Home » MUST READ
Category Archives: MUST READ
There are so many speculations on the recent crisis pertaining flight MH370 which could distract and hamper the search and rescue activities currently underway in the South China Seas.
Fortunately, the management of this crisis has been handled very well by Malaysia Airlines and the relevant authorities. With the Department of Civil Aviation taking charge of the search and rescue missions, it is commendable on the part of the agencies involved to remain professional in their duties.
The management of the crisis could have gone either way and it is a mark of true professionalism that Malaysia Airlines so far is on the dot in the proper procedures in handling this serious incident. Below is an article from the Business Insider which could have been taken as a case study on what not to do during an aviation crisis.
Asiana Airlines Needs Serious Help With Crisis Management
As the FAA and NTSB continue to investigate the July 6th accident in which 3 were killed and 182 were injured at San Francisco International Airport (SFO), crisis management experts are scratching their heads at the perplexing response of Asiana Airlines.
Crisis Management protocols
When there is a crisis, the proper procedure is for PR-savvy company representatives to talk with the public through the media to reassure them that everything is being done to investigate the cause and insure the safety of the airline and the wellbeing of its passengers.
The idea is to get ahead of the story and make current and future customers as comfortable as possible in doing business with the Airline. As Korea’s second biggest airline, Asiana needs to make every effort to take care of its passengers and protect its reputation while allaying the fears of the flying public.
Asiana, however, has done the opposite of what crisis management protocols suggest. With the exception of a brief apology to victims and families a day after the crash, Asiana has been largely silent. When CEO Yoon Young-doo arrived at SFO airport 3 days after the accident, he declined to comment. Even more surprising, the airline did not have a trained public relations representative accompany the CEO to address the media either. The following day, six of twelve flight attendants appeared at a news conference, but none of them said a word, and some hid their faces. It appears they don’t know that when you are silent, many in the public think you are hiding something. While lawyers often recommend you don’t talk, marketers know that silence is the opposite of what a company faced with such a crisis should do.
Attempt to silence passengers
What’s even worse is the Airline has instructed passengers not to talk with anyone. On Wednesday, CBS This Morning featured a story about the Xu family who told reporter Carter Evans in an interview he taped on his iPhone that the Airline controlled nearly every aspect of their lives and told them not to speak with the media. In fact, when the reporter arrived at their hotel, airline security tried to prevent him from speaking with the family. Since these efforts to stifle the media appeared on camera on a major news broadcast, they supported what the Xu family was saying and raised further suspicions about Asiana.
Even though the pilots involved in the crash were novices landing and supervising the landing of a Boeing 777 at SFO, they pointed the finger at the automatic speed controls of the plane. According to the head of the NTSB, there are no signs of failure of the automatic speed controls or other automatic flight equipment on the plane that crashed. Such accusations by the pilots do nothing to inspire public confidence – especially since the early evidence points to pilot error as a potential cause of the accident. Also, the fact that this is the first fatal accident involving a Boeing 777, which has a record of being one of the safest planes in the sky, makes the finger-pointing even more suspicious.
While flying is the safest form of travel, it is a risky business for those involved in making and flying the planes. When bad things happen, the best companies can do is to quickly figure out the problem and be forthcoming with customers. What can any business learn from this latest incident involving Asiana Airlines? Employ the fact procedure to protect your reputation.
- Admit the problem, and apologize if necessary (do not “point the finger” at others because it is likely to compromise your credibility).
- Limit the scope (in this case put the incident in perspective and provide data that shows that flying on a Boeing 777 from Asiana is very safe).
- Propose a solution so it will not happen again (if it is found to be the cause, a more rigorous training and pilot supervision program would be the solution).
If implementing the fact procedure is premature
In a case such as this when the cause of the accident is not yet known with certainty, the airline should not be silent as Asiana has been. And, it should not try to control what the passengers say to the media. This just fuels suspicion. It should make it clear to the flying public that it (1) is doing everything in its power to cooperate with the investigation and (2) will continue to do whatever is necessary to insure the safety of its airline and the wellbeing of its passengers.
Since Asiana has proven to be inept in this crisis, and some believe this may be a cultural issue, it should hire US crisis management experts for advice to protect its reputation going forward.
Most people think that Pakatan Rakyat politicians are human beings with excellent moral values and integrity. They portray themselves as the people’s saviour against Barisan Nasional politicians which they accuse as the corrupt devils greedy for riches.
In actual truth, the politicians in Pakatan Rakyat are as greedy and as corrupt as the ones they are accusing. And since they always arrogate themselves as the epitome of goodness, this hypocrisy renders them even worse than their Barisan Nasional nemesis.
Take for instance Rafizi Ramli’s overzealousness in trying to create the perception that the LRT extension project, which had been awarded to George Kent – Lionpac consortium, was dubious and it should have been awarded to Balfour Beatty consortium instead.
And it was later discovered and exposed by this blog that Balfour Beatty’s main partner is Ingress Corporation Bhd whereby the main player in the latter is a close crony of Anwar Ibrahim. Luckily, the motive of Rafizi Ramli’s incessant accusations were uncovered and since then, he has been quiet about this issue.
Another example is how Tony Pua is belittling 1MDB and backed YTL over the tender of a power project. The blatant support for a corporation to win a multi billion was so unashamedly done, eyebrows were raised as to why a senior DAP politician would do that. Ironically, DAP which is very much known for its principles on socialism is now seem to be capitalist in nature. Are they shifting their raison d’etre when big money is involved?
Hypocrites rule the roost and Pakatan Rakyat’s lust for money and opulence can be seen openly. Otherwise, why would DAP politicians in Selangor who should be a socialist in nature, demand near 300% hike in their salaries?
The latest incident involve water crisis in Selangor will raise more eyebrows. For a start, this is the chronology of the whole fiasco:
PKR politics as we all know is very much a carbon copy of Umno’s but in one huge difference – they do everything much worse.
On Wednesday, the Federal and Selangor governments signed a Memorandum of Understanding that will facilitate the implementation of the Langat 2 water treatment plant project and the takeover of water assets in the state.
The MoU breaks a five-year impasse that has stalled the implementation of water projects in the country’s most industrialised state. - Source
However, PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli had claimed the party was in the dark about the MoU, and said the state executive councillors would be asked to explain.
PKR deputy president Azmin Ali said the Mentri Besar would be summoned to brief Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim once he returns from Japan.
“We want to hear Khalid’s side of the story as many are still in the dark about the details. We are concerned over whether there would be an increase in water tariff prices and whether there would still be free water for Selangor,” he said yesterday.
Anwar’s official Facebook page showed that the Permatang Pauh MP is currently in Japan.
It has been reported that several PKR leaders were not informed before the state signed the memorandum on the water restructuring exercise while it is unclear if Khalid has the backing of the top Pakatan Rakyat leaders over the deal. - Source
Zaid Ibrahim had a different take on why top PKR politicians was in the dark about the deal:
Kajang by-election contestant Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said that PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim got “checkmated” by Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim on the water deal.
Zaid said it was too late for Anwar – who is apparently setting his sights on the office of mentri besar – to influence the deal that has just been struck between the Federal and state governments.
“It is too late. It is a checkmate for Anwar,” he told a packed press conference at his residence here yesterday.
However, PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli had claimed the party was in the dark about the MoU, and said the state executive councillors would be asked to explain.
But Zaid believed Anwar knew the MoU would be signed.
“I am sure Anwar knew about the deal …in the event a new mentri besar takes over from Khalid, he cannot do anything to ruin the deal.
“I think what Khalid did was right and I agree with him.
“At least the future of the Selangor people would be more secure with the end of the privatisation of water supplies,” he said. - Source
Zaid Ibrahim’s press conference can be seen as below. There are many sneak peaks on what Anwar Ibrahim intend to do once he will become Menteri Besar of Selangor inside the video.
And today Khalid Ibrahim told the public on why the water deal was made in such clandestine manner. Basically, he did not want the trio of vultures – Anwar Ibrahim, Rafizi Ramli and Azmin Ali to take over the water deal for their own benefit. This triad of political schemers had been working against Khalid Ibrahim since day one of the Kajang plot.
Some PKR top brass wanted to set price of water assets, says Khalid
SHAH ALAM: Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim disclosed that there were party leaders from PKR who were trying to influence the valuation of the water assets in the state.
He said some party leaders had introduced him to a few people who were trying to make their case as to why the pricing of the water assets should be higher.
“I have been an investment banker for so long that I look at the principle of valuation before determining the price (of the assets). I stood by my principle of valuation and set the price at RM9.65bil.
“These people wanted to set the price and wanted the valuation to justify their price,” he said in an interview with The Star yesterday.
Khalid also explained why the mechanics of the deal could not have been revealed to all and sundry in and outside of the party before the agreement with the Federal Government was signed on Wednesday.
He pointed out that the information, if revealed, would have an impact on the price of the stocks related to the water assets.
“I was also concerned about possible abuse of information and insider dealing. These are reasons why PKR leaders were not informed ahead of the signing on the water deal between the Selangor state government and the Federal government,” he said.
Khalid said he did not inform his party leaders due to those reasons to ensure that the implementation of the transaction was right and adhered to proper corporate governance.
Like George Orwell’s Animal Farm – the ones who think could be the saviour, will eventually become worse than the alleged oppressors once they have tasted power.
If anyone of the readers here haven’t read the Confessions of an Economic Hitman book, here is a Youtube video where the author summarily describes the content of the book in about 11 minutes.
Locally, our own economy is floundering.
None of the great economic consultants employed by the Prime Minister are able to find the right formula to revitalise the local economy yet. Today, the blogger Darah Tuah wrote a snapshot on the economic position of this country right now particularly the economic relationship between the bumiputera and the non-bumiputera. The blogger gave recommendations as well.
Maybe PEMANDU and other advisers can learn a little bit of something about it too.
Please have a read HERE.
Thanks to blogger SatD, we came across this intriguing article on covert Christian evangelicals in East Africa. It tells a story of a muslim man who became an ardent follower of Christ eventhough outwardly, he is still deemed by the general community as a muslim.
But as the interview progressed, it is becoming clear that he is really a pure Christian at heart whereby he discounted the role of Prophet Muhammad and elevated the position of Christ (Isa Al Masih) and of course, believe in the Trinity (Holy Spirit, Father and Son).
In the belief system of any muslim, the centre of it all is the iman; and the most important part of the iman is the belief in Allah. The one true God. He neither begets nor was begotten. Which runs contrary to the Christian beliefs.
However, from the interview below which appeared in the web portal Christianity Today, the interviewee (known as a pseudonym of “Abu Jaz”) is clearly a member of an evangelical movement trying to subvert the unassuming muslims into a practising christian.
Remember SatD’s post about the type of muslims which are targeted by the Evangelicals? Within the post there is a schedule on the types on Christians in the muslim world:
Abu Jaz is clearly a C5 type of christian. And together with his movement, they are trying to move into C6 where they will be perceived as muslims but privately, they are christians. Note that for a muslim, the moment you believe in the Trinity and the bible, in substance, you are no longer a muslim. And Abu Jaz cited extensively verses from the bible and not once from the Quran. He even talked about syncretism between Christian and Islam.
Do read below on their modus operandi, which among others, telling muslims that they (the Christians) worship Allah too. The opening paragraphs are just misdirection in stating that Abu Jaz is still a muslim and not necessarily be a christian. But as mentioned before, as the interview progressed, it is an obvious fact that Abu Jaz is clearly a christian. We assure you this interview is a really great read in knowing the intricacies of the evangelical movement in East Africa.
Worshiping Jesus in the Mosque
Can people from other religious traditions genuinely follow Jesus without becoming “Christians”? The question is a point of much dispute within today’s missions world. Those who follow Jesus yet don’t formally express Christian faith are said to belong to insider movements. And no insider movement has received more attention than Muslims who embrace Christ yet stay within their Islamic community. “Insiders” are hard to access due to cultural, geographic, and linguistic barriers. As a result, many Christians have taken positions on insider movements without ever having met or spoken with someone who belongs to one. In the following exclusive interview, we hear from just such an insider.
The following is the synthesis of two interviews conducted in 2011 with “Abu Jaz,” a key leader in a movement that describes itself as the People of the Gospel. This group represents several thousand Muslims in eastern Africa who have converted to faith in Christ during the past decade, but who have remained in their Muslim communities. Abu Jaz is married and has three children. He started followingIsa al Masih (“Jesus the Messiah”) as the Savior 18 years ago.
The interview was conducted by “Gene Daniels,” a missionary in the Muslim community for over a decade, who has published many articles in missionary journals. Christianity Today has verified the authenticity of the interviewer and interviewee, whose real names are withheld so that the work of the People of the Gospel will be protected.
Describe your conversion to Christ.
One night the only food my wife and I had was a small portion of macaroni. My wife prepared it very nicely. Then one of her friends knocked on the door. I told myself, The macaroni is not sufficient for even the two of us, so how will it be enough for three of us?But because we have no other custom, we opened the door, and she came in to eat with us.
While we were eating, the macaroni started to multiply; it became full in the bowl. I suspected that something was wrong with my eyes, so I started rubbing them. I thought maybe my wife hid some macaroni under the small table, so I checked, but there was nothing. My wife and I looked at each other, but because the guest was there we said nothing.
Afterward I lay down on the bed, and as I slept, Isa came to me and asked me, “Do you know who multiplied the macaroni?” I said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I am Isa al Masih. If you follow me, not only the macaroni but your life will be multiplied.”
He didn’t tell me that he was God; he didn’t tell me that he died on behalf of me; he didn’t say, “I am the Son of God.” He didn’t talk to me about any complicated theological issues. He only told me that if I followed him, he would multiply my life. At that time, I was very happy if he only multiplied the macaroni like he did that day. I didn’t understand what he meant when he said that my life would be multiplied. Now I understand what that means. But at that time, I accepted him simply as the “lord of macaroni.”
Much like the crowds in the Gospels who accepted him as “lord of bread.”
Yes, I just accepted him as one who satisfied my needs. That day I understood that because Allah loved me, Isa came to my home.
When I think back now, the kingdom of God came to my home. Jesus said, “[I]f I cast out demons … the kingdom … has come upon you” (Luke 11:20, NASB). Any miracle that takes place by Isa al Masih speaks of the kingdom of God. It was not because I was poor that Isa came to my home; there are many poor. It is not because he wanted to multiply my macaroni. Maybe there might be other people who can multiply macaroni, like magic. So what is the purpose? Isa al Masih came to my home with the kingdom of God. He didn’t completely explain theological issues, he only said, “If you will follow.”
I went to an [evangelical] church after that, and I faced a cultural challenge as a Muslim. Everything was different—their way of worship, the way they sang songs, the way they danced. Nothing was familiar to me.
I have my own expression of worship. When it comes to greetings, I say, As-salaam ‘alaykum (“Peace be upon you”), and I expect people to reply, Wa ‘alaykum Salaam wa rahmatu l-laahi wa barakaatuh (“Peace to you and may God’s mercy and blessings be upon you”). And we Muslims have a way of shaking hands. But in the church, it was totally different. Nobody liked my expressions. Brothers and sisters told me that As-salaam ‘alaykum and Wa ‘alaykum salaam were from the Devil, so it was hard for me to join and start life with members of the church.
One day the pastor came to me and said, “How are you?” I answered, “Alhamdulillah!” (“Praise be to God!”). The pastor was very angry. He said, “No, brother! No more Alhamdulillah. Your God is changed from Allah to God [using the tribal name]. You have to express your thanksgiving to God as a Christian, and we have our own expression of thanksgiving to God.” He ordered me to say, “Praise the Lord” and “Praise to God.” He asked me to not use the term Allah because Allah is evil, Allah is the Devil, Allah is the black stone, Allah is an idol. That was the first time I had heard [anyone say] that Allah is an idol or evil. I was shocked. When I do my spiritual duties, I think I am doing them for Allah. He is the one who created the universe, sustains the universe, and judges the universe. I couldn’t in my mind imagine that Allah is an idol or evil.
The next day the pastor asked, “How are you?” I wanted to replace his words with my own Alhamdulillah, but since the pastor warned me not to, I didn’t. I tried to say, “Praise the Lord,” or “Praise to God,” but for 33 years I had never used these words or the tribal name for God, and it was difficult to do so. So I stayed [in the church] without sayingAlhamdulillah for more than three months. I simply said, “I am fine.” I wanted to express my gratitude to Allah, but because of their understanding [of the term], I suppressed it.
Then I started questioning the justice of God. I asked him, “God, you are the one who put me in a Muslim culture; it was not my choice. They don’t allow me to express [my praise] in the congregation. When they hear Islamic terminologies, they immediately rebuke me, so I prefer to keep silent. You like the Orthodox culture, you like the traditional African culture, you like Jewish culture, you like the European culture, you like cultures of other people groups, but you dislike the Muslims. So you are not just.”
This stayed with me for two years. But finally, because I had no other alternative, I completely accepted the evangelical cultural context, and I dissolved all of my Islamic cultural identity. No more Islamic terms; [you could say] that in my context I became circumcised. Then people finally accepted me as a believer, but it isolated me from my own Muslim community.
Did the church accept you when you abandoned your Islamic identity?
When I changed my culture they thought I had finally become a believer; before that they did not consider me one. When I changed my culture to become like them, they even clapped their hands and said, “Now Abu Jaz has become a believer.” But I had already believed for two years.
After some time, I had the chance to go to a Bible college. While I studied there, I learned the difference between the supracultural substance of the Word of God and the cultural form that expresses it. Then my question was answered, [and I understood] that God really does love everyone. God opened my eyes to understand that all cultures are equal in his eyes. It is not holy contexts, only holy texts.
From that time, 1998 by the European calendar, I started to prepare myself to speak with my own community. In the Bible college, I discovered myself, and I wanted to restore my cultural identity again, the identity of my culture, not for the sake of the people, but to express myself and my faith in God. I went back and restored my former Islamic cultural identity. Then I rejoiced that God is just.
Still, even if I had theological and cultural challenges in the Christian community, I experienced love there, a love that was alive. The believers showed me and my wife kindness and love. So I praise God for these people.
But I understand the pain of Muslims. I understand what they fear. When they hear the Good News, they want to have Isa al Masih, but because they have been told that it is only Christians who think about him, they reject him. But now we are not repeating the same mistake.
Talk a little about the theology of your movement.
We do not use systematic theology, even though I studied [it] in Bible college and understand how and when Christians developed different Christologies, for example. I know church history, and I know the creeds and when they started. The early church fathers faced external and internal challenges; they wrote the creeds to solve their own challenges, in their own contexts. So if [the] church fathers solved their own problems by finding answers in the Word of God, then the people who are working among the Muslims have to identify their own problems and even call councils to discuss the challenges and apologetic [issues] in these contexts.
How do you go about sharing the gospel in your context?
It is important to start [by asking], What is the purpose of preaching the gospel? We find our thinking in Acts 14:15, where Paul says, “We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them.” So bringing the Good News to people is turning them back to their Creator God. Of course, we must do this in Isa, in Jesus, but we have to start just as Paul did, with the Creator God.
This is general revelation. If we destroy general revelation, there is no more special revelation. As far as I know, Paul directly addressed non-Jewish religions twice, and both times, he started with general revelation but ended up with Jesus, the ultimate revelation of God, as the one appointed by God the Creator to save people. The Book of Acts tells us that. But to believers, in the Epistles, he taught them that Jesus is divine. No one can say Jesus is Lord without the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3).
Muslims believe there is a Creator of heaven and earth, and his name is Allah. If you tell a Muslim about the Creator of heaven and earth, but say that the Creator is not Allah, the Muslim will be very confused. What you are telling him is not good news.
If you believe that even Muslims have received general revelation, then you have to start there. If you don’t believe this, you don’t believe your own [evangelical] theology. But if you come to them with good news, [to] restore their relationship with the Creator God, then you have to receive the name they have for him, Allah. If we say that the one they know as Allah is not God, we are not [speaking] against the religion of Islam, or Muhammad or Qur’an, but against the doctrine of general revelation. The missionary must first receive the name of the Creator God from the people, and then they have heavenly authority to give the people the name of the Savior, Isa al Masih.
How is this different from simply believing in the Muslim prophet Isa, as in the Qur’an?
Muslims believe that Isa is a prophet and messenger of Allah, but that he is superseded by Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. According to Islam, salvation is based on the teaching of Muhammad. But you still have something to start with in Islam. You start with their limited Christology and Christ’s role in the kingdom of God, mainly his role in the Day of Judgment. Muslims start to think from Islamic Christology, but they end up with Isa [as the one] who overcame the power of death. They progressively understand him, from prophet and messenger to Savior and then to Lord. But this takes time and the Holy Spirit, as it also did for Peter.
But while they are slowly coming to understand who Jesus is, why don’t you also slowly bring them into the Christian church?
It is possible for Muslim-background believers to join the existing church. But the evangelical church in my country represents a mixture of two religious forms, the Coptic Church and traditional religion.
If I say to Muslims, “Come to this church with me,” I am inviting them to a very strange thing. Also, this is saying to them that they do not deserve a church that connects with their community. This is why we need a Muslim-focused church-planting strategy, because it will produce a church that uses the terms and forms from their Muslim community, not something from other religious communities.
Many Christians in the West would agree that Muslim-focused evangelistic strategy is needed. But many of them also feel that a Muslim-focused church is going too far.
Why is it too far? All people have a church-planting strategy that fits their religious context. Why is there a [problem] when we come to Islam? So we ask, “Do Muslims deserve a church that fits their cultural context?” We are not trying to bring them into the already [existing] evangelical church. They should have a church that reflects their culture. Then we can say that we have an indigenous church, one that grows from the soil of the Muslim community. To “hook” one person into the evangelical church is possible. But the question is how we can fish with a net.
When you are talking to one person you [are also] talking to his community. He represents the whole community. What we say to one will go back to all the rest. So we want to reach a whole community and bring community transformation. The content of church is from heaven, but the form of the church should be from the ground, the culture. The church should reflect Muslim culture, not Muslim theology.
How do the people in your movement view Muhammad? Is there confusion?
First, we cannot rule out syncretism at the beginning of a new believer’s life. The purpose of discipleship is to separate their old beliefs from their new beliefs. So when they put their faith in Jesus, they may have at the same time Muhammad in their heart. But when they start to pray in the name of Isa for their own need, they experience joy, assurance, and peace. And when they pray in the name of Jesus and find people healed and demons cast out, they completely stop thinking about Muhammad. It is a process of the Holy Spirit.
[We should] categorize people in how they relate to Jesus: Where are these people, and where is Jesus in their life? We should ask, “Does this person accept Isa as Lord of their life?”
But what about Muhammad?
Before [they believe in Isa], Muslims acknowledge Muhammad as the final prophet of God. Then we tell them about Isa al Masih. They already know that Isa al Masih was a prophet that raised people from the dead. They know that Isa al Masih did miracles and that he will come as the sign of the Day of Judgment.
Even though they know all this, they are not intentionally thinking about Isa; they are thinking about Muhammad. But when we tell them the gospel, they begin to think about Isa intentionally as the one who will save them from the Day of Judgment, from Satan, from antichrist, from death.
At that point, they mix Muhammad with Isa al Masih. Before, Isa was not the issue. Muhammad was the issue. But when they hear about Isa, they start to bring Isa up to the level of Muhammad. Before, Muhammad was the one who controlled their life.But when they hear the Good News of the kingdom of God, they start to think about Isa. Now syncretism has started; before there was no syncretism. If missionaries don’t ever want problems with syncretism, then just leave them with Muhammad [grins].
But syncretism did not start with us. It started even in Paul’s time. That was the reason Paul wrote the Epistle to the Galatians. It is not [an] issue because we are Muslims; syncretism starts because people normally start with their own religious background. When people start to think about Isa intentionally, the Holy Spirit has room to lead them into all truth, even if they first mix Isa and Muhammad. The Holy Spirit through time will glorify Isa al Masih in their lives.
So after the new birth, the Holy Spirit begins to open their minds to understand more fully the Messiah.
Yes, of course. Before they believe in Jesus, the Holy Spirit will convict them about sin, righteousness, and judgment. As soon as they give their will to Jesus, they will receive the Holy Spirit and be born again and become a child of God. Then the Holy Spirit starts to live in them. Because the Holy Spirit lives in them, he will lead them to all [the] truth of Jesus. Then the Holy Spirit will give them revelation, and they will say that Jesus is Lord.
The [rest of the community] have started to think now, and they say, “Lial lial rasul Isa“—”These are the people of the messenger Isa.” They’ll say, “Who are these people? These people are not Christians. These people are not Muslims. Who are they? Let’s go and hear what they are thinking.” We explain as much as possible from the Bible. People ask us, “Who is Isa for you?” Our answer is, “He is the Word of Allah.” Then we quote from the Qur’an, but explain what the “Word of Allah” means from a biblical perspective.
If the Muslim community thinks the new believers “are not Christians and are not Muslims,” what do the new believers themselves think? What is their self-identity?
When they first come to believe in Isa, of course they still think [of themselves] as Muslims. What else could they think? We are not telling them they are now Christians.
But when they understand the gospel more clearly, they don’t want to have an Islamic religious identity. Yet they also do not want to let go of their cultural identity as Muslims, which naturally includes forms from their previous way of life and worship.
Where is Jesus in the life of the people in your movement, the People of the Gospel?
When people want to know our faith articles, we can tell them. But when it comes to individual people, we cannot say so easily, because they are not all on the same level. We find some people who say Jesus is God, some who understand that Jesus is the Savior. Others say he is the Word of Allah, without explanation, as they are struggling to understand what that means. Sometimes they understand Isa, other times they don’t. So we have to instruct them.
We have to teach them from the things that they already know. For example, some people may not [understand] if I tell them that Jesus died on their behalf. Islam has a different theology of sin; they don’t accept that Jesus died on their behalf. It is true that he died on their behalf, but it is not the only benefit [of Christ's death].
When he died on the cross, he defeated death and the one who owned the power of death, Satan. And because God raised Jesus from the dead, he was appointed by God as a judge on the Day of Judgment, and the Savior from the Day of Judgment. The Cross is the answer for every [issue] in life. It is the solution regarding our relation to God, Satan, sin, death, and so on.
It is the evangelist’s responsibility to choose which benefit of the Cross is the answer for the spiritual needs a Muslim feels. Then gradually the Holy Spirit will explain the benefit of the Cross as it relates to their sin.
Muslims are afraid of evil spirits; they are afraid of the Day of Judgment. They are afraid of the Devil. I have a message from the kingdom of God that addresses all of these spiritual needs. So we are using the Muslim way of thinking about Isa, even if it is incomplete. If Muslims understand even one of these, they will call to Isa, and the Holy Spirit can lead them to understand more benefits of the Cross.
There are lots of opportunities in Islam; there are also lots of challenges. But the opportunities are bigger than the challenges. We must remember that it is not we who are bringing God to the Muslim people. He was already here.
Update 5 December 2013:
Bloggers Seademon and Helen Ang’s articles relating to the issue:
The Malaysian Insider has become a centre for malay bashing and the mecca for malays who agree and love the bashings they are getting, especially from the non malays. The latest one is the article below which was pin pointed by a friend last night on how spiteful the tone it connotes.
A writer by the name Stevie Chan, a non muslim (a Malaysian chinese who probably is a christian or perhaps an atheist), had the audacity to blame the social ills and the problems in Malaysia on the shoulders of all muslims. But as always the case of these type of racists who pose themselves as intellectual and liberal, he had disguised the apparent racist condemnations under the pretext of comparing the muslims in this country, to another country that is seemingly perfect to his eyes – Denmark.
What is astounding is the fact that Stevie Chan, is talking down on all muslims and lecturing us on the values of Islam which according to him is currently absent in all of the Muslims here in Malaysia.
Below is the excerpt of his article. Our comments in blue:
Pada tahun 1882 seorang cendekiawan Islam negeri Mesir yang bernama Muhammad Abduh dibuang negeri selama enam tahun oleh pentadbiran penjajah Britan. Beliau bertumpang di Lubnan selama lima tahun diikuti setahun di kotaraya Paris.
Kalau bukan sebab dibuang negeri, dizaman itu memang tidak ramai yang berperluang pergi melancong menaiki kapal laut yang besar besar. Pasal itu bila Muhammad Abduh pulang ke Lubnan dari Paris, ramai peminat-peminat beliau sibuk tanya dia pasal Eropah.
Muhammad Abduh pun jawab, “saya pergi ke Barat dan nampak Islam merata, tetapi tiada muslim; saya pulang ke Timur dan nampak muslim merata, tetapi tiada Islam.”
This is just an introduction to warm us up and to the prepare the malays that they will be lectured and talked down to like a child. Nevermind the fact that this first few paragraphs are plagiarised from another blogpost which was first written in October 2011.
Apa yang saya akan tulis berikutnya mungkin bersifat sensitif kepada para cendekiawan Islam tanahair seperti ahli-ahli puluhan NGO seumpama PERKASA, PEKIDA, dan sebagainya; tidak lupa juga guru-guru dan idola-idola agama yang hebat seperti Azhar Idrus, Fathul Bari, Nasrudin Hassan, Dr. Maza, dan lain-lain.
Sebab itu saya ingin meminta maaf terdahulu jika apa-apa yang saya tulis disini menyinggung perasaan mereka atau pengikut-pengikut mereka.
Oh, dan juga MCMC, PDRM, JAKIM, dan sebagainya.
Stevie Chan is wrong. What he had written will not be a sensitive subject but a very offensive affront towards ALL muslims in this country. Do read on.
Perasaan saya begini: selagi saya masih seorang rakyat Malaysia yang berkongsi nasib dan masa depan bersama semua rakyat jelata, saya rasa rencana ini wajib saya tulis.
Baru-baru ini saya dan isteri saya telah pergi ke negeri Denmark, sebuah negara berfalsafakan social-demokratik, atau suatu demokrasi yang bersifat socialis.
Walaupun juga sebuah negara monarki berpelembagaan dengan raja permaisuri sebagai ketua negara dan gereja-gereja Kristian, Denmark, pada pendapat saya adalah sebuah negara yang amat Islamik, atau sekurang-kurangnya jauh lebih Islamik daripada Malaysia.
Biar saya bagi sedikit contoh.
Kaum Minoriti dan Imigran Denmark: Musim sejuk di Denmark amat menyeksakan, mungkin sebab itu ia bukan destinasi utama bagi imigran-imigran. Tetapi sistem kebajikan dan polisi imigresen yang sangat pemurah telah menarik ramai ‘asylum seekers’ dari negara-negara muslim kurang aman seperti Syria, Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Pakistan, dan lain-lain.
Stevie Chan is juxtaposing the minority muslims in Denmark to the minorities in Malaysia. Since he is chinese, the treatment of chinese in Malaysia by the majority of Malaysians (incidentally the malay muslims) is the main point he is trying to tacitly imply.
Pada masa ini bilangan warga muslim di Denmark tidak melebihi 3% daripada jumlah penduduk seluruh negara. Ia satu minoriti yang amat kecil.
Warga muslim di Denmark mepunyai kebebasan membina masjid-masjid, surausurau, dan sekolah-sekolah agama sendiri yang berbahasa pengataraankan bahasa ibunda masing-masing. Ini satu hak mutlak.
Anak-anak imigran yang masih berada di negara asal juga diberi sokongan kewangan seperti warga negara Denmark yang lain.
This is a redundant statement trying to blame the muslims here in Malaysia that the minorities do not get any chance to build their own house of worship, could not build their own vernacular schools, and trying to show us muslims here that hey, the majority christians in Denmark treat their minorities muslims way better than the muslims here treat their minority. UNFORTUNATELY, and we typed that in capital letters, judging from the commentary section of this article in Malaysian Insider, many muslim malays agreed with Stevie Chan!
It seems that Malays these days are so timid and pitiful with such low esteem that they will believe every misplaced criticisms this chinese throws at them. Oh as his article suggests, do we want to financially assist the children of immigrants here in Malaysia who are still living in their own country? Why should we? Stevie Chan is beginning to sound like a belligerent hater as we move on below.
Masa saya berada di Denmark, satu issue yang tengah rancak dibahaskan diseluruh negara itu adalah samada hanya makanan halal sahaja patut dibekalkan kepada murid-murid dan kakitangan di tadika.
Walaupun belum selesai pembahasan itu, adalah penting kita mengetahui fakta fakta ini:
1. Denmark adalah negara pemakan daging babi per capita yang paling besar didunia. Dari sarapan ke makan malam ada saja daging babi. Itu satu gaya hidup yang sudah beratusan tahun.
2. Warga muslim hanya 3% daripada jumlah penduduk negara itu. Malaysia: Penganut agama Kristian di Malaysia adalah lebih-kurang 10% daripada jumlah penduduk, dibandingkan 3% warga muslim di Denmark, mereka merupakan satu blok miniriti yang agak besar.
From the above few paragraphs, we would think that it was the majority christian Danes who tried to put only halal food in the menu of that kindergarten. But here is where Stevie Chan became malicious, and a liar.
Not only does Stevie Chan is condescendingly lecturing us muslims, he also had lied to us about the above facts. What he had cleverly omitted was that it wasn’t the Danes who magnanimously trying to put only halal food in a kindergarten. It was actually a tussle between a muslim community in a local council where they are the majority and the minority christian danes. Below is the real news:
“When some Muslims recently obtained a majority on the council running a government-financed daycare centre in Denmark, they proceeded to vote to ban serving pork to all children in the daycare (whether they were Muslim or not). This Muslim group, Dahl said, seemed to think that majorities are not responsible for protecting minorities’ rights.” – SOURCE
Of which, there was an uproar from the majority of christian Danes in Denmark!
Was Stevie Chan really serious in extolling the virtues on muslims in Malaysia should treat the chinese by feeding us muslims with lies about porks and halal food in Denmark? We wonder if Stevie Chan couldn’t get any pork for the last few years here in this muslim infested country of his, hence this malicious article of his. What about his fellow chinese who had berated the azan in Puchong recently? That is permissible? In the name of tolerance? Chinese and christians in Malaysia are blameless in all misbehaviours and social ills?
Tetapi warga Kristian di Malaysia sudah lama dinafikan pembinaan gereja baru, gereja-gereja yang kita lihat sekarang kebanyakan (kalau bukan semua) adalah yang dibina dalam zaman penjajahan. Kebanyakan warga Kristian di Malaysia berjemaah di tingkat atas rumah-rumah kedai. Bukan mereka tak mampu nakbina gereja, mereka mampu, tetapi diberi perbagai masalaah ‘tape merah’ kerajaan.
Cerita pasal kuil-kuil Hindu yang dirobohkan tanpa setitik hormat dan belas kasihan sudah muak kita dengar.
Ramai warga asing yang mengahwini warga Malaysia tidak diberi kewarganegaraan walaupon sudah berdekad menubuhkan keluarga disini.
Ke-tidak-pastian sebegini menyebabkan ramai yang tak mampu berancangan panjang untuk keluarga mereka dengan elok.
Baru-baru ini ada cerita tentang murid-murid bukan muslim di Malaysia yang disuruh makan didalam bilik salinan di bulan ramadan; ada juga cerita pasal seorang murid bukan islam yang dipukul cikgu di negeri Sabah sebab murid tersebut membawa makan tengahari yang mengandungi daging babi kesekolah.
Banyak lagi contoh-contoh jauh lebih buruk yang saya boleh tampilkan mengenai cara kita “mistreat” kaum minority dan imigran di Malaysia, tapi cukup lah.
Maybe Stevie Chan is mistaken. As far as we know, there were no changes in any of the government ruling since the day of independence about the rights of minority religions – christians, buddhists, hindus, others (except for deviant teachings) here in Malaysia. They are always allowed to have a proper place to worship their Gods. If there are any rules that were broken (encroachment of private property, irregular infrastructure etc), proper action will be taken. And prove a point, if the majority muslims are evil and mistreating the minorities here, all proper churches built before independence would’ve been razed and destroyed. But did it happen?
And to put matters into perspective, there are only around 100 mosques in Denmark. But these are not proper mosques. Denmark will only opened it’s first proper mosque soon. Therefore, what Stevie Chan wrote above is again, erroneous and meant to mislead.
Biar kita tanya soalan ini: dari segi kaum minoriti dan imigran di Denmark dan Malaysia, siapa yang lebih bertimbang rasa, lebih berperikemanusiaan, atau lebih Islamik nilainya?
Another racist and seditious statement to provoke the liberal malays into agreeing with him, that yes, the muslims and the christians in Denmark are way, way better and way more Islamic than the muslims in Malaysia.
Worse, they are malays who think that when this particular chinese is degrading the malays, this doesn’t affect them as they are not the same malays as the majority. This type of malays have lost the communal pride and become individualistic. Some call themselves liberal although in reality, they are an undignified apologist.
Alam Sekitar, Idolisasi, dan Rasuah
Deanmark: suata pagi saya dan isteri saya menaiki satu daripada puluhan bot lancongan di kotaraya Copenhagen, melalui rangkaian air dan jambatan yang cukup mengkagumkan. Tapi apa yang benar-benar mengkagumkan adalah kebersihan pengairan di Denmark, dalam masa satu jam kami berlancong diatas air, kami hanya nampak satu bag plastic di dalam air canal yang jernih. Satu jam, satu bag, air jernih.
Seminggu kemudian kami pergi ke sebuah perlabuhan besar yang sibuk, air disana sama juga jernihnya. Bayangkanlah, air jernih di perlabuhan!
Dalam masa dua minggu di Denmark, kami telah memandu dalam kereta di bandaraya utama dan menengah, suburbia, kampong-kampong dan kawasan gudang perlabuhan.
Selain daripada mengangguh diri kami dari A ke B dan menikmati permandangan yang indah, saya dan isteri saya berazam mencari lubang atas jalanraya di sepanjang 800km yang kami lingkumi.
Lubang dan ‘manhole cover’ yang tidak serata permukaan jalanraya. Akhirnya, sepanjang 800km, tiada satu pun yang kami jumpa. Di kawasan gudang perlabuhan dimana lori-lori besar berkeliaran pun kami tak jumpa.
Saya tidak akan cerita pasal penghutanan dan binatang liar dalam rencana ini sebab bab itu terlalu panjang.
Tapi ada satu lagi benda yang tidak kami jumpa disepanjang jalanan atau dimana-mana pun di negara yang aneh ini: iklan billboard barang-barang komersial mahupun ahli politik.
Malaysia: saya percaya para pembaca pasti boleh buat perbandingan bagi bab ini tanpa saya bercerita panjang lebar, kecuali mungkin ada yang fikir keadaan buruk jalanraya kita adalah kerana teknologi pembinaan kita ketinggalan zaman.
Tapi ia bukan, ia disebabkan rasuah yang berleluasa. Di Denmark, hampir semua dokumen-dokumen kerajaan adalah terbuka kepada rakyatnya; di Malaysia hampir semua dokumen-dokumen kerajaan telah dijadikan rahsia pemerintah.
Eloklah kita tanya soalan ini: di antara Denmark dan Malaysia, siapakah yang menjaga alam sekitar yang dikurniakan tuhan dengan lebih sempurna, lebih penuh hormat dan sayang? Siapa lebih Islamik? Di antara Denmark dan Malaysia, siapa yang lebih gemar memuja barang-barang komersial, siapa yang lebih gemar memuja idola-idola politik? Siapa yang lebih Islamik nilainya?
It is astounding that Stevie Chan is blaming solely the muslims here for not taking care of the environment. Is he saying that only the muslims do not know about cleanliness, only muslims immerse in corruption and only the muslims had ravaged the forest and abuse all the wild animals here in Malaysia?
Stevie Chan must be suffering from misguided chinese supremacy to think all this up and put it in a writing! We are guessing all the illegal poaching of endangered species in our forest in order to eat their paws, animal brains or snake blood are done by muslims. Not to mention the majority of illegal loggings are done by the chinese. And it is beyond reason to say that the chinese never bribe nor given any bribes in this country. But in Stevie Chan’s mind, his chinese brethren are bribe-free.
Blaming everything above on the muslims without looking at the faults of your own race is just smack of arrogance and racism. Was he dropped on his head as a baby and became a racist because of that?
Jenayah dan Hukuman
Denmark: walaupun saya tidak ada data-data yang sah ditangan, secara am negara ini saya rasa sangat selamat. Budak-budak kecil menaiki bas seorangan; bayi diparkir diluar kedai sementara ibunya membeli-belah adalah perkara yang amat biasa.
Walaupon kes-kes pencurian (property crime) ada didengari dan dilapurkan, tapi jenis yang ganas (seperti rampasan) hampir tiada.
Mengapa begitu? Sebab mereka tidak perlu melakukan jenayah ganas tahap itu.
Contohnya bila seorang warga Denmark kehilangan kerja, kerajaan akan membayar dia lebih kurang RM8,000 sebulan bagi jangkamasa tidak melebihi dua tahun. Dalam dua tahan tersebut orang berkenaan perlu mencari kerja baru, atau pulang ke institusi pelajaran untuk mengaji bidang lain yang lebih sesuai.
Pengajian sebegini dibiayai sepenuhnya oleh kerajaan.
Biasanya jenayah-jenayah di Denmark adalah yang kecil-kecilan, atau jenis misdemeanor (kacau).
Tempoh penjara bagi jenayah-jenayah sebegitu (jika dipenjarakan) biasanya sangat pendek, antara seminggu ke enam bulan.
Yang paling pelik adalah penjara untuk jenayah sebegitu ada penjara terbuka, penghuni boleh keluar masuk sesuka hati (tapi yang tidak pulang akan dibawa balik oleh polis).
Sebabnya begini: masyarakat Denmark percaya bahawa manusia tidak buat jenayah jika bukan dipaksa keadaan semasa, atau mereka mengalami kekeliruan sementara. Sistem keadilan mereka bukan untuk menghukum seseorang tetapi mengubah sikap atau keadaan mereka supaya mereka tidak mengulagi jenayah.
Sukacita saya dimaklumkan bahawa Denmark mempunyai rekod “jenayahulang” yang paling rendah didunia.
Malaysia: perlukah saya buat pembandingkan untuk bab ini?
Yes, Stevie Chan is blaming the muslims for the crime in this country. As we all know by now, Stevie Chan without putting so much in a sentence is telling us muslims that this country is unislamic because the muslims are involved in crimes and the punishment method of this country is certainly unislamic.
His argument inevitably has two facets – one, that only muslims are criminals and two, and this is ironic, would he rather have us impose hudud laws to make us more islamic?
Mungkin ada diantara kita akan berkata, “oh, cukai pendapatan di Denmark tinggi, mereka mampu membiayai semua itu.”
Adakah kita sebuah negara yang miskin? Atau kekayaan kita disalahgunakan?
Saya tanya seorang pemilik kedai kopi di Copenhagen apa perasaan beliau tentang membayar kadar cukai yang tinggi untuk mendapat sebuah masyarakat yang aman dan adil. Jawapan beliau, “bahu yang lebih besar pikul beban yang lebih berat.”
Bukankah itu nilai Islam, wahai pembaca yang dihormati?
The racist Stevie Chan, who probably tells all his friends that he is not a racist, condescendingly telling us muslims that this country, a country where the majority and the minority had lived peacefully (before he came into the picture probably) is actually not peaceful and unjust. All because the muslims here have abused the rich natural resources of this country. Mind you, only the muslims are doing this. Not him nor his kind.
Ada baiknya jika saya mendedahkan satu “rahsia” warga pelik negara Denmark ini: tidak ramai yang pergi ke gereja. Malahan banyak gereja-gereja sudah dijual dan dijadikan kedai-kedai ataupun perpustakaan.
Saya rasa ini tidak ada apa-apa perkaitan dengan agama, tapi hanya nilai kemanusian atau humanism.
Kita diMalaysia amat taksub bergaduh pasal makzab, hukum, anjing, babi, sehingga kita lupa apa nilai asas agama-agama yang kita cintai.
Walaupun zaman sekarang sudah jadi perkara biasa kita melancong menaiki kapalterbang yang besar-besar ke tempat yang jauh-jauh, dan tiada sesiapa pun yang tanya saya pasal Denmark, saya tetap nak kata:
Saya pergi ke Denmark dan nampak Islam merata, tetapi tiada Melayu; saya pulang ke tanahair dan nampak Melayu merata, tetapi tiada Islam.
Denmark menghayati nilai Islam tanpa mengetahui Islam. Melayu mengetahui Islam tapi gagal menghayati nilai-nilai asas Islam yang murni dan indah.
There you go, a clear statement of him blaming the malays and admonishing us that the malays here in this country is not only unislamic but also intolerant of the minority, and had aggressively ill-treated all the non malays and mistreated them in such ways that they can’t live peacefully in their own country. Stevie Chan must have felt living in Palestine, being bombarded by Israeli bombs as he wrote this article of his – eating dust and had to work three work shifts a day just to earn minimum wage.
Selamat menyambut hari raya Aidil Fitri, saya mengambil kesempatan ini untuk meminta maaf, zahir dan batin.
Wabillahi Taufik Walhidayah Wassalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.
This is perhaps the final nail in the coffin by the racist ‘holier than thou’ Stevie Chan. Citing an arabic phrase which generally meant – “may Allah give us guidance and success”. Since he does not believe in Allah, he is generally saying to all muslims – “may Allah give YOU guidance and success.”
What right does a disbeliever like Stevie Chan to invoke our God’s name in order to chastise us? If he believes in Allah, then he should have embraced Islam already. Does he think by writing an arabic phrase after branding all the malays as the source of social problems here in Malaysia will endear him to us more?
If he had written an article to advice the muslims in a non-offensive way, that is perhaps permissible, even welcomed. But to condescendingly blame the malays of all the social ills in Malaysia while expunging any blame from non malays is just too much to take. This is perhaps the most racist article ever printed by Malaysian Insider, written by the biggest racist around.
And it is sad that the apologists among the malays are cowering in front of Stevie Chan. He spat on top of your head and you just clapped your hands in glee. This is just like the days before independence. When conquered mentality are too coward to fight back and all insults are just taken by the mouthful.
(P/S: saya mengambil tanggungjawab penuh untuk rencana ini, ibubapa saya tidak tahu pasal tulisan saya mahupun pendapat saya atau agama saya (yang saya telah rahsiakan).
Yes, Stevie Chan, whoever he is, should be fully responsible for his article. And if he does not want his parents to know he wrote this article then maybe he should not have put his real name.
“Perhaps the less we have, the more we are required to brag.”
- John Steinbeck from his book, East of Eden
The majority of the thinking society would feel that a political leader needs to be inherently intelligent enough to know that doing things right is paramount than doing things just to be popular.
Take for example the previous Prime Minister. He wanted to do things which will make him popular with a few factions of people which in the end, led him to become the shortest serving Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia (at 5 years and 5 months, less than Tun Hussein Onn’s at 5 years and 6 months).
Being popular is good for a career in politics but that must be complimented with genuine hardwork and results which people can really see and experienced.
If wanting to be popular for the sake of being popular then people can easily see through the leaders’ smokescreen and be exposed as fake, or a con-artist. Not so much a leader, but a buffoon trying too hard to be popular.
The current Prime Minister and his cabinet has this tendency to be popular with the masses while disregarding the concept of good leadership. We can see the apex of the attempts to gain popularity concocted up by his advisors during the run up of the recent general election.
Ranging from giving too much money to vernacular schools, running election campaigns much akin to the US Presidential election (personality-driven) rather than a cohesive, BN driven (coalition-centric) campaigns, repealing important laws just to pander towards opposition sponsored ‘human rights’, etc.
But all these bending over backwards just to become popular did not yield the returns that they had hoped for. In fact, just as we had foreseen, the majority of the people saw it through and were not impressed. Popularity is never about one-off announcements to wow the crowd. It has never been about shock-factor (just to borrow a few of consultants’ jargons), quick-wins or ‘picking the low hanging fruits’.
Having a crowd to pat you on the back after giving out goodies to people will not make you more popular.
Even Winston Churchill kept perspective on the crowds that gathered to hear him speak by conceding they would be twice as big if they gathered to see him hanged.
Popularity is a series of leadership by example, a series of doing the right things and not flip flopping on decisions that will make you be seen as less intelligent. Above all, popularity will come when you do not seek it.
It’s all about action and results.
Actively trying to be popular without any substance to begin with will only make you look pathetic. Just look at Anwar Ibrahim for example. Those with critical thinking knew him as a snake oil salesman, who would sell his principles just to be popular. Even a foreign publication had called him a chameleon.
Even in his hey days of popularity back in 90s, that couldn’t make him last long in politics. As history sees it, his popularity did not save him from falling in disgrace – exposed for his inefficient handling of the 1998 currency crisis and engaged in morally wrong conduct.
On the contrary and of course as a lesson to the current crop of leaders, going against the tide will often make you last longer in politics.
Take Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad for example. He did several unpopular things during his premiership which will bring dread even to the most courageous of politicians. He sacked Anwar Ibrahim at the height of his deputy’s popularity, he clashed against the monarchy and kept their behaviours in check when a few of the rulers were misbehaving and unruly towards the people. These were extremely unpopular decisions at that time and could spell an end to a political career if popularity is what a leader seek.
But it was the right thing to do and Tun Mahathir did it because it was good for the people.
He even agreed to accept all 600,000 members of Semangat 46 back into Umno’s fold in 1996 for the sake of malay unity – a decision which was highly unpopular among Umno members when the likes of Rais Yatim, Tengku Razaleigh and Shabery Cheek returned to Umno after nearly 8 years as an opposition in Semangat 46.
In 1984, after Musa Hitam defeated Tengku Razaleigh again for the post of deputy president in Umno General Election, Tun Mahathir still appointed the latter as a minister eventhough Musa Hitam, a powerful Deputy Prime Minister and a Home Minister at that time was so much against it.
But he still appointed Ku Li nevertheless as the minister in MITI (albeit downgraded him from the Finance Minister post) since Ku Li is a capable leader and as the malay proverb goes – “kalah sekali, bukanlah kalah semua.”
Tun Mahathir made many unpopular decisions – be it concerning the capital controls during the currency crisis, his unwavering stance in curbing racist and religious extremists as well as his decisions to chastise the west and the jews for their hypocrisy and terrorism.
All these led him to become the longest serving (at 22 years 3 months) Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia.
Can we imagine any of the Prime Ministers after him doing such unpopular things? Of course we can’t. What is lacking in the current crop of Umno leaders is gumption and the believe of doing things right. In its place is the mistaken belief that their careers will last longer if they are popular. Unfortunately, they had got it backwards.
And it’s also a fact that Tun Mahathir is arguably the most popular Prime Minister we ever had. He is a walking and living brand and is a successful one at that. And all that stemmed from the fact of doing things right and not wanting to be popular.
How many times have we hear him say that he is merely stating the truth and do not care what people think about him? Plenty of times. He lives by his principles and sticks to it like glue.
On the contrary, what we have now are Umno leaders desperately trying to be popular.
Take for instance, the Ketua Pemuda Umno who is also the Minister of Youths and Sports. Apparently the day the kalimah Allah judgment was read out in the Courts of Appeal, the youth wing leader of agama bangsa dan negara party was more busy tweeting and promoting himself for a popularity contest.
The Shout Awards is a popularity award show organised by Media Prima to honour popular artists in the field of music, tv, movies and radio.
But lo and behold, a minister crept in and found himself in the nominees list as well!
How more pitiful (deserving or arousing pity) can you be when you are already a minister but still want to vie in a popularity contest? A contest where you are not really in sync with any of the categories mentioned.
Truly this is a new low for Pemuda Umno and Umno as a whole. In the face of current issues facing the party and the malays such as the attacks on the kalimah ruling by the liberals, as well as on other fronts, did the Pemuda Umno made any statements to defend the position? The only notable but half hearted statement by Pemuda Umno was when they seek explanation over news of US spying from its KL embassy.
Apart from that, the now liberal Pemuda Umno Malaysia is more than happy to enter popularity contests or collect Pakatan Rakyat leaders as their fans. God forbid, even the incorrigible Lim Kit Siang is the number one fan of Ketua Pemuda Umno now.
Nobody pointed a gun to his head and made compulsory for him to join this fluffy event. Yet he is there, tweeting and soliciting votes from the masses to vote for him for this award.
The ridiculousness of this glam-craze escapade underlines a bizarre, yet comical attitude of the Ketua Pemuda in wanting to be popular at all cost. The less he have, the more he is required to brag.
But since this is an era of liberalism and where Umno leaders want to be popular regardless if they have any substance at all, we should not be surprised. The Prime Minister and his myriad of advisors themselves are also in the forefront and believer of populist movement.
Just sit back and enjoy the entertainment all these leaders are providing us. After all, Umno is now a play and some of their leaders are actors.
You might like to read this too.
In the previous article, it was mentioned that:
It is appropriate for his mother to tell Umno to ‘choose competent leaders’. Fullstop. But to lambast Mukhriz for rising up the ranks to quickly is highly irregular considering her own son’s unfair advantage towards others for the past 9 years.
And obviously it is highly inappropriate for NST to even publish this shoddy piece of journalism. None of the other so called veterans in the article above mentioned any names of the candidates. But somehow a veteran (?) Umno woman who happens to be the Ketua Pemuda’s mother had no qualms to mudsling a candidate in public and NST had the audacity to let it print.
Now the underdog had so much work to do. Considering all government’s media is actively trying to realise the ambition of one young arrogant leader who suffers misplaced sense of self-entitlement and jealousy.
We don’t count on Mukhriz to win this weekend with all this ungentlemanly conduct by people with no class.
And the people with no class had also used the apparatus they owned to further malign and slander the underdog. The Malaysian Insider had no scruples in writing and publishing an article that had tarnished Mukhriz Mahathir’s campaign in the Umno vice presidency race.
People can read that heavily defamatory article here.
Excerpt of the article says:
Umno vice-president hopeful Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir has revved up his campaign by sending out an estimated 1.2 million SMS appealing to Umno delegates to vote for him and, if his critics are to be believed, is handing out the cash too.
Party insiders and his supporters said the Kedah Menteri Besar still has a good chance to win despite ground reports and his father, influential former Umno president Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad suggesting he may not stand a chance as he was not among those endorsed by the leadership.
“His machinery is going around the country wooing younger Umno supporters,” said a grassroots leader familiar with Mukhriz’s campaign officials.
The leader also told The Malaysian Insider money or “hujan emas” (windfall) will hit the divisions and branch members.
“From the information we received, since this morning, Mukhriz’s machinery had gone all over the country,” he said but refused to reveal the amount distributed to delegates.
Of which Mukhriz issued a stern rebuttal:
Mukhriz vehemently denied that his campaign machinery issued such SMS.
“I categorically deny what was reported both in English and Malay and demand The Malaysian Insider retract the story. I suspect The Malaysian Insider have ill intent by publishing the story and has somewhat tarnished my image as someone who uphold integrity in all that I do”, said when contacted.
“If The Malaysian Insider does not publish an open apology and retract the story by 1000am by tomorrow, then I will not hesitate to take legal action against them”.
The Malaysian Insider, which was acting in mala fide (in bad faith; with intent to deceive) predictably retracted the article an offered a pathetic and half hearted apology. But they have done their task. Damage has been done.
Knowing how all these morally destitute people work, the grassroot leader might even be a fictional character. Otherwise they wouldn’t be retracting the article as their source is solid and reliable. The Malaysian Insider’s greatest faux pas in journalism was their stupidity in not contacting Mukhriz himself to reconfirm their findings before they even publish that damaging report.
That is journalism 101. You must get clarification from the other party so that you will give an accurate news to the public. Did they even ask around and check if the delegates did receive SMS or money from Mukhriz?
But since The Malaysian Insider is really a propaganda tool for their political masters and not really a news portal, the editors and journalists are acting more and more like keyboard prostitutes than a real journalist. Have they forgotten their training?
The crux of the matter is, the good guys in Umno can’t catch a break because those who are in power are using any means necessary, including slander and malicious propaganda just to undermine those who they feel are a threat to their power crazed ambition. And these kind of despicable people have populated Umno to the brim.
Below are some reaction on Malaysian Insider’s shameless article and apology:
Thank you and good luck to all candidates.
“What he does privately is none of my business”
“His sexual preference is not important to me”
Ever since the stories of sex videos and sodomy charges have haunted Anwar Ibrahim’s political career, how many times have we heard the statements above from his rabid worshippers? Too many times I suppose.
These sycophants, who portray themselves as rational and very lucid in their opinion, are saying that whatever Anwar Ibrahim does privately, is none of their concern. It’s his politics, performance and policies that they would keep an eye on.
Actually, that is a logical stand. After all, whatever someone does behind close doors should remain private. Right?
But behind this naive consideration of his private life, lies a critical underlying message – that all his worshippers, who muttered those words, are actually accepting his abnormal sexuality.
They are actually implying that they believe he did all those things i.e., the sexual tryst in the sex video, the sodomy act etc. Otherwise, why say it at all? Regardless, these statements from his fans will always arise whenever the subject was broached.
But there is one thing that doesn’t jive with the beliefs of his supporters; Anwar Ibrahim never admitted in doing all those things. In fact, Anwar Ibrahim vehemently denied all sexual misconducts. He even made police reports against all the whistleblowers of his wrongdoings.
Even after experts from US had confirmed that it was Anwar Ibrahim in that video, he remains unrepentant and shameless and completely incapable of confessing his misdeeds. Thus, we come to the quintessential question to his fans – how can you reconcile and justify your belief (that he did all those awful things albeit, privately), to the fact that Anwar Ibrahim has no qualms in lying to you about it?
If you think he does it, then aren’t you offended that he chose not to own up and face the music? What kind of leader are you supporting? Someone who is not honourable enough to do the right thing and have an ounce of integrity and accountability to tell the truth?
Don’t you want a leader with integrity and accountability first and foremost? Policies, performance and politics is useless if you don’t have these two leadership traits.
Many leaders around the world resigned from their post when their illegal sexual affairs came to light. But it seems, for Anwar Ibrahim’s case, double standard is applied generously by his adoring fans.
Could it be that the moral standpoint of his fans have somewhat deteriorated? Probably the definition of ethics has changed when it comes to Anwar Ibrahim, and what’s worse this is acceptable for his fans.
If you are championing an unethical person, verily it shows a lot about your own ethics.
At this point it seems the unprincipled lot are wholeheartedly supporting the shameless leader. Incredibly, the fans and this shameless leader, often touted as “God’s gift to Malaysia” have kept telling themselves that they want to save Malaysia.
Their priority however, should be saving themselves first. Thank you.
This is the final part of the series. Thus far, readers can appreciate the fact that history does repeat itself and those who do not learn from it will commit the same folly again and again.
6. DAP: Tactics and campaign strategies in general elections
In 1974, DAP objected to Malaysia’s ties with China. The reason given was that it didn’t bring any benefits to the chinese in particular and Malaysians in genera (NST 21st August 1974). When former Prime Minister, the late Tun Abdul Razak paid the first official visit to China, the DAP accused the Barisan Nasional’s establishing diplomatic ties with China as an ‘election ploy’ to garner Malaysian chinese votes!
In 1987, Kit Siang questioned past government leaders criticising Malaysians investing abroad as being disloyal, but in 1994, when DAP’s closest political ally Semangat 46 chief Tengku Razaleigh questioned Malaysian chinese of their loyalty for their overseas investment in CHina, Lim Kit Siang chose the “deafening silence”, to illustrate that it was alright to sacrifice “principles” he often preached but never practices (even though Kit Siang disagreed with S46 Tengku Razaleigh’s comments and felt that the S46 leader was being out of touch from political realities).
In the 1974 election campaign, the DAP adopted the politics of desperation and racism, harping on sensitive issues despite knowing very well it could lead to racial tension. In chinese areas, the DAP put up posters “warning” chinese voters that chinese culture and education would be taken away from the by the BN. In malay areas, the DAP created issues of government inefficiency in combating inflation and corruption. The tactics were similar to those used for arousing communal hatred and dissension during and after the 1969 general elections (Straits Times 16th August 1974).
DAP promised Penangites in 1974 that if DAP captured the state government, it would investigate various allegations of malpractices and corruption against the ruling coalition and the “acquisition of sudden wealth” by prominent members of the ruling party in the last 5 years (1970 to 1974). The DAP also promised to recognise Nanyang and Taiwa graduates for appointment to local authorities and other state vacancies; grant book aid and scholarships to all needy children, and to set up a revolving book-bank; construct low-cost houses and resettle slums and squatters at permanent sites; and review the imposition of quit rents; dissolve the management committee and hold local elections; re-site the Penang bridge or to consider alternative linkage (Straits Times 1st August 1974).
In 1978, in a desperate move to uplift the DAP’s image, Kit Siang announced a DAP’s “shadow Cabinet” comprising 16 DAP MPs to monitor the respective Ministries in government. As soon as the 1978 general elections was over, the proposal frizzled out.
The 1981 DAP crisis in Penang state was worse than the one in 1978 with the Opposition party embroiled in power struggles, disunity, indiscipline and factionalism which spread from Penang to Perak, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan and Selangor. Mass resignations dogged the days of the DAP crisis in Penang, resulting in ten out of the 17 branches leaving en bloc in support of the DAP dissenters against Kit Siang’s dictatorial rule. A former DAP leader from Penang commented that (quote): “any new DAP member who joins the party cannot afford to remain neutral and is bound to be drawn into the whirlpool of factionalism and power struggles among the leaders” (Star, 25th February 1981).
The DAP Penang crisis exposed Kit Siang’s support of Karpal Singh’s bias against DAP chinese educated members. In 1981, Karpal Singh told the Press that DAP has no place for those who talk in terms of chinese unity or malay unity or indian unity. Expelled DAP Penang vice chairman Seow hun Khim urged chinese educated DAP members not ot be fooled by Kit Siang, to speak up and not act against their conscience by remaining silent. Quipping a chinese saying about Kit Siang (quote): “Kit Siang can set a big fire, but his members are not even allowed to light a lamp”. On March 1981, DAP Melaka crisis began which later led to the sacking of chinese educated Chan Teck Chan.
7. DAP and other malay parties
Tengku Razaleigh in December 1980 when he was in UMNO, called on Kit Siang to retire from politics following the latter’s public announcement of his intention to do so. Expressing fears of DAP capturing the Pengkalan Kota seat would encourage the Opposition to take control of Penang, Ku Li said the DAP would use Pengkalan Kota as a base to project its ambition. And referring to Kit Siang’s resignation and the DAP crisis, Ku Li acknowledge that the DAP scenario “reflects the kind of dictatorship ruling the DAP”. The aftermath of Kit Siang’s withdrawing his resiugnation as expected also saw many of “DAP dissenters” who had challenged Kit Siang being axed from the Party (including former DAP political chief Chan Teck Chan).
In June 1979, former Umno Vice President Tengku Razaleigh once advised the people to be wary of opposition parties like DAP and PAS which he said indulged in politics of fear. He added that DAP and PAS are always looking for opportunities to belittle BN leaders and intimidate the people with sensitive issues that could widen the relationship gap between the government and people.
8. DAP’s tired calls for human rights, freedom and democratisation
For 27 years, DAP Kit Siang and his big boys have been singing the “song of freedom and democracy” and virtually projected DAP as having sole rights to free Malaysians from repression, sufferings and injustice. But if we remember, in 1980 after the tragic DAP defeat at the Pengkalan Kota by-election in Penang, Kit Siang had the discomfort of hearing that song being sung by his supporters. There was a difference. In 1980, the song was directed at him during a time of internal turmoil. It was also a time, when ousted DAP leaders gagged by Kit Siang for years of dictatorship, began to “spill the truth of Kit Siang”. It was also a time when Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir who was Deputy PM branded DAP as the ‘Dictatorial Party’ and democratic only in name. Adding that Kit Siang applies double standards in that he will not allow party members to criticise him, while he goes around criticising everyone in BN.
Hoping that the public’s memories are short of his calls for freedom and democracy, Kit SIang went about “chopping and changing DAP rank and file” as he wished, by gagging and disciplining those he did not like during the 1980 DAP leadership crisis. In short, Lim Kean Siew once complimented Kit Siang’s character as “what is sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander!”. The Socialist Democratic Part (formed by DAP dissidents in 1978) described the 1980 DAP crisis as a “comedy of errors”. Kit Siang conveniently accused the Malaysian press for discrupting and destriying DAP. For years, the double standard Kit Siang has accused BN government for not granting press freedom.
In 1981, DAP national publicity secretary Tan Seng Giaw charged former DAP MP Chan Teck Chan for committing a serious breach of discipline for publishing a book containing the latter’s speeches in Parliament without the consent and approval of the DAP CEC. This is the DAP’s version of “human rights and press freedom” which DAP practices within and without. On one hand, DAP challenges the government for press freedom while on the other, suppresses its own leaders’ freedom and rights to publish books (source: Straits Times 4th March 1981).
In 1980 when the press reported the DAP developments, Kit Siang questioned the “rights and freedom” of the press. He attacked the press for blowing the “small disagreements” out of proportions and therefore, irresponsible journalism. Yet, Kit Siang does the same or worse by using the DAP’s official organ “The Rocket” against Barisan Nasional government by sensationalising small issues. It was alright for the DAP to condone, promote and protect “irresponsible journalism” of the Rocket but not alright for the vernacular press to report the accurate picture of the DAP crisis.
This is the sort of mentality and attitude of Malaysia’s opposition leader in Parliament who has no courage to admit weaknesses of his leadership, but instead heaped blame against the Malaysian press and the BN for its internal turmoil. Yet, Kit Siang and his warlords are boastful and to the point of utmost arrogance to claim that they are courageous and brave to sacrifice “freedom and personal lives” for the sake of the people’s interests and rights even if they had to face the “repressive laws” of the BN government. For the wise voters, questioning the virtues of DAP must be a continuous affair. If DAP leaders cannot even admit “to themselves” their own weaknesses and faults in their leadership, where are the qualities of honesty, courage and bravery? By depriving these qualities, the DAP leaders are surmountable to being self deceiving, dishonest and cowardly “to themselves”. Needless to mention their leadership accountability and responsibilities toward voters.
……. (can we see the similarities between what happened years ago to what is happening now? A leopard cannot change its spots. A party doesn’t change its malicious ways no matter how much they are saying otherwise..)
In the 1970s the favourite political gimmick employed by DAP was to either ‘boycott parliamentary sessions and state assemblies’ or to stage ‘walk-outs’ even if the event was an important one such as Budget presentation. In 1970, 13 DAP MPs boycotted the Budget speech at the Dewan Bahasa on December 22nd, and the habitual boycotting of Parliamentary and State Assemblies became the norm of DAP’s political tactic and style for years to come.
Why is DAP adopting this irresponsible mode of representing the voters when it accused others of the same? Will such boycotting contribute to nation-building? DAP has an impeccable record of boycotts, the national education consultative council and numerous walkouts in Parliament and State Assemblies.
When DAP is not invited to give their views, the Opposition accused the BN of being undemocratic and dictatorial; but when they are invited, they have nothing to contribute. Instead they staged political gimmicks to obtain cheap publicity and political mileages. For once voters in the DAP constituencies should convey a strong message in protest against DAP’s trampling politics.
This contradiction is a typical example of DAP leadership since its founding years. Its wishy washy political policies are always subjected to the whims and fancies of its leadership depending upon the political moods of DAP leaders in exploiting the political circumstances of the day. In 1972, two DAP National Vice Chairmen left the opposition citing many of the current DAP leaders as “opportunistic, unprincipled and hankering for personal power and glory”. Many of the DAP staunched leaders like Goh Hock Chuan, Dr A. Soorian who had earlier condemned the policies of the Alliance, came to realise the ‘final truth’ of the DAP in later years.
By June 20th 1972, DAP lost four of its 13 MPs and twice that number of Assemblymen. The DAP was split in Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Selangor, Melaka (the whole committee of Melaka Branch resigned in August) and Penang. The DAP fell foul of old friends with whom it had an election understanding in 1969 and refused membership of the National Consultative Council (just as it boycotted the NECC in 1989) and boycotted KL City Day. The DAP was virtually in the ‘dumps’. Dr A. Soorian, former DAP national vice chairman was expelled because he was increasingly ‘critical’ of Lim Kit Siang for having betrayed the trust and ideal of the DAP as laid out by founder members such as Devan Nair. Lim Kit Siang’s leadership according to the former DAP leader, had no fixity of purpose or sense of direction, and “Kit Siang behaves as though the DAP belongs to him”.
4. DAP devoid of ideologies and principles
As early as 1967, precisely on 5th October, 28 years ago, current DAP Chairman Dr Chen Man Hin who held the same position then, said that the DAP was a multiracial party which would ‘never’ desert its cause by aligning itself with a racialist party, (quote): “… be it the Pan Malayan Islamist Party (currently PAS) or any other chinese or indian chauvinist party” (unquote). In 1971, DAP secretary general outdone his Chairman by saying (quote) : “The DAP must learn from the mistakes of compromising with political opportunists. The people must not repeat the mistakes of desiring on “opposition unity” at “whatever costs regardless..” (unquote).
Yet, seven years later in 1978, the same Lim Kit Siang made a generous offer to PAS to work together “in the name of benefitting all Malaysians”. The pertinent question we have to direct to Lim Kit Siang is that: “What benefits have all Malaysians received from the DAP-PAS political “marriage of convenience”? We know that DAP has played a key roe in assisting PAS in capturing Kelantan State government. We know that the Kelantanese chinese community is living in fear and apprehension of PAS in imposing the proposed Hudud laws and all types of restrictions in the name of PAS Islamic rules are being enforced, restricting Kelantanese chinese community’s rights and freedom to their economic and cultural practices.
Yet, DAP was willing to sacrifice those purported principles it so gallantly preaches by covering up PAS’ misdeeds and seeks electoral pact with PAS to fulfil Lim Kit Siang’s personal ambition of becoming Penang Chief Minister. In 1990, Lim Kit Siang stated openly in the Malaysian Press that DAP was more than willing to work with PAS to further “its own interests”. In other words, DAP National Chairman Dr Chen Man Hin’s open declaration not to align with PAS was meant either to ‘deceive’ the voters or that DAP is void of “principles”. Can Malaysian voters place their trusts upon DAP national leaders who have no principles, and having been exposed to have said something at a particular time but doing something else at another time!
Kit Siang realising his past follies and own lies had caused uneasiness within his own rank and file is trying to make amends by recently “covering up with another lie” that DAP will go to the polls “alone” suggest that DAP will distance itself from PAS. Should Malaysians voters believe again and again these lies? Should Malaysians in the coming general elections, increase DAP representation knowing that DAP rank and file are powerless to stop their “unscrupulous” Kit Siang’s lone ranger actions and absolute powers. Kit Siang being an old fox is bound to change his political tactics to woo public sympathies by “lying” that he is old and ought to be given a last term in Penang state. In the 1990 general elections, did Kit Siang give Lim Chong Eu a last chance to serve the constituents? The answer is obviously ‘no’., Kit Siang is too arrogant and in 1990, politically killed Lim Chong Eu.
Now that Koh Tsu Koon has replaced Lim Chong Eu for Gerakan in Penang, it is time that Lim Guan Eng should replace Kit Siang in DAP. What assurances are there to stop DAP from exercising “dictatorial rule” in Penang, exactly the way Lim Kit Siang runs DAP? Greater liberalisation in supporting DAP means a support of “tyranny” (unjust rule by a person or small group of people who have power over everyone else in the state or party).
5. DAP & educational policies
DAP has no constructive educational policies. Since its founding years, the party’s policy has been one of opposing for the sake of opposing. When MCA initiated the Tunku Abdul Rahman College, the DAP in 1968 “accused the MCA of using education to produce a race of fanatics who were prepared to sacrifice ordinary laws to the party machinery (source: NST 16th September 1968)”. [JMD - very much like the DAP law-breakers we have now..]
It further slandered MCA by saying that TAR College teachers would be “indoctrinated with the beliefs of MCA and that text books would be written to glorify MCA”. The DAP compared MCA’s proposed TAR College to schools in Germany turning out Hitler’s Youth who graduated into the Gestapo.
This is the type of opposition leadership within DAP of yesteryears and the quality of its leadership has since deteriorated by employing new political gimmicks, malicious methods and destructive means to keep the DAP afloat. Not only does DAP wants to do nothing to the cause of Malaysian education, the DAP leadership also wants “others” not to do anything worthwhile towards education our younger children. Envious and jealous of MCA initiating the TAR College in 1968, the DAP spread malicious lies, sowed seeds of suspicions and doubts among the community just to sabotage a beneficial community project. If DAP had been successful in sabotaging the TAR College project, hundreds of thousands of Malaysians would be deprived of educational opportunities and careers. To be exact, 40,500 TAR College graduates would be deprived by DAP of their educational opportunities and thousands of careers wiped out at the costs of nation-building.
Today, DAP lies have been proven to be malicious and has further proven that those DAP leaders who made such lies are liars. None of these graduates has been ‘indoctrinated” by MCA and not a single graduate turned out to be a Hitler Youth! [JMD - but these days it is alleged that most students in UTAR are pro-DAP. Irony.]
There is a mentality among voters who support the DAP for the very reason that the opposition was needed to “voice their grievances” and to provide “checks and balances” in government. In reality, DAP is “morally and ethically incapable of voicing your grievances for the very simple reason that DAP leadership is no longer capable to protect your interests. DAP is predominantly occupied by protecting its own political survival.
Recently the dAP has adopted “new political technologies” to survive. It has mastered the art of “claiming credits” to its name. Never mind, whether the achievements are economic, political or social related. Malaysia’s development progress is attributed to DAP’s existence! And DAP hopes to “hoodwink” the voter in the street even though it might be an insult of intelligence to the man on the street. Another “political technology” employed by DAP since Tanjong Two failed to materialise was to “beg” for sympathies by threatening to “resign”.
Lim Kit Siang during his 25 year political career as DAP Secretary General has threatened to resign no less than 50 times either within DAP or to the electorate, an average of two threats per 12 months of his political office. His practice of using “tricks and threats” to solicit sympathies is synonymous to Lim Kit Siang’s norm and childish prank he endears to, in order to keep absolute power.
DAP has been this way since its inception. Wither Malaysia should they are given another chance to wield power in Pakatan Rakyat.
I found a few pages of brief analysis on list of ideological weaknesses of the DAP leadership recently. I thought I would share some of the points to the readers out there. It is an old document – written in 1995. Therefore, all of the events quoted and examples given were not up to date to the current political environment. Nevertheless, readers could appreciate the fact that history tends to repeat itself. Some with different actors with similar issues and some with same old actors but with different issues.
1. “DAP-itis”: A Form of Political Sickness within DAP Leadership
They preach democracy, human rights and freedom, greater liberalisation but within DAP its national leaders do not tolerate dissent, constructive criticisms and especially by Lim Kit Siang’s dictatorial rule as DAP Secretary General following Goh Hock Guan’s being ousted from the post. In Parliament, DAP national leaders “acted” and projected their public images as if they are loyal and principled “Malaysian leaders” who are impeccably honest, incorruptible, and a peolpe’s champion. Yet, DAP leaders suffer from “DAP-itis” during their overseas missions by bad mouthing Malaysia, conspired with left-wing union and labour organisations to disrupt congenial relationship between Malaysian government and local labour unions, threatening job positions (eg. GSP withdrawal, union strikes etc), spreading lies, rumours, and character assassinations in the name of human rights and freedom.
In 1966, former DAP secretary general C.V. Devan Nair set list if “do’s and don’t” for DAP:
a) ”A strictly non-racial approach to all social, economic, political and cultural problems of Malaysia.”
Comment: Today, it is habitual for DAP to exploit racially sensitive issues and with forked tongues. Playing one community against the other to gain political mileage.
b) “Acceptance of the Malaysian Constitution and loyalty to constitutional methods of political action.”
Comment: Today, DAP resorts to “foreign support” to exert international pressure in blackmailing our government to conform to DAP’s demands. DAP resorts to “protest rallies”, union strikes, disloyal methods of political actions at international forums and gatherings, often used for self vested purposes such as saving their own leaders from ISA detention.
c) “Honesty and incorruptibility in private life and public activities.”
Comment: Since Lim Kit Siang’s leadership, DAP leaders have unquestionably been involved in cooperative scandals, unaccountability in collecting public funds in the name of Bukit China, education and legal aid. There is completely no accountability after the funds had been collected, how it was spent, by who, and for what purpose? Receipts were not kept and one wonders any records were made and yet the DAP has the cheek to demand BN leaders to declare their personal assets while DAP national leaders openly fail in fulfilling the responsibility of public accountability in collection of public funds and refusing to set examples. And recently DAP leaders in the Trade Union were charged for misused of funds.
d) “No cheap slogan shouting, rabble rousing or playing to the gallery.”
Comment: Not only has the DAP leaders failed to comply the abovementioned, DAP members of parliament resort to abusing Parliamentary privileges by “behaving like schoolboys” such as name calling, walking out of parliamentary sessions in protest, slandering, launching personal vendetta against BN MPs, issuing personal challenges and staging “political gimmicks” during parliamentary sessions.
In 1978, DAP was known as the “Walkout Oppositon” for its blind attitude and constant walkouts in Parliament and State Assemblies so much so that staging walkouts was their way of representing the constituents. Since Lim Kit Siang took over the reigns of DAP leadership, a ‘new chaotic” dimension was added into the Malaysian Parliament with his lackadaisical fashions. The DAP should reform itself by not using the Parliamentary privileges to launch character assassinations and malicious lies before shouting for Parliamentary reforms, and start to act responsibly in its representation to the electorate. To cover its record of treating the Parliament like a coffeeshop, DAP hypocritically called for the BN government to reform parliamentary procedures. Yet electoral history has amply proven that DAP is more interested in winning electoral seats than representing them!
For decades, Kit Siang has been arrogantly boasting that DAP leaders have sacrificed their personal lives and freedom to speak out fearlessly for Malaysian democracy, yet when they are detained under the ISA for threatening national security, the DAP sent telegrams and letters to all over the world to denounce the Malaysian government, and like “cry babies” moaned and groaned about their predicament, seeking world sympathies and pressure to seek their releases! DAP leaders’ personal behaviours are a great contradiction to their false public images as “heroes” and voters must explode this myth which the opposition has repeatedly projected to deceive the public at large!
2. DAP preaches political ideals but applies double standards within
In 1967, Lim Kit Siang preached democratic socialism to strive for a society and members equal opportunities for political, economic, social and cultural development. He condemned the Feudal society where men occupy ranks in life not because they perform any socially useful function but because of their births. Does DAP national line-up today reflects the very principles preached by Lim Kit Siang 28 years ago? Chen Man Hin and Lim Kit Siang are the DAP national Chairman and Secretary General respectively today as they were 28 years ago.
Malaysia since then has changed Prime Minister thrice and its cabinet line up many times over. DAP’s leadership history is littered with bitter expulsions and personal vendetta with recent cases of former DAP leaders Lee Lam Thye and Hu Sepang being forced out of political positions. Today, Lim Guan Eng, DAP Youth DAPSY Chief, by birth right as Kit Siang’s son, is being groomed by his father, has a tremendous bright future to lead the opposition DAP. DAP professes political ideals as a political weapon to attack others but never applies within because DAP does not believe in “practising what they professes”.
The public has been misled that DAP is the champion for democracy and democracy is within DAP but democracy has been dead within DAP for a long time. DAP rank and file have no “human rights” to dissent against the mistakes and misdeeds of their leaders though they might be “freed” to do so through expulsion. Former DAP National vice chairman Daing Ibrahim in 1978, quit the DAP, describing the party being run by a handful of dictators, who had arbitrarily expelled political opponents from within. He had exposed Kit Siang’s true colour and “DAP’s own brand of democracy”.
Malaysians have been taken for a ride for too long to believe that DAP is the champion of democracy and political freedom. It is time DAP should put its own house in order before shouting for democratisation, liberalisation and freedom of sorts! DAP crises in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982 and 1990, had left a trial of desertions, defections and expulsions with open confessions of dictatorship and double standards of Kit Siang and his warlords. The record of sacked DAP top ranking leaders included staunched DAP leaders, DAP founder leaders and DAP leaders who had condemned the Alliance and BN governments. Lee Lam Thye and Hu Speang were only the latest additions and lineage to the long long list of former DAP leaders who finally woke up after a long, long political nightmare!
3. DAP: A record of self contradictions and selling out
The DAP, since its founding, has shouted for a ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ concept, not out of sincerity to the idea, but only as an election strategy and platform to capture votes. Till today, the DAP’s political concept merely exists in print and form. During the mid-1960s till up to the late 70s, DAP national leadership had to face widespread dissatisfactions and grievances among its supporters, that DAP never practised what it preached. Outside of its own homefront (DAP Party), its national leaders shouted the slogan of a Malaysian Malaysia. Within its frontiers, preferential treatment was given to DAP chinese leaders and supporters while ignoring the pleads of other communities within its rank and file. In 1978, DAP announcing its intention to absorb 20,000 malays into the party within 5 years, was looked upon as a political joke.
In actual fact, it was a “cover up” to hide the reality of many malays leaving the DAP in 1978. Today’s DAP remains a party that does not reflect the Malaysian Malaysia ideology, though at ground level, DAP leaders play a chauvinistic line to the tilt to deceive voters for their votes.
In 1969, former DAP national leader Lee Lam Thy strongly condemned the Alliance Government: (Quote Malay Mail 3rd April 1969): “The Alliance government is dictatorial by its ‘one voice policy’, undemocratic and unparliamentary in its practice of parliamentary democracy; intolerant of Opposition criticism; incompetent in its administration; wasteful in its expenditure; divisive in its nation building policies; shortsighted in its treatment of the people” (unquote). Little did Lee Lam Thye realised at that time that 21 years later, his criticisms and condemnations made against the Alliance were applicable to Kit Siang and his warlords. In 1990, Lam Thye quit DAP and wept openly, a disillusioned man. In 1983 and 1985, two disillusioned DAP leaders summed up the following comments on DAP before they quit the opposition Party:
a) Former DAP Youth leader (Perak): DAP lacks democracy, practices favouritism, double standards and opportunism. DAP leaders are dictatorial and hypocritical with passing weeks. They are the greatest political circus in Malaysia with threats, undemocratic restrictions, suspensions and expulsions. The DAP has lost its bearings and soul because it is being led by power crazy and autocratic individuals. A former DAP from Penang once summed up DAP leadership as “DAP has talked a lot about democracy but there is nothing in the party that is democratic at all.”
b) Former DAP State Treasurer (Melaka): (Quote) “The DAP’s activities are a danger to national unity and harmony among the different races in the country. The DAP should realise its mistakes as its efforts to harass the people and create disunity among them were totally rejected by the people.”
In 1972, hundreds of DAP members quit DAP partly attributed by disillusionments and sackings carried out by Lim Kit Siang. Popular former DAP national leaders to quit DAP included Lee Lam Thye and Hu Sepang during the 1990s. On August 3rd 1971, an entire DAP committee of the Melaka branch resigned en bloc. In 1972, the former deputy publicity secretary Encik Ainnol Jammal (DAP KL Branch quit DAP citing DAP as a chauvinistic party run by a dictator. In the same year, DAP Rocket adopted a chauvinistic approach by publishing an MCA official wearing a songkok and captioned it “the fighter ans saviour of chinese culture and education”.
Minister of National Unity the late Tun Sambathan chided DA for stooping to such a low form to score political points. In 1986, DAP carried out the chauvinistic and dirty tactic by concocting printed photographs of an MCA candidate wearing songkok and mass distributed to voters during the general elections. Since Lim Kit Siang took over the reigns of DAP leadership, the DAP is infamous for whipping up communal feelings and character assassinations for its selfish political ends.
In 1971, V. David (currently DAP national leader) who was with Gerakan had a verbal clash with former DAP leader Goh Hock Guan on the Selangor State Assembly meeting. V. David accused the DAP of playing “cowboy politics” and power crazy. Today, the same V. David is a DAP national leader who perpetuates the cowboy politics and supports “power crazy” DAP policies.
On 22nd April 1974, 102 DAP members from 5 branches in Selangor, resigned en bloc citing Kit Siang’s “dictatorial ways” as the chief reason for their resignations. (Quote): “In our investigations, we (former DAP supporters) found that Kit Siang was trying to keep power to himself by getting rid of people who did not agree with him. The DAP Constitution was changed to allow Kit Siang to assume more personal power and to mould the DAP according to his will” (unquote).
It is evident that Lim Kit Siang calls for greater liberalisation and democratisation today is hypocritical move when the DAP ideals which he personally refuses to practice and apply within his own political homefront. Voters must wake up to DAP’s hypocrisy and double standards which Lim Kit Siang steadfastly upholds for the past 28 years of his dictatorial rule . To ensure that the DAP Youth perpetuates this Hitler’s doctrine, he puts his son and future DAP successor, Lim Guan Eng to indoctrinate the younger DAP members and pro-DAP youth movements with anti-government and anti-establishment policies of the opposition.
——————————————– to be continued.
Anwar’s latest skulduggery came in a few hours ago in his blog when he desperately trying to clear his name against his position on Israel.
The blog post is titled – ‘Jangan Putar belit Kenyataan Demi Fitnah’ (Don’t twist my statement just to slander me)
Saya diwawancara oleh Wall Street Journal pada hari Khamis, 26hb Januari 2011. Antara soalan yang ditanya kepada saya adalah berkaitan dasar luar negara dan isu Palestin. Saya tuntas menegaskan bahawa kemahuan dan hak rakyat Palestin mesti dibela dan itu merangkumi hak untuk mendirikan negara sendiri serta tidak terus dizalimi. Saya juga mengungkapkan bahawa jika syarat ini dipenuhi maka wajarlah hak rakyat Israel juga dihormati.
Translation: “I stressed that the needs and rights of the Palestinian people must be guarded and that includes the right to establish their own country and not to be further victimised.”
Anwar Ibrahim changed his opinion 180 degrees in a split second after he is being criticised for being a stooge for the Americans and for supporting Israel.
Let us be clear that this latest statement to clear his name means absolutely nothing simply because the statement in bold above was not in the original Wall Street Journal article. If it is not there, then he would have not said it at all in the first place.
In the WSJ article, nothing was said about guarding the needs of Palestinian people or their rights to established a Palestinian country. No such thing was mentioned.
What Anwar Ibrahim should have done is to get WSJ to run full transcript of his interview. Or at the very least (since he is in the mood of suing everyone these days), to sue WSJ for tarnishing his image among his Muslim supporters and slandering him to be Israel’s number one fan!
The fact is ladies and gentlemen, this latest statement which was made in Bahasa Malaysia, was made purely to allay the fears of the Muslim Malays here in Malaysia.
At the end of that statement, he even strengthened this deceit by giving a warning to those who tries to twist his earlier interview. But we all know, nobody is pushing him to voluntarily make that interview and nobody is twisting anything.
We can take his words from the WSJ story word by word without changing anything and the result is still the same. He sealed his own fate with his own actions.
His latest blog posting was just a cover up to assuage his supporters.
Anwar will play by the gallery since that is his second nature. He will say one thing to an audience. And will say a complete opposite to another audience.
To the world he lambasted us by saying the elections in Malaysia is dirty and not free and fair. But he did not tell them that his PKR party just witnessed the dirtiest party elections ever conducted which resulted in an exodus a few strong supporters in the form of Zaid Ibrahim and Haris Ibrahim.
I reinforce my assertion from my previous article; that Anwar is not in the correct state of mind to lead this nation.
Maybe he should make another trip overseas to get further instructions from his masters before they can pat him on his derriere and return him here with fresh directives on what to do next.
And just like how he ended his attempt to cover up his motives and ulterior motives, I shall end this article with the same words albeit with a slight change.
“Justeru saya memberi amaran keras kepada Anwar Ibrahim jangan cuba menjadi talam dua muka dalam memutar belit kenyataan-kenyataan beliau sendiri hanya kerana untuk mendapatkan kuasa.”
Read more HERE.
To put things simple enough, RM18 million of MAS’ very important, very hard earned cash was given to another company belonged to one of its directors. Basically, a director of MAS, Tony Fernandes got RM18 million given to his other company – a football team, Queens Park Rangers (QPR).
There is a massive conflict of interest there. Worse, the transaction was transacted like a kneejerk reaction. Like someone had jerk the leash of owners of MAS and bamboozled them into agreeing to give their money to another director.
Was there a tender committee being called before the transaction was approved? Which other teams were selected in the final leg of the tender procedures? Were the teams in the Spanish Primera Liga or the Italian Serie A taken into consideration as well? We can bet there were none. Is this how a premier airline should have used its advertising money?
Right after Christmas, QPR is now just 3 points above the relegation zone. From 18 games played, they could just secure 17 points. That is less than a point for each game. If this continues, they will get less than 40 points by the end of the season. In a season where 38 games are played, the 40 point mark is the benchmark in order to survive the Premier League. If this hold true, the punters were correct in saying that QPR has 1 in 4 chance to be relegated by the end of the season.
Maybe this would be a bad omen. Just like how MAS is fighting for its survival, QPR will be fighting most in the relegation zone for the rest of the season. But unlike QPR, the management of MAS is consciously mismanaging the company towards destruction.
Conflicts of interests?
Bad advertising deals?
Azman Mokhtar, Danny Yusof and Tony Fernandes are above the petty rules and regulations! Are they? Maybe the government should give Danny a Tan Sri-ship too!
We can safely deduce that this RM18 million advertising deal is to help Danny’s partner in crime fleecing money from a GLC at the most minimum hassle and purview.
You might think RM18million is a small amount. Try counting 1 to 18,000,000 and get back to me when you’re done.
Now how about the breach in anti-trust laws? When the share-swap agreement was inked in early August, the millionaire brother of the Prime Minister, Nazir Razak had said:
“We will be looking at all the anti-trust provisions in all the markets the three global airlines operate in.”
MAS and AirAsia even said in their statements to Bursa Malaysia ‘that the collaboration agreement would only be committed upon once an anti-trust analysis had been completed and was in compliance with the applicable laws with regards to anti-trust.’
But what happened soon after was anything but being compliant to the anti-trust laws. The routes to KL – Bandung and KL – Sandakan were taken off without so much of a warning; leaving AirAsia as the sole service provider of the routes.
There aren’t any other foreign flights to ply this route for customers to choose from too.
When MAS was still plying this route, the average ticket price of AirAsia ticket to Bandung from Kuala Lumpur was around RM300 to RM400 and could be as high as RM800 if you had bought them a few days before the departure date.
But currently, even at two weeks before the date, AirAsia is selling them at more than RM1,000 each! It was RM800 if you buy slightly earlier than that.
This is in serious breach of anti-competitive laws.
Customers are at the mercy Air Asia.
Nazir Razak made to look like a buffoon by this AirAsia – MAS swap. By issuing statements when he is not even privy to the operational plans of both companies, he probably won’t deny that he has become a buffoon.
The question now is, what will Azman Mokhtar do?
Tony Fernandes made it clear that he does not give a damn about what the customers think or feel. In one episode, when had to deal with the newly revised airport tax, Tony Fernandes responded via twitter to many of the complaints by his customers with:
“It’s a free world. If you don’t want to fly and done (sic) like us you don’t. We have to use malaysian airports. That’s the difference”.
The blog journalist who blogged about this found his tweet ‘rather unbecoming, if not somewhat churlish’.
Well it seems now, passengers going to Bandung have no choice but to pay the exorbitant ticket prices.
Now everyone can fly? I don’t think so.
Rumours has it that MAS will also terminate their Haji Charter services to Jeddah in their new business plan which by the way are planned by their board of executive directors. Incidentally, two of these directors are the owners of Air Asia. So which airline will be given this concession in the future?
Anyway, Tony Fernandes had the cheek to run a guerilla type campaign against Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad regarding the airport tax when he himself is squeezing the public. One just have to remember the inability of Azman Mokhtar in trying to get Tony to pay MAHB over the millions of ringgit in airport tax collected by AirAsia.
Only in 2010 was the sum finally paid up; not totally, and getting further discount too.
Tony is fighting for the rakyat? Tony is robbing the rakyat that’s more like it. How much does a maggi mee costs in an AirAsia flight? Very expensive.
Can we bring our own food to eat in the flight if we don’t want to pay those extremely pricey food?
Of course we cannot do that.
Do you know that flights to Jakarta via KLM is much more cheaper than AirAsia’s own flights? KLM provides food and in flight entertainment too. With all those incidental fees here and there, Tony Fernandes hoodwinked Malaysians into believing that he provides cheap flights.
Coupled with very lousy service right from the booking department all the way to the quality of its aircraft, AirAsia is a behemoth of which crooks are hiding behind it.
Tony went overboard with his campaign against the MAHB when he urged the public to stand up for the ‘unfair’ airport tax hike when in fact, airport tax had not been increased for more than a dozen of years.
He proceeded in buying full page newspaper advertisement in The Star vilifying MAHB to the extent of directing AirAsia staff to wear protest badges and putting up anti-MAHB posters all over MAHB’s airports!
Surely as the owners of the airports, MAHB has the rights to remove all those illegal and provocative posters. But when MAHB did exactly that, Tony went berserk and publicly slam them for harassing his staff!
“Malaysian airport staff tearing down our posters and taking away airport passes of our staff. And using intimidation. Can someone tell them this is Malaysia and not a police state.”
This is a typical opposition mentality whereby the main villain is antagonising and provoking the establishment and then claiming to be the victim. When you are acting like gangsters, of course someone will have to act against you.
And to think that Tony received the Asian Corporate Director Recognition Award by Corporate Governance Asia last July for his ‘contributions in enhancing business ethics, transparency and corporate social responsibility on the foundation of his success in running the airline business. In addition to these selection criteria, the award also recognizes Tony’s efforts in helping to raise the standards of corporate governance practice in Malaysia’.
Luckily the MD of MAHB, Tan Sri Bashir Ahmad stood his ground and remained a gentleman when facing this petulant CEO of a company which he had gave so many special privileges all these years.
Thomas Jefferson had said – “Nothing gives one person so much advantage over another as to remain always cool and unruffled under all circumstances.”
While Bashir Ahmad showed character and resoluteness, finesse is non existent in Tony Fernandes. At the same time, something much worse is plaguing Khazanah’s top management; their lack of accountability.
If Azman Mokhtar couldn’t curtail Danny Yusof from agreeing to that RM18 million deal, what makes you think his other investment decisions will be sound?
The deal was mired with blatant conflict of interests which is nakedly open for the public to see and yet the main shareholder of MAS is not doing anything about it. In fact, they are actively supporting this mistake!
The mismanagement and systematic destruction of MAS, the arrogance of the conniving Tony Fernandes, supported by inaction of Khazanah and their investment blunders will certainly not look good on the Prime Minister’s reputation.
But nobody seems to be awake at the moment. Everyone is being bigheaded and high and mighty yet nobody wants to be accountable.
Just like the arrogant CEO of AirAsia X, whom after been queried in twitter over the RM250 million subsidy given to them, had lashed out at people who questioned him as not having the necessary intellectual capacity.
He invited people to deal with him directly through email but then quickly dismissed any queries behind the Auditor General’s report. Nearly 2 months has passed but until this day, I have not received any explanation of the RM250 million subsidy from him.
Hot air is everywhere even during this rainy season but the government is too lethargic to take action.