All cabinet members and deputy ministers will take a 10 per cent cut in their entertainment allowances

By referring to Malaysiakini report on the 10% cut off their entertainment allowance, we can derive that a Minister will have, on average about RM 10,000.00 per month "to play" while a typical rakyat has to fork out an extra RM 200 to RM 300 from his only source of income. Mind you, a typical rakyat does not get any "entertainment allowance" from his employer.

RENUNGILAH WADAH MUFTI PERLIS

Lihat negara kita yang kaya dengan berbagai hasil. Sepatutnya kita akan tetap kukuh dan setiap rakyat akan menikmati kekayaan ini dengan adilnya. Namun, disebabkan pembaziran, harta negara yang sepatutnya dapat dimakan puluhan tahun, tetapi surut mendadak dalam masa beberapa tahun.

Maka, yang patut mendapat bantuan dan hak, tidak cukup untuk sampai kepadanya. Barang keperluan pula bertukar menjadi mahal. Pembaziran memusnahkan kehidupan rakyat bawahan dan menghalang hak yang sepatutnya sampai kepada mereka.

Maka betapa wajar untuk para pembazir itu dipersaudarakan dengan syaitan. Apatah lagi dalam banyak keadaan, pembaziran itu lahir dari keangkuhan dan kesombongan. Sifat-sifat itulah jua yang menjadi asas kepada kekufuran syaitan.

Soalannya, mengapakah apabila kita membicarakan tentang pembaziran, kita hanya terbayang orang-orang bawahan di kampung ataupun bandar. Jika kita ingin meminta supaya setiap warga negara ini berjimat dan jangan membazir, maka bermulalah daripada atas. Bukan sekadar untuk mengenakan si miskin yang sekian lama telah berjimat dan sudah tidak tahu apa yang hendak dijimatkan lagi. Mengapa kita hanya terbayang rakyat yang berada dalam rumah persendirian dan berbelanja dengan wang poketnya yang sudah lelah?

Kita sepatutnya terlebih meneliti semula bagaimana perbelanjaan yang menggunakan harta negara dan rakyat yang sedang berjalan di istana-istana, kediaman-kediaman rasmi kerajaan di peringkat negara dan negeri? Apakah wajar di kala ini keraian untuk orang-orang besar sama ada sultan atau menteri begitu mewah? Makanan yang dihidangkan untuk mereka, harga satu meja kadang kala boleh dimakan oleh ratusan rakyat bawahan. Karpet yang dipijak oleh mereka harganya ribuan bungkusan nasi yang dimakan oleh ‘orang biasa’.

Apakah patut pada saat yang sebegini, ada istana atau kediaman rasmi menteri yang hendak ditambahmewahkan? Apakah patut orang-orang besar ini diraikan dengan hiburan atau pertunjukkan dan konsert yang menelan puluhan ribu ringgit sempena sesuatu kunjungan mereka?

Wang itu, wang negara. Wang itu, wang rakyat. Apakah dalam masa yang sebegini mereka masih mendapat peruntukkan untuk bersantai, bermain golf dan ‘berhiburan’ dengan menggunakan wang rakyat bawahan yang disuruh menjimatkan nasi lemak dan air kopi mereka?

ONE

I am only one

But still am one

I cannot do everything

But still I can do something

And because I cannot do everything

I will not refuse to do the something that I can do


-Edward Everett Itale-

Johor DAP Vice Chairman Wore Songkok.

This is a photograph of me in my younger days. Note the headgear / songkok.

"TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR THE SONGKOK" - THE STAR SUNDAY 9, JUNE 2008.

PRESS STATEMENT
VICE CHAIRMAN DAP JOHOR
NORMAN FERNANDEZ

ISSUE: REPORT IN THE STAR SUNDAY 9, JUNE 2008
“TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR THE SONGKOK”.

The Sunday STAR 9th June, 2008 reported at pg N4 “ To wear or not to wear songkok”. Having read the news, I wish to clarify the issue and also make my personal stand.

1. My statement as appearing in the STAR would seem to imply that I am questioning the wisdom of DAP Central Executive Committee and that Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Johor DAP State Chairman/Adun Skudai and myself are of the same view. That is far from true. I have not and wish not to criticize the CEC.

2. I wish to make it clear that what I meant and was referring to, is the stance by the DAP National Legal Advisor Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin who had been quoted in the paper as saying that the songkok ought not to be worn. As such Sdr Dr Chen Man Hin’s statement runs contrary to the decision of the CEC. The CEC had already decided with regard to the wearing of the songkok. I wish to make it very clear and reiterate that I hold steadfast to the decision of the CEC meeting held in Penang after the election which left to the respective state committees to decide the decision whether to wear or not to wear the songkok.

3. In the recently concluded 12th General Election, DAP Johor won the Parliamentary seat of Bakri while winning the State seats of Skudai, Senai, Mengkibol and Bentayan.

4. The Member of Parliament for Bakri is Sdr Er Teck Hwa. The State Assemblymen are Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau, Skudai, Sdr Ong Kow Meng, Senai, Sdr Ng Lam Hua, Mengkibol and Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang, Bentayan.

5. In the aftermath of the election, the wearing of the official attire (No.1 Suit) in the Dewan Undangan Negeri Johor became an issue. The official attire or the No.1 Suit as it is known consist of a Jacket and a songkok with the crest.

6. The CEC of the DAP in its meeting held in Penang after the general Election, decided that the decision on whether or not to wear the songkok will be left to the individual state committee to decide.

7. In accordance with the directive of the CEC, the Johor DAP State Committee thereafter at its meeting held on the 20th April, 2008 discussed the issue of wearing the formal attire, namely the No.1 Suit and more importantly the wearing of songkok.

8. Save for the Assemblyman for Bentayan who was absent, all other Aduns and the State Committee members present expressed their views.

The wearing of the songkok was an emotive issue and the Committee Members were reminded of the unfortunate events of 1990. There were a diverse of views. The pros and cons of wearing the official attire and more importantly the wearing of the songkok was freely debated. The State Committee also took into account the unfortunate events which happened to the then DAP Aduns namely Pang Hok Liong and Wong Peng Sheng in the Johor State Assembly in 1990 The Johor state DAP remained steadfast in its stand that the events and incidents and the use of force to the then DAP Aduns had no justifications.

In the end, the state committee taking account of the winds of change and the new politics brought about by the 12th General Election, in its meeting on 20th April, 2008 resolved that that all Aduns shall and must wear the official attire together with the songkok.

It was the general consensus that the wearing of the songkok was not or ought not to signify cultural submission or capitulation of principles but instead the wearing of the songkok with the state crest state crest was as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor who will be present for the opening of the Dewan Undangan Negeri. In any event, the wearing of the songkok was only for the period when His Highness Sultan of Johor was present.

9. Thereafter on May 13, 2008, at an informal meeting held at the Gelang Patah Parliamentary Liasson Office and attended by among other by all the DAP Aduns save for the Adun of Bentayan, the two DAP State Vice Chairmen namely Norman Fernandez and Ahmad Ton and the DAP State Secretary, Sdri Gan Peck Cheng. A brief discussion on the issue was held once again it resolved to maintain the decision of state committee of April 20, 2008.

10. At the said meeting, the Johor State DAP Chairman then directed the Johor State DAP Secretary to send a formal letter to all Aduns to remind them of the decision and compliance of the state committee’s decision of April 20, 2008. A draft of the said letter was immediately prepared by Norman Fernandez and given to the Johor State Secretary for her action.

11. Yesterday, 7 June, 2008 the State Chairman made a shocking revelations claiming that apparently the CEC on April 21, 2008, that is a day after the Johor DAP State Commmiteee had resolved to wearing the official attire, the CEC had revoked its decision to let the individual state committee to decide on whether or not to wear the formal attire and more importantly the songkok.

If it was true that the CEC had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP, then I have to also question why the Johor State DAP Chairman did not to inform the Johor DAP State Committee until yesterday. Regretfully, I am made to understand that the CEC did not and never had revoked the decision of the Johor State DAP.

Further, had the CEC revoked the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee, question also arises as to why the Johor State DAP Chairman on May 13, 2008 had given a directive to the Johor State DAP Secretary to send out to a formal letter of reminder to all the DAP Aduns notifying the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of April, 2008. Was it play acting by the Johor State Chairman?

12. Today’s report in the Star “To wear or not to wear the songkok” has left me no opportunity but to clarify what has indeed transpired so far and also to make my personal observation and stand public.

13. Sdr Gwee Tong Hiang (Bentayan) from the onset had said he will not wear the official attire and the songkok and is prepared for any consequences arising. While I do not agree with Sdr Gwee, nevertheless I must say that at the very least he has stated his stand openly, never mind rightly or wrongly his decision may be.

14. Sdr Ng Lam Hua (Mengkibol) has steadfastly stated that he will wear the official attire and the songkok. The Sunday Star reported the reason for his decision and I salute him for his courageous and forward thinking.

15. Sdr Ong Kow Meng (Senai) has expressed his concern and stressed the importance of the DAP Aduns being united. He has repeatedly said openly that has no objection to wearing the songkok.

16. Since the stand of the other three Aduns are clear, what then is the stand of Sdr Dr Boo Cheng Hau (Skudai). From Sdr Dr Boo’s statements and conduct, I am now of the view that it is plainly clear that he do not wish not to wear the songkok but instead is and has been seeking an excuse or rather any excuse for justifying not being able to wear the songkok. Blaming it on the decision of the CEC ( when there was none) would naturally be a good cover. Little wonder that he prefers to ignore the decision of the Johor DAP State Committee of 20 April, 2008 and instead finds refuge and reasons on statements by certain DAP leaders as justification in not wanting to wear the songkok.

I am made to understand that the Secretary General had made it clear that the final decision on the wearing of the formal attire and the songkok is with the respective individual state committee. That’s precisely what the Johor DAP State Committee in its meeting on April 20, 2008 did – agreeing to wear the official attire and the songkok. As such I am deeply dissapointed by Sdr Dr Boo’s attempt to drag the Secretary General into this issue.

Dr Boo Cheng Hau must find courage to state his stand openly whether he will or will not be wearing the official attire and the songkok. The shilly shalling has to stop and he should not divert blame or justification not to wear the songkok on the Secretary General or the CEC. The onus is on Dr. Boo to prove that the CEC had on April 21, 2008 revoked its earlier decision. Until then the directive of the CEC must be held to be true and remain.

17. I had from the onset been firm in my conviction that the wearing of the songkok should not be viewed as cultural submission and the capitulation of principles but to view the wearing of the songkok with the state crest as a sign of respect to His Highness Sultan of Johor. Rightfully, the Aduns ought to be play the role of his Majesty’s Loyal Opposition representing the subjects of the Sultan and not instead behave as bunch of defiant protagonist.

18. It has been 18 long years since DAP had any representation in the Johor State Assembly. During this time politics and peoples perceptions on many issues have changed. Sad, that for some Aduns, despite the winds of change as seen in the 12th general election, small mindness still remain. Perhaps these Aduns ought to have been forthcoming during the election campaign by telling the voters that if elected they will defy the Sultan and not wear the songkok. I wonder if they would still be elected.

19. I am most upset that the proud occasion of the opening of the Johor State Assembly on June 19, 2008 is going to end in one ugly saga. I call upon all the Johor DAP Aduns to wear the official attire and the songkok.

Norman Fernandez - the opinion expressed are the writers’ personal opinion. Norman Fernandez would welcome readers comment on this issue at anfalaw@streamyx.com.

Please vote

Have created a poll on the fuel price increase. Please vote by clicking on the option at the side bar.

Fuel price surprise from the BN Government

PETROL : 2.70 per litre
DIESEL : 2.58 per litre

PULAU PISANG – RIGHT TO OPERATE LIGHTHOUSE GRANTED IN PERPERTUITY TO SINGAPORE.

Pulau Pisang measuring 178.4 hectares is situated about 15km off the Johor coastline in the Straits of Malacca.

History

In 1885, an agreement was reached between the Sultan of Johor and the Govenor of the Straits Settlement in Singapore pursuant to which the Sultan granted to the government of the Straits Settlement a plot of land on which to build and maintain a lighthouse and a roadway access to the lighthouse.

In 1886 a lighthouse was erected and in accordance with 1885 agreement, the lighthouse was managed and maintained by the government of the Straits Settlement and later by Singapore which continues to do so to the present.

The 1885 grant by the Sultan was not reduced to writing at the time but it was subsequently recorded in an express written indenture signed on the 6.10.1900 between the Sultan of Johor and the Governor of the Colony of the Straits Settlement after the Sultan of Johor had sent a reminder to this effect to the Governor of the Straits Settlement.

According to the Johor Menteri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman as reported in the Harian Metro May 27, 2008, Singapore has been granted 0.4 hectares of land which includes the lighthouse, the access road and the jetty. Further, since 2002 the Malaysian government has made it a condition that those working at the Lighthouse must register with the Marine Department, Immigration Department and also with the Royal Customs at Kukup. Every forthnight, when there is a changeover of personels, both personnels goes through the procedure. The Menteri Besar seems to paints a rosy picture that local villagers in Pontian are allowed to go to the island to cultivate and harvest fruits. However the letter by a reader to www.bloglimkitsiang.com seems to suggest otherwise. (see letter below).

SOVEREIGNITY AND OWNERSHIP
In contrast to Singapore’s continuous assertion to ownership and sovereignity of Pedra Branca, Singapore has not asserted soveregnity of Pulau Pisang.

Singapore’s (then) Minister of Foreign Affairs Prof. S. Jayakumar in 2003 in his parliamentary reply is quoted as saying “ Let me say upfront Pulau Pisang belongs to Malaysia. We have never disputed Malaysia’s sovereignity over Pulau Pisang but our MPA however has a right to operate the lighthouse there and the plot of land as well as the road leading to the lighthouse has been granted in perpertuity so long as Singapore operates that lighthouse. It is an indenture between the Johor Sultanate and the Straits Settlement,”

THE CONCERN AND QUESTION
Note the key words “ granted in perpeituity”. In the light of Pedra Branca, the government should urgently clarify clearly the status of Pulau Pisang and confirm if any right in perpertuity actually exist and the actual extent of that rights. Numerous letters have been written about Malaysians not allowed entry or shooed away from Pulau Pisang. Has the right to maintain and manage the lighthouse and the road leading to the lighthouse been extended to Singapore maintaining security of the island and making the island a restricted zone and thereby arbitrarily preventing Malaysian from the shores of Pulau Pisang or landing at the Jetty at Pulau Pisang. There seems to be an unwritten no trespass zone rule in operation. Here is a letter “Kedaulatan Pulau Pisang” as appeared in www.bloglimkitsiang.com where the writer raises concern that Pulau Pisang may someday face the same fate as Pulau Batu Putih (now Pedra Branca).

“ Kedaulatan Pulau Pisang

Letters by Azmi

Salam sejahtera YB, saya adalah seorang anggota TLDM yang pernah ditugaskan untuk memantau kehadiran petugas rumah api warga Singapura di Pulau Pisang. YB, Pulau Pisang adalah pulau yang tidak dihuni, dimana penduduk asalnya telah berpindah ketanah besar di Pontian, yang tinggal hanya dusun dan perkuburan yang tidak terjaga, Ia terletak di perairan Pontian Johor dan jauh daripada Singapura.

Persoalannya mengapa kita yang telah 50 tahun merdeka masih memerlukan bantuan Singapura untuk mengawal selia rumah api tersebut, adakah Jabatan Laut tidak berupaya untuk mengawal selianya. Disini saya ingin memaklumkan kepada YB, selama penugasan saya di pulau tersebut, kami tidak dibenarkan memasuki persekitaran rumah api, malah menggunakan jetinya juga dilarang apatah lagi memasuki kedalam rumah api. Maka sepanjang penugasan kami di sana, kami hanya memerhatikan dari jauh warga Singapura keluar masuk, tidak lebih dari itu.
Merujuk kepada kemenangan Malaysia keatas kedaulatan Pulau Ligitan dan Sipadan adalah atas dasar pembangunan dan kawal selia Malaysia di pulau tersebut, begitu juga kehilangan kedaulatan Pulau Batu Puteh kepada Singapura juga atas alasan yang sama.

Tidakkah kerajaan Malaysia berasa risau dengan kedudukan Pulau Pisang yang mungkin akan dituntut haknya oleh Singapura pada masa akan datang (tidak sekarang, mungkin 50 tahun akan datang. Tuntutan ke atas Pulau Batu Puteh pun dilakukan setelah puluhan tahun ia mengawal selia pulau tersebut). Ada atau tidak perjanjian antara Malaysia dan Singapura yang jelas menyatakan bahawa kehadiran Singapura di Pulau Pisang hanya mengawal selia rumah api sahaja.

Apakah para penasihat Kementerian Pertahanan atau Panglima Angkatan Tentera tidak sedar akan perkara ini. Tidakkah PAT terfikir, sekiranya berlaku konflik antara Malaysia dan Singapura, dengan mudah mereka boleh menempatkan pasukan elitnya di pulau ini. Mahukah kita buah pisang berbuah dua kali? kehilangan kedaulatan wilayah kepada pihak yang berada jauh dua kali ganda jaraknya daripada kita.

Saya amat berharap YB dapat memanjangkan persoalan ini kepada Menteri Pertahanan semasa persidangan parlimen. “

Siti Nurhaliza in a ghazal tempo, waxes lyrical about Pulau Pisang.

PULAU PISANG

Pulau Pisang
Pulaulah Pisang
Pulau Pisang rumahlah api sayang
Pedoman kapal belayar malam (x2)

Sebelum ajal
berpantang mati
walaupun tercampak dalam lautan dalam (x2)

Pedoman kapal
Pedoman kapal belayar malam sayang
Sarat bermuat buah keranji
Walaupun tercampak lautan yang dalam
Tidakkan lupa segala janji.


The loss of Pulau Batu Putih (now Pedra Branca) though it may only be a granite outpost is already painful for Malaysians and Johoreans. The loss is felt even deeply by the Johor Malays. May the government learn the lessons from the loss of Pulau Batu Putih and ensure generations to come will never have to reminisce the loss of Pulau Pisang by singing the song.

SALINAN SURAT PEMANGKU SETIAUSAHA KERAJAAN JOHOR YANG MELEPASKAN HAK PULAU BATU PUTIH.

Di Syurga Kita Tanya NYA

Kita tidak perlu bersengketa

kamu dan saya

tentang empunya nama NYA.

Biarlah…

bila kamu dan saya

sampai di syurga

kita tanya pada pemilik nama

siapa antara kita

layak menggunakan nama NYA

kerana hanya empunya nama

boleh menjawab

boleh menentukan.

Hasil Nukilan, Norman Fernandez

KARPAL SINGH CONTROVERSY. NOW THE MUFTI OF PERAK ENTERS THE FRAY.

The Mufti of Perak is the latest to wade into the controversy surounding Karpal Singh’s statement regarding the extent of the powers of His Majesty Sultan of Perak. My personal view on this saga has already been made known. In brief, I am of the opinion that although Karpal Singh may be right in law, nevertheless it would have been politically prudent to leave it to others to make their observation or at the very least Karpal Singh ought to have put his views in temperate language.

Yesterday when I purchased a packet of nasi lemak for breakfast, the wrapper was from a page of Harian Metro and lo and behold! The page carried a statement of the Mufti of Perak.

Briefly this is what the Mufti said rebuking Karpal Singh. “Jangan menyakiti perasaan orang lain. Jangan menimbulkan kebencian dan kemarahan rakyat.” Fair comment I suppose.

Now, that’s strange when the rebuke and warning comes from someone who had a hand in the controversy surrounding the siege at Church Of Our lady Of Lourdes on November 6, 2006. At that time no one including the Mufti thought of prudence. No one bothered about “menyakiti perasaan orang lain” or even was concerned that the mobsters could “menimbulkan kebencian dan kemarahan orang lain.” In fact, in the aftermath, there was not even a ounce of decency from anyone to apologise to the Catholics. The Mufti did not rebuke anyone or condemn the mob that gathered outside the church. Worst of all, until today no one knows whatever has happened to the police investigation. Till today no one has been charged although a prime suspect was indeed arrested.

But in Karpal Singh’s case there has been a bee line to the police station to lodge police reports against Karpal Singh. The police has super efficiently and in meteorite speed wrapped up the investigation and papers sent to the Attorney General’s Office.

The long and short of it, is that, its time people stopped this SELECTIVE “menyakiti perasaan and jangan menimbulkan kebencian dan kemarahan” claptrap. Being hurt or being angry is not the exclusive domain of any one community or religion.

NOW THIS WAS THE ARTICLE POSTED ON NOVEMBER 20,2006 IN MY BLOG. PLEASE READ…

THE EVIL SMS THAT LAUNCHED A PROTEST.

All right thinking Malaysians and particularly Catholics are outraged at the intimidating actions of ill informed groups of Muslims who on November 5, 2006 pursuant to an SMS came in droves and gathered outside Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Silibin, Ipoh Perak causing fear and anxiety to the worshippers.
(Read The Herald November 12, 2006)

The SMS message said:-A number of Malays will be baptized by Dato Azhar Mansor this Sunday at the Slibin Church, Ipoh. Recently 600 students from Ungku Omar Polytechnic have converted to Christianity. Revealed by the Perak Mufti this afternoon at the state masjid. Please forward to all who stand for Islam.
(Translation)

The original SMS in Malay (and unedited) said:-Sejumlah Melayu akn dibaptiskan oleh Dato Azhar Mansor Ahad ini di Gereja Selibin IPO. Seramai 600 plajar Poli teknik Unku Omr Ipoh telah msuk Kristian baru2 ini. Pendedahan oleh Mufti Perak ptg ini di masjid Negeri. Sampaikan SMS kpd orang-2 yang mahukan ISLAM .(sic)

That malicious SMS ( which had indeed been circulating for almost three days before the incident ), on November 5, 2006 was enough to mobalise Muslim protestors ranging from individuals to political parties-read PAS and Muslim NGO’s to gather outside the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes. In truth what was to take place and did indeed take place in the Church was the First Holy Communion celebration for 98 children.

In the aftermath and in the days following the incident, the Perak Mufti Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria began to shed some light on the issue. He first revealed that a woman from Selangor whom he later named as Raja Sherina as the originator of the text message. The woman had apparently on October 21, 2006 at 9.33 am sent the said SMS to him.

According to the Mufti, this woman had claimed that she had studied at the International Islamic University and the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. On her return from Egypt she was doing social work with missionaries when she converted. However, she claimed that she later returned to Islam.

The Mufti further claimed that the woman and her husband had come back to his house on October 22, 2006 to confirm the substance of the message.

According to the Mufti, the Perak Mufti Department then decided to record his meeting with Raja Sherina and copies of the VCD were later handed over to Special Branch, Perak Menteri Besar, the Prime Minister’s Department and the Islamic Development Department for further action.(read NST pg.12).

Thereafter on November 2, during a meeting at the conference room of the state mosque with members of non-governmental organization the Mufti once again brought up the issue of the SMS. The Mufti then claimed that on November 3, 2006 he was informed that a number of NGO’s who attended the meeting would hold a peaceful protest against the alleged baptism. As the highest religious official of the state, the Mufti could have and should have in no uncertain terms stopped the proposed protest. Instead he made some sheepish attempt by discouraging the protestors before leaving town for Syria.

What all this means is that as early as October 22, 2006 and some 12 days before the alleged baptism ceremony, the Mufti and many others already had knowledge of the SMS and the impending “baptism “. Thus the Mufti as a religious leader could and should have acted with greater responsibility first preventing the protest and secondly and more importantly verifying the authenticity of the SMS. Neither of this was done. Instead time was spent doing a VCD recording!. The 12 days was a period long enough for the Mufti and all concerned to do among others number of thing:-

a. Investigate further about Raja Sherina background and verify the truth of her claim;

b. Since the national mariner Azhar Mansor was said to be going to perform the baptism rites, why did the Mufti or other authorities not contact and obtain confirmation from him. After all he was in Langkawi. A denial by Azhar Mansor could have expeditiously resolved and concluded that the SMS was false;

c. Find out the procedure how one is baptized into Catholism. For the uninitiated, in Catholism only a priest can conduct the baptism rites. Thus no lay Catholic and worst of all a recent convert would not be allowed to perform the baptism rites and that includes Azhar Mansor even if he had converted;

d. In the spirit to ensure religious harmony, the Mufti could have verified the authenticity of the SMS with the Church. Naturally this would have been easier had there been open channels of communication;

e. Investigate and verify if there was any truth that 600 students of Ungku Omar Polytechnic had indeed converted to Christianity.

Perhaps it may not be wrong to assume that what was hoped for, was to catch the Church in the act. That would have been sensational news and Azhar Mansor would have been the icing. Instead and thankfully the SMS and the alleged event has turned out to be one big hoax and now the Mufti is scurrying away and hoisting the blame solely on the messenger. The SMS turned out to be not only malicious but also mischievous, irresponsible and has without any doubt has damaged inter-religious relationship. Now the authorities are searching for Raja Sherina and Raja Sherina (if caught) could be charged under the Sedition Act or under the Multimedia and Communication act.

Strangely, the Mufti now advises that should anyone receives similar text message on such issues, he should forward them to the police and the authorities instead spreading them. Fair advice, Then why did he without first verifying the authenticity of the SMS, on November 2, 2006 made the SMS known to others particularly to the NGO’s .? As a religious leader, does he not know that his exalted position requires him to act with prudence and a greater responsibility is required from him.

This is what Johan Jaafar writing in his column NST Point Blank on November 18, 2006 (about the Mufti) had to say:-

“Now this person have been known to make ridiculous statements on almost everything-banishing AIDS sufferers to an island, giving out fatwa (decrees) that smoking is haram and even stating frightening figures about Muslims who have become apostates”.

Incidentally, in February 2006 the Mufti made a sensational revelation claiming that 250,000 Muslims (of which 100,000 were Malays) had apostised themselves while 100,000 more had submitted their application to do so. Never mind that he was never able to substantiate his claim save for stating that these figures were obtained from “reliable sources”. Still it was enough for some NGO’s and political parties read PAS to go on the overdrive. In the end on November 11, 2006 Malaysiakini reported the findings by Dr Mohd Azam Mohd Ali, professor of law at University Technology Mara who basing on official data obtained from the state syariah court, religious departments and the National Registration Department recorded that from 1999 to 2003 there were 750 applications. Of these, only 220 were granted throughout the five years and most of these were applicants who were converts to Islam. Clearly the figures bandied around by the Mufti has been debunked.

The Catholics and Non Muslims are most relieved at the swift reaction and response by the police and the government. Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said that firm action must be taken against those who had spread the SMS message because the “SMS message is dangerous as it can lead to racial disputes and create a tense situation”.

The Prime Minister according to a report in the NST is reported to have told his cabinet that this was a matter which could not be treated lightly. The Prime Minister also wants those responsible be severely punished because “they did with the intent to provoke anger”. The good Prime Minister could not be more correct. Catholics and Non Muslims are most comforted by the Prime Minister when he returned to the issue of the said SMS during the UMNO General Assembly when the Prime Minister when addressing the issue of intolerance said:-

“It is this same group who makes such proclamation that are conjuring imaginary threats aimed at inciting Muslims, hoping that they (Muslims) will become more intolerant of others.Their agenda is to see Malaysia torn apart, for us to fail as a multi racial, multi religious nation. This is not Islam.For example, so many SMSes have been sent, claiming mass baptisms of Muslims and the purported formation of a Malay Christian Association. There are even those who claim- without proof-that hundreds of Malay Muslims have become apostates.This kind of incitement whips many Malays into a frenzy because we do not have a culture of seeking to verify what we hear, preferring to believe everything we are told.It is such unfounded claims which lead to many becoming angry and even militant.But when the lies are exposed, those who create them scurry into hiding, nowhere to be seen and not even attempting to rectify the situation or to calm things down.”

The good Prime Minister could not have said any better. He has soothed the pain and anguish of the Catholics. However the authorities must show courage and take this matter seriously and not only investigate but also apprehend and prosecute the individuals and groups that have deliberately tried to sow hatred and racial ill-will in this country.

If the perpetrators and those involved are not apprehended and prosecuted, then there is every danger that an ill-informed group could merely being suspicious of the language and skin-tone may on a Sunday appear at the church doorstep to inspect and verify if the Indonesians migrants, Sabahan and Sarawakian or even Filipinos attending praise and worship are indeed Christians.

Never again should the Catholics and Non Muslims be subjected to such trepidation and that the legitimate exercise of their faith including religious and holy ceremonies in peace should be respected and protected.

Surah al Hujraat 49 : 6 - O you who believe ! if a sinner comes to you with any news, ascertain the truth, lest ye harm people unwittingly, and afterwards become full of repentance for what ye have done.

Surah al Hujraat 49 : 12 – O ye who believe ! Avoid suspicion as much (as possible) for suspicion in some cases is a sin.Fr Bernard Paul : “ A sad state of affairs.. because it shows how gullible people are and how quickly they believe in lies rather then checking first before responding. They are disrupting our religious service.

This is our Sunday celebration ! Its unjust…

KEMPEN RUMAH SELAMAT SEMASA CUTI SEKOLAH

Desperate Dr M plays the race card

Source : MalaysianInsider

JOHOR BARU, May 17 ─ Desperate times call for desperate measures. So Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today played the race card ─ something the former prime minister has not done since he was a young, upstart Umno politician in the 1960s.

You can read the full news here, but some of his more extreme remarks were :

“If we don’t speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over,”

“What does it say? Malaysia for Malaysians! This is the reality of the present situation. If we do not speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over..." - on the memorandum forwarded by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf)

"Today, the Malays have lost their political power and the non-Malays no longer respect the Malays and the Malay institutions.."

"Technically, I am now without a state and am asking Britain for asylum,"-P Waythamoorthy

P Waythamoorthy, who has been living in self-imposed exile after organising the mammoth Hindraf rally last November, denounced the government for allegedly revoking his passport.
The Hindu Rights Action Force chairman, who has been in London since he fled the country last December, said he has sought asylum in Britain after learning that Kuala Lumpur had cancelled his passport.

"Technically, I am now without a state and am asking Britain for asylum," the chairman of rights group Hindraf told AFP in a phone interview. "This is a very cowardly act by the Malaysian government against me in order to undermine me, but it really undermines their credibility locally and internationally."

Waythamoorthy said immigration officers at Gatwick airport told him that Kuala Lumpur had revoked his passport when he last entered Britain.

"The revocation of my passport is a last desperate attempt by the government in crippling my international lobby for the cause of Malaysian Indians and this unwarranted act has given me strength to continue the fight," he said from London.Immigration: He should come back

Malaysian immigration officials told AFP they were unaware of the passport cancellation and said Waythamoorthy should return home to check the status of his travel document.

But Waythamoorthy said Kuala Lumpur intended to force Britian to deport him so he could be arrested under Malaysia's Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows for indefinite detention without trial. Waythamoorthy, along with his brother P Uthayakumar and four other Hindraf leaders, angered the government in November by mounting a mass rally alleging discrimination against minority ethnic Indians.

Waythamoorthy fled Malaysia in December to lobby the international community for support, while the other five were detained under the ISA. The Federal Court on Wednesday refused to release the five. Amnesty International's Asia-Pacific advocacy director T Kumar called on Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to give a "full explanation on the rationale for the cancellation."

"This is the first time I have heard of a political activist's passport being revoked by his own country's government," he told AFP.

EC says Govt rejected use of ink but PM says he merely gave "advice"

EC chief: Cabinet rejected indelible ink

Election Commission chairperson Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman today dropped a bombshell by revealing that the cabinet had rejected the use of indelible ink in the March 8 general election on the day Parliament was dissolved.“I have not told the country about this (before) but what happened was that cabinet rejected our proposed law (on indelible ink) on Feb 13 - the day dissolution of Parliament was done,”...(read the full news at Malaysiakini)

No Instruction For EC To Scrap Ink Plan, Says Abdullah
KUALA LUMPUR, May 17 (Bernama) -- The government did not instruct the Election Commission (EC) to scrap its plan of using indelible ink in the last general election.Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said, although in principle the government made the decision, it was delivered in the form of an opinion and not instruction. (read the full news here)

New Straits Time Friday, May 2, 2008

Karpal saga - Johor DAP Vice Chairman agrees with Nathaniel Tan

Possibility: Karpal alone to sink Pakatan kapal?
Posted on May 10th, 2008 by Nathaniel Tan

It’s just a question, before diehard Karpal supporters start flinging brickbats. I must say I felt for the poor guy, who talked about rushing out to war and suddenly finding comrades you expected to be there behind you conspicuously missing. In this case however, perhaps it was a case of one general not consulting fellow generals, colonels and privates before rushing out.

I’m the last person in the world to comment about where royal boundaries begin and end. It’s simply not my area of expertise. But from a purely political standpoint, surely there is a need for some nuance here. The question I believe should face YB Karpal is, is it worth it?
Yes, I can totally sympathise with being unflinchingly true to ones principles. It is admirable no doubt.

For me, one principle is knowing what to give and what to take, to maximise the good of the people. Having recently rewatched Hot Fuzz with polytikus, I know the dangers of being obsessed with the greater good, and indeed, the line must be drawn somewhere. Indefinite detention without trial or torture for instance. Or even, I’m prepared to concede, super (and I mean super) dramatic cases involving serious overstepping of boundaries where the royalty or religion is concerned.

But drawing the line at the Sultan’s objection with regards to the appointment of a state religious chief? At a time when race relations are facing unprecedented challenges, and the unscrupulous (Utusan) waits to pounce on absolutely anything remotely perceived as anti-Malay? It’s not about sweeping everything under the carpet until Pakatan sweeps into power. It’s about being respectful of people’s beliefs, and what they hold sacred. If indeed someone’s right to swing his fist ends where your nose begins, I think we may have reached more than a few nostril hairs by now.

I think even Anwar, even riding the height of his credit ratings, prefers to consult with the party before deciding on major policy stances, statements, and the like. I certainly shouldn’t presume to tell others how to do their job, but perhaps not making such consultations has resulted in YB

Karpal’s current unenviable position?

Again: especially if you share my view that this is no slippery slope yet, is this really the place to draw that line?

'Allah' case: Court grants leave for judicial review

Source : MalaysianInsider

KUALA LUMPUR, May 5 – The preliminary round is over. After 2 hearings held over the past 10 days, the Catholic Church can now proceed to the next level and properly seek a judicial review of the Internal Security Ministry's decision to ban The Herald from using the word “Allah” in its publication.

This morning, Justice Lau Bee Lan from the appellate and special powers division of the Kuala Lumpur High Court announced before a full courtroom that the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur, Datuk Murphy Pakiam, as publisher of The Herald, has been granted:

• Leave to apply that the Internal Security Ministry's decision under the “Garis Panduan Penerbitan” (Publishing Guidelines) dated March 1, 2007, which prohibits The Herald from using the word “Allah” is illegal, null and void; that the paper is entitled to use the word “Allah” and that the word “Allah” is not exclusive to the religion of Islam.
• Leave to quash the Ministry's decision to disallow The Herald from publishing the word “Allah”.
• And an order to stay the Ministry's order until the court decides on the matter.

Later, outside the courtroom, Derek Fernandez, one of the 5 church counsel, explained to the waiting reporters that Justice Lau had basically agreed that the church's application “is not a frivolous application ... not a waste of the court's time”.

The next move, he added, would be for the church to file a substantive application, which they will do so within the next 2 weeks. “Hopefully, (the court hearing for the judicial review) will be fixed within 6 months,” said Fernandez.

KEEP POLITICS AND ZEALOTORY OUT OF FOOTBALL. SELAMAT DATANG CHELSEA.

Last Saturday, Chelsea played Manchester United. Manchester United would have clinched and retained the premiership title had they beaten Chelsea. Instead my team, Manchester United lost 2-1.

I watched the game at Hamiid Restoran, a popular eatery in Tampoi Indah which on match days is filled with English Premier League fans. That Saturday, it no different and with the typical multiracial crowd. Among them there were a sizeable number of Malay youths. When Chelsea scored they clapped and cheared. When Manchester United equalized they groaned and when Chelsea stole it at the end up went the roars and the high fives. It did not matter that Chelsea’s manager was an Israeli and that the Chelsea team also has an Israeli international Tal Bal Haim.

I cannot be wrong when I say that Chelsea is a popular team worldwide and that includes muslim middle east. To date no mullah’s has issued any fatwas against supporting Chelsea or for the matter against Avram Grant or Tan Bal Haim. Infact Chelsea is scheduled to play in the middle east.

So it comes as a surprise when a group of wet blanket decide to protest the visit by Chelsea to Malaysia. Maybe they are not against Chelsea per se but their bone of objection is rather against Avram Grant and Tal Ben Haim. According to the coalition of 21 muslim groups’ spokesperson Muhamad Azmi Abdul Hamid, Israel is a rogue state and therefore this duo should be prevented entry. He further claims that the coalition intend to hold a massive protest at the tour match if the government did not bar the Israeli duo. He then pronounces an edict that Malaysians should boycott the match. My ass ! who is he to tell Malaysians to boycott the match or have the audacity to claim that his group represents Malaysians.

Let me ask this small minded person. How come he did not organise a massive protest when two young Malays footballers left for a brief training stint with Chelsea. None of them protested outside KLIA, threatened them with bodily injury or labelled them friend of the Jew. So lesson one is that if benefit is to be gained then it is all right to befriend a Jew. If the reason for their objection is that Malaysia has no diplomatic ties with the State of Israel, then the objection once again holds no water. Pray, tell me how come this group never objected when the government invited imminent Jews to participate and speak in conferences on Palestinian and Israeli conflict? So lesson two is that any Jew who is prepared to condemn the Jews may be welcomed to Malaysia. He is kosher. Just the other week, the Second Finance Minister Md Nor Yakcob urged the Malays to copy the Jews. No one kicked the Minister’s kaboosh and no group behaved like bats out of hell. The conclussion is that, there is only a small minority who wish to be vocal with their shifting principles. The majority of the Malaysians, thankfully, common sense still prevails.

Thus, credit must be given to Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Ahmad Albar for his courageous and wise decision to allow the Israeli duo to come to Malaysia. It may not have been an easy decision for him, considering that Malaysia do not have diplomatic ties with Israel and also not want to offend or incur the wrath of Malaysian Muslims. Rationality prevailed over emotions. Syabas and terima kasih, Datuk !.

No one is denying that the Israel- Palestinian conflict has gone on too long. The fault lies with both sides and deep rooted. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians are equally to be blamed for perpetuating the conflict for so long but must we bring religion and politics to sports? It is worth remembering that sports is the best way to foster good relationship. Sportsmen and genuine fans forget about colour and creed of the sportsmen. To them it does not matter if the footballer is an Israeli or a Jew or for the matter an Afgan Taleban. Sports transcend all and genuine fans just want to enjoy the beautiful game and wish to keep it free from politics, zealotory, and racist bigots. Syed Hamid Albar rightly epitomizes forward thinking Muslims when he said “we do not look at the aspects of politics”. Well said.

So to this group my advice is protest if you wish to but disrupt you shall not do. Please do not to shove your politics and religious zealotory on us, genuine football fans. Selamat datang to Malaysia, Chelsea. I will be supporting Malaysia.