opposition media with regards to the same issue”

    a. The J-Star

    http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/06/28/Felixia-Yeap-to-embrace-Islam-July-3/

    b. Malaysia Kini

    http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/267570

    c. The Malaysian Insider

    http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/feeling-reborn-as-new-muslim-ex-playboy-bunny-insists-on-keeping-chinese-na

    d. Yahoo Malaysia

    https://my.news.yahoo.com/bekas-model-playboy-kekal-nama-cina-lepas-peluk-065221488.html

    All of these media portrayed Felixia in Hijab as a sign of respect of her decision to embrace Islam. Please disregard some of the headlines, they are oppo. media and what can you expect from them. And of course all pro-government medias have opted the same, again as a sign of respect.

    2. Freudian Slip

    I asked Helen, what is her motive and her replied was “I am Neutral”. I would love to believe so, forget about her past entries with Felixia’s Photos which didn’t sound neutral, but let us focus on this entry alone. Talking about Freudian Slip, please reads all her comments about Felixia, do the comments sound neutral here? e.g. Bunnies are so Yesterday, Felixia is a Trailblazer wrt to Mermaid and there are many others;

    3. Seeking Solace and Comfort in others

    Jamie, Edward Loong, Mundu, Survivor and the likes stand by Helen’s view and of course as they say, “Great Mind Thinks Alike” or “Bird of a Feather Flocks Together”, but that doesn’t justify or answer Helen’s motive in posting the Mermaid Photo, going by the way Helen contradicted her “Neutral” stand of Felixia by amply and gladly agreeable to the said comments.

    In contrast, if you were to ask MENJ, Islam1st, and the likes the probability is the answer maybe opposite;

    4. Whitewashing

    Annie from the Life of Annie, once commented “Aku Punya Blog, Aku Punya Sukalah” and she stands by it. This is akin to Helen’s “My Blog, My Like”, unlike Annie, Helen has tried to whitewash her doing by roping in all other unrelated issues instead of focusing on the answer to her motive on posting of the said photo. I don’t have to elaborate on this it is all up there written for public viewing;

    5. A Picture tells a thousand words

    In photo journalism, It takes just a photo to tell a story, be it situation, environment, emotion, and even to the extend of creating perception, be it good or bad. As all of you have already seen and as attest by Helen herself (wrt to matching animal photo to personality), she is very good at it. You can see Hannah Yeoh and Purple Iguana, and recently the two MCA leaders with two Pandas.

    The question is why need to do that if photos and pictures don’t mean anything? So is it wrong for me to ask what is her motive wrt the Mermaid photo? But never mind my question as we have established the “ceteris paribus” above.

    6. The Headline says it all????

    Just like a photo, a headline will make or break the news. Editor and writer will thrive on attention-grabbing headline, be it for relaying important message or creating perception in a gist. The headline is not there for no reason.

    Just below the Mermaid photo, there is a headline that says [Singapore] ‘She can be your mermaid for $1,600‘ (The New Paper, 30 Aug 2013). Why the need to include that? I write a lot and when I used graphic from the net or media I would put Photo Credit: The New Paper, 30 Aug 2013. I don’t put the whole headline unless necessary.

    The question is, was it really an honest mistake or oversight?

    I leave it to all of you to judge. I am merely stating facts here and there is no part of this comment is based on my personal opinion.

    This is my favorite from Billy Joel; [YouTube]

  9. aku setuju dgn LOL, aib muslim wajib ditutup. ini tuntutan Islam. yang bukan Islam mungkin tak tahu hal ni. tapi muslim dituntut menutupi aib orang2 yg ingin bertaubat.

    dipetik dari: http://www.resepirahsiaku.com/2011/04/siapa-menutup-aib-seseorang-islam-maka.html

    Firman Allah SWT bermaksud:
    “Sesungguhnya orang yang ingin agar (berita) perbuatan yang amat keji itu tersiar di kalangan orang beriman, bagi mereka azab yang pedih di dunia dan di akhirat. Dan Allah mengetahui, sedang, kamu tidak mengetahui”. (Surah An-Nuur: 19)

    Ini bertepatan dengan hadis Rasulullah SAW yang bersabda:
    “Setiap daripada kamu ialah orang yang berbuat salah dan sebaik-baik orang yang berbuat salah ialah orang yang bertaubat.” (HR Ahmad)

    Setiap manusia tidak terlepas daripada keaiban. Sama ada diketahui orang lain mahupun menjadi rahsia sendiri. Namun, Allah itu berkuasa menutup dan membuka keaiban hamba-Nya.

    Sabda Rasulullah SAW bermaksud:
    “Siapa menutup aib seseorang Islam, maka Allah akan tutupkan aibnya di dunia dan di akhirat. (Hadis riwayat at-Tirmidzi).
    Segala maksiat di sekeliling kita perlu dicegah. Kita membenci segala perbuatan maksiat. Namun, kita tidak membenci orang yang melakukan maksiat. Apatah lagi melaknat orang berkenaan. Ahli Sunnah Wal-Jamaah dalam menghadapi sesuatu kemungkaran membezakan antara perbuatan dan si pembuat.

    –sila baca lanjut di blog tersebut untuk lebih faham tentang tuntutan menutup aib sesama muslim.

    1. Kalau begitu, sama lah ia dengan ajaran Kristian evangelista. Bagi mereka, seseorang yang masuk Kristian dianggap Lahir Semula.

      Kelahiran Semula akan “membersihkan” orang tersebut daripada dosa-dosanya.

      Orang Kristian baru yang menerima Yesus sebagai penyelamatnya (saviour) akan disucikan daripada dosa lampau hidupnya (selari konsep taubat).

      Selagi orang itu tidak menerima Yesus, maka orang itu masih bergelumang dengan dosa. Akan tetapi sebaik sahaja dia menerima Yesus, dosa-dosanya dicuci bersih.

    2. Dia bukan bertaubat, dia masuk Islam.

      Kalau rajin tengok video convert Islam kat youtube, tajuk-tajuk video yang dipublish akan berbunyi begini “christian racist embrace Islam”, “former model embrace Islam”, “Islam hater embrace Islam”. Yang publish video begini pun channel Islamic.

      Dekat Malaysia, Melayu naik hantu kalau panggil Felixia ‘former Playboy Bunny’. Kenapa?

      1. You’re not even supposed to use her old name “Felixia” anymore. It’s “Rania Yeap” now.

  10. Helen Ang,

    Tak sama, menutup aib. Menutup aib. Tapi kalau Helen anggap sama, terserah. Pemikiran dan persepsi orang tak boleh dikawal. Ia ultimately adalah pilihan. Nak gelakkan kepercayaan orang pun adalah pilihan juga. Semua ini di luar kawalan orang dan merupakan hak kebebasan bersuara (menulis). selamat menulis.

    Sekian. terima kasih.

Comments are closed.