The Good News! Catholic Newspaper "The Herald" Given Permit With NO Conditions Attached

From BBC News: Read here article by Robin Brant and HERE

Government Backs Down on use of the word Allah by Catholic Newspaper, The Herald.

Excerpts: Read here for more

Read here earlier related article on the controversy created by the Deputy Internal Minister Johari Baharum about the use of the word "Allah" by the Catholic newspaper The Herald. AND Read HERE and HERE and HERE

The Malaysian government has reversed a decision to ban a Christian newspaper using the word ALLAH to refer to God.

The government informed the editor of the newspaper that it will get its 2008 permit, with NO conditions attached.

The editor, Reverend Father Lawrence Andrew, said a representative from the Internal Security Ministry delivered the letter of approval, dated Dec 28, by hand at 10am Sunday.

Father Andrew Lawrence told the BBC he was delighted, saying prayers had been answered.

He blamed politics and a general election expected here in 2008 year for what he said were the actions of a few over-zealous ministers in the Muslim-dominated Malay government.

The Catholic Weekly newspaper reports on the Catholic community in English, Bahasa Malaysia, Tamil and Chinese. In the Bahasa Malaysia version, it uses the word "Allah" for God. The paper has a circulation of 12,000 among the Catholic community.

Father Lawrence thanked (Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) Tan Sri Bernard Dompok for his assistance, as well as the various news agencies and other media groups for wide coverage on the controversy.

When contacted, Dompok said he had brought the matter to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi a few days before Christmas and Abdullah had promised to look into it.

"I think the permit is good news and the Government has given the Christian community a wonderful Christmas present. The community will certainly be happy to know that the Government is looking into their welfare," said Dompok.

Malaysian Government's Prohibition Lands ALLAH in Court

Latest UPDATE: 31st December, 2007

Government reversed ban on use of the word Allah
Read here for more

--------------------End of update--------------------------------

Malaysian Courts to Decide on COPYRIGHT Ownership of "ALLAH". Malaysians will be told WHO can own the word "Allah."

A ridiculously stupid legal tussle caused by the UMNO-led Government for the NAME of GOD!

Read HERE related article, and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here

Malaysian Government's recent actions and comments made by Deputy Internal Minister Johari Baharum have landed Allah (Arabic word for "God") in Malaysia's secular courts.

Speaking on God's or Allah 's behalf will be Muslims and Christians/non-Muslims.

In all probability, Allah's case will be heard by at least two to three Muslim judges. For Malaysian Christians, they have to wait to know whether there will be at least one non-Muslim judge to decide on the case.

The publisher of a Malaysian Catholic newspaper, The Herald, has sought a court order to use the word Allah. "We are in the view that we have the right to use the word Allah, (a right) which ... is now sought to be curtailed," Father Lawrence Andrew, editor of The Herald, told AFP.

The legal challenge was filed in a Malaysian High Court on December 5 following orders from the government not to use the word Allah, which Muslims use to describe God.

Church leaders had said they used the word Allah when delivering sermons in Malay or write in the Malay language section of the 28-page weekly newspaper.The tabloid Herald is circulated among the country's 850,000 Catholics with articles written in English, Chinese, Tamil and Malay. Read here for more

In a separate case in Sarawak, the Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB), also known as the Evangelical Chuch of Borneo, is seeking a court order to quash Malaysia's Internal Security Minister's decision to refuse the import of four titles and withhold delivery of another two titles impounded under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA).

They are also seeking a declaration that they have the constitutional right to use the word “Allah” in all their religious publications and practices, and not just within the church. Read here for more

COMMENTARY

RECOMMENDED READING ! : From Ali Eteraz: Read here for more on The Guardian (UK)

"... I just read that a Catholic newspaper in Malaysia is not being allowed to refer to God as "Allah" as it has always done.

I guess the (Malaysian) government thinks that Muslims have a MONOPOLY over the word.

The Church has, quite appropriately, sued the government for this absurd pronouncement, arguing that the word "Allah" is merely an Arabic word for God, which has been used by members of many faiths, long before Islam was even founded.

The Church has, quite appropriately, sued the government for this absurd pronouncement, arguing that the word "Allah" is merely an Arabic word for God, which has been used by members of many faiths, long before Islam was even founded.

This is yet another instance (do they ever stop?) where Islam is being used by conniving leaders to advance political agendas.

(UMNO) leaders in Malaysia promote supremacist, dominionist versions of Islam, because it makes political sense for them to do so. Sixty (60) per cent of the country is Malay-Muslim; the rest are Chinese Buddhists, Tamil Hindus and animists.

So, if you can CONTROL the (Malaysian) Muslims, you will control the government.

Therefore, ever since Malaysia's independence in 1957, Islamocentric ideas have been utilised by politicians thirsty for political power.

This ISLAMIST PROGRAMME has gone through TWO stages.

1. In the first stage, it simply sought to apply Islamic laws to Muslims, making comforting gestures to non-Muslims that Islamic laws would not be applied to them. In this stage, Sharia courts, which are separate from the secular legal system, were created.
   

   This occurred in the 1980s, specifically under an amendment of Article 121(A) of the constitution which said that civil courts (which apply secular law) had no jurisdiction over matters under the control of a Sharia court. This produced some absurd results.

   I recall a story (via Farish Noor) where at a club non-Muslims were told by the PA system "to enjoy themselves" while the Muslims were told to segregate themselves on the basis of gender.

2. It looks as if the second stage has now taken off.
   
   In this stage, ISLAMIST LAWS are being applied to NON -Muslims (the curse of self-replicating fundamentalism).

   - A Christian publication cannot use the word "Allah" for God.
   
   - A Hindu Muslim couple with six children was forcibly separated on the basis of Sharia (which reminded me very much of the racism of the American South when miscegnation was legally prohibited).
   
   - A Hindu woman was forced to bury her husband as a Muslim because a secular court judge (who is, surprise surprise, a Muslim) stated that his court could not challenge the ruling of the Sharia court which, in an ex parte ruling no less, had declared the Hindu man a Muslim.

Obviously, Islamism wouldn't be complete without some completely assinine rulings, like when a fatwa targeted genies, mermaids, vampires, phoenix birds and ghouls.

Voices Against Spread of Islamism in Malaysia

There are, of course, some voices against the spread of Islamism, but as always, they are both under-recognised and under-valued.

A Hindu Rights Force has been created, composed of 30 Hindu organizations. The group Sisters in Islam, is still chugging along having opposed Islamisation for years (though I'm sure they could use some donations).

The writer Farish Noor has been on a tireless crusade (can we call it a jihad?) against Islamism for as long as I can recall, fighting "the fascism in our midst." Mr Noor's commentary on the use of the word "Allah" is at his blog.

There is the work of Afghan-Malay scholar, Muhammad Hashim Kamali, such as his book, Freedom of Expression in Islam.

In the Malaysian case, theoretical anti-Islamist programmes are useful. The fundamental point is that there have to be MORE Malay-Muslims who have to be willing to put aside their racial preference (for Malay), and join the Chinese (Buddhists) and Tamil (Hindus).

This is, in fact, what Farish Noor is often agitating for. Historically, this has been difficult to do because Malays have felt resentful towards the wealthier Chinese, and taken out their aggression against the weaker (and smaller) Hindus.

Yet, if Malaysia is going to stymie the Islamist push, which - make no mistake - it is clearly suffering from, this reconciliation must happen, and soon.

From Wong Chun Wai: Read here for more in The Star

"... The similarities in Islam, Christianity and Judaism are expected because these religions originated from the same area and the people share many cultural, sociological and anthropological traits.

IT’S odd that it should even become an issue but the matter has now gone to the courts following the unprecedented suits by two church groups against the Government for prohibiting the word Allah to be used.

I do not think Johari Baharum has taken into account the linguistic and historical issue of the subject. He probably made the decision on the advice of middle and lower-level officials and we hope he will review this decision, which has caused unnecessary discontent.

Anyone travelling across the Middle East can tell you that tourists would be greeted with “Assalamualaikum”, even among Christian Arabs.

But Malaysians are told that “Assalamualaikum”, is for use exclusively among Muslims. Even the Arabs are perplexed by this.

“Peace be upon you” is such a beautiful and meaningful greeting, and we wish for it to be used by Malaysians of all races. It is also such a positive introduction to the world of Islam, where followers wish others well.

The Arabs prefer salam, as with the Malays here, while the Jews use shalom. There is no religious context in such greetings.

If you take a copy of the Arabic bible, you will find that Allah is used as a reference to God in the Christian perspective. It’s not something new as it has been in existence for centuries. In fact, the Christian usage of the word predates Islam.

This Arabic word is the closest equivalent to the English word God. In Hebrew and Aramaic, the language used by Jesus, the word used for God was “El” or “Elah”.

Christians in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Indonesia and many parts of Africa with huge Muslim communities have used the word with no problems.

The Church of Nativity where Jesus was born is located at the Palestinian side.Muslim leaders have no problems attending the church mass annually, as part of the respect accorded to the church.

A MUSLIM holds the keys to the Church of Nativity because of the factional fight between church groups.

It is common to see Palestinian Muslims and Christians selling church souvenirs, including crosses and rosaries, to pilgrims side by side.

The ministry has obviously decided that Allah is exclusive to Islam, seeing it as a security issue, but times have changed. They have no reason to fear that Malaysians would be confused. In fact, the ministry’s decision is confusing.

SIB president Pastor Jerry W.A. Dusing has said, in court documents, that the word Allah was used in the first complete Malay Bible in 1733 and the second complete Bible in 1879.

The ministry has stirred up a subject which should be left alone, as it has been for centuries. A new generation of Malaysians, more fluent in Bahasa Malaysia than English, has emerged because of our own policy.

Sermons in churches are increasingly conducted in the Malay language, simply because the younger congregation are no longer fluent in English.

Indonesians, mostly foreign workers, are attending church services in huge numbers alongside Malaysians. If Christian books cannot be in Bahasa Malaysia, then it has got to come from Indonesia and Singapore. The dilemma is that the Bahasa Indonesia translated Bible uses the word Allah and Indonesia has more Muslims than Malaysia but it’s not a problem there.

Information Minister Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin is right. He has consistently reminded Malaysians that Bahasa Malaysia is not exclusively for Malays. The same applies to Arabic words.

(The Prime Minister) Pak Lah must have listened to the views of both Muslims and Christians by now and certainly he serves as a good appellant.

It would be good if the church could meet Pak Lah, express their feelings and possibly withdraw the suits. They could also give an assurance that these books and publications will be used only for their members.

The impasse has to end and as we usher in the new year, let us remember there are bigger and more challenging tasks ahead of us. Surely, the ministry has more issues to handle than to create a linguistic controversy with religious connotations. .."

Do Malaysian Muslims Understand What 'ALLAH' Means?

Latest UPDATE: 31st December, 2007

Government reversed ban on use of the word Allah
Read here for more

---------------------------------------End of update------------------------

by

Dr. Farish A. Noor

Read here full article in "Other Malaysia"

Read HERE earlier posting on the same issue and HERE

QUOTE:

"... Deputy Internal Security Minister Johari Baharum recently stated that "Only Muslims can use the word Allah" ostensibly on the grounds that "Allah" is a Muslim word.

The mind boggles at the confounding logic of such a non-argument, which speaks volumes about the individual's own ignorance of Muslim culture, history and the fundamental tenets of Islam itself.

The Minister's remark not only demonstrated his SHALLOW understanding of Muslim culture and the clear distinction between Arab ulture and Muslim theology, but it also demonstrated his own lack of understanding of the history of the Malays, who, like many non-Arabs, only converted to Islam much later from the 13th century onwards.

What is clear is that some Ministers should get their basic knowledge of THEIR own religion in order first.

It is hard to understand how any religion can have a language to call its own, for languages emerge from a societal context and not a belief system. If one were to abide by the skewered logic of the Minister concerned, then presumably the language of Christianity (if it had one) would be Aramaic, or perhaps Latin.

Time and again the Malaysian public - first Hindus and now Christians - have felt necessary to protest over what they regard as unfair, biased treatment and the furthering of an exclusive brand of Islam that is communitarian and divisive. ..."
-Dr. Farish A. Noor

At the time of writing this, I am in Cairo in the company of my Egyptian friends who are Muslims, Catholics and Copts. Eid has passed and I attended several dinners and celebrations where Muslims and Copts celebrated together, visiting each others' homes and ate til we could not eat any further.

What is worse, Christmas is upon us and so once again Muslims, Catholics and Copts will be heading for the communal table for the communal feast and there will be much licking of chops, munching of bread, gobbling of sweet deserts and drinking for everyone.

It is all simply too pleasant to belive, yet it is real and this is what life is like for many in Cairo, the 'Mother of civilisation' and home to more than twenty million Egyptians from all walks of life.
What is most striking to the outside observer like me - though rather banal for the Egyptians themselves - is the fact that in all these celebrations ranging from Eid for the Muslims to Christmas for the Catholics and Copts the word 'Allah' is used to denote that supreme and singular divinity, God.

Catholics and Copts alike exclaim 'Masha-allah', 'Wallahi', 'ya-Rabbi', 'Wallah-u allam', and of course 'Allahuakbar' day in, day out, everywhere they go.

The coptic taxi driver blares out 'By Allah, cant you see where you are parking??" as he dodges the obstable ahead.

The Catholic shopkeeper bemoans "Ya Allah, ya Allah! You can only offer me two pounds for the scarf? Wallahi, my mother would die if she heard that! Ya-Rabbi, ya-Rabbi!"

Yet in Malaysia at the moment yet another non-issue has been brewed to a scandal for no reason: The Malaysian Catholic Herald, a publication by and for Catholics in the country, has been told that it can no longer publish its Malaysian language edition if it continues to use the word "Allah" to mean God.

Worse still, the country's Deputy Internal Security Minister Johari Baharum recently stated that "Only Muslims can use the word Allah" ostensibly on the grounds that "Allah" is a Muslim word. The mind boggles at the confounding logic of such a non-argument, which speaks volumes about the individual's own ignorance of Muslim culture, history and the fundamental tenets of Islam itself.

For a start, the word 'Allah' predates the revelation to the Prophet Muhammad and goes way back to the pre-Islamic era. Christians had been using the word long before there were any Muslims, in fact. Furthermore the word is Arabic, and is thus common to all the peoples, cultures and societies where Arabic - in all its dialects - is spoken, and is understood by millions of Arabic speakers to mean God, and little else.

One could also add that as "Allah" is an Arabic word it therefore has more to do with the development and evolution of Arabic language and culture, and less to do with Islam.

It is hard to understand how any religion can have a language to call its own, for languages emerge from a societal context and not a belief system. If one were to abide by the skewered logic of the Minister concerned, then presumably the language of Christianity (if it had one) would be Aramaic, or perhaps Latin.

The Minister's remark not only demonstrated his shallow understanding of Muslim culture and the clear distinction between Arab ulture and Muslim theology, but it also demonstrated his own lack of understanding of the history of the Malays, who, like many non-Arabs, only converted to Islam much later from the 13th century onwards.

Among the earliest pieces of evidence to indicate Islam's arrival to the Malay archipelago are the stone inscriptions found in Malay states like Pahang where the idea of God is described in the sanskrit words 'Dewata Mulia Raya'. As no Malay spoke or even understood Arabic then, it was natural for the earliest Malay-Muslims to continue using the Sanskrit-inspired language they spoke then. Surely this does not make them lesser Muslims as a result?

The ruckus that has resulted thanks to the threat not to allow the publication of the Malaysian language edition of the Christian Herald therefore forces observers to ask the simple question: Why has this issue erupted all of a sudden, when the word Allah was used for so long with narry a protest in sight?

At a time when the Malaysian government is already getting flak as a result of the protests by Malaysian Hindus who insist that they remain at the bottom of the economic ladder despite fifty years of independence, now it would appear as if the Malaysian government cannot get enough bad publicity.

The administration of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi came to power on the promise that it would promote its own brand of moderate Islam that was pluralist and respectful of other cultures and religions. But time and again the Malaysian public - first Hindus and now Christians - have felt necessary to protest over what they regard as unfair, biased treatment and the furthering of an exclusive brand of Islam that is communitarian and divisive.

The latest fiasco over the non-issue that is the name of God would suggest that Prime Minister's Badawi's grand vision of a moderate Islam has hit the rocks, and is now floundering. Just how the ministers and elite of this government is to regain their course is open to question, but what is clear is that some Ministers should get their basic knowledge of their own religion in order first.

Must Read Article for Muslims:: A CHRISTIAN 'anointed' MUHAMMAD as PROPHET of ISLAM

Latest UPDATE: 31st December, 2007

Government reversed ban on use of the word Allah:
Read here for more

-End of update

From Malaysia-Today: Read here article by Raja Petra Kamarudin

Click here related article

Quote:

" It was the Christian cousin of Prophet Muhammad's wife, Khatijah, who 'anointed' Muhammad as the Prophet of Islam.

Khatijah's cousin, (Waraqa bin Naufal) an Arab, who had much earlier converted to Christianity, said that Muhammad was destined to become a Prophet. He also predicted that Muhammad would bring the Arabs out of the darkness of paganism in the period that Muslims call the era of ignorance or jahil.

The Christian cousin of Muhammad's wife was an Arab, as was Muhammad.

The Arab Bible was in Arabic, the language of Islam, and the Arab Christian God was called Allah, as was the God of the pagan Arabs who also had 360 other Gods alongside Allah -- which about 22 years later were all 'sacked' in favour of just the one God, Allah, the same God of the Jews and Christians of the Arabian Peninsular of that era.
- Raja Petra Kamarudin

What the Al-Quran says about Jesus Christ (read here for more)

Al-Quran:
Al-Imran (3:55) "(Ingatlah) ketika Allah berfirman: Wahai Isa! Sesungguhnya Aku akan mengambilmu dengan sempurna dan akan mengangkatmu ke sisiKu dan akan membersihkanmu dari orang-orang kafir dan juga akan menjadikan orang-orang yang mengikutmu mengatasi orang-orang kafir (yang tidak beriman kepadamu), hingga ke hari kiamat. Kemudian kepada Akulah tempat kembalinya kamu, lalu Aku menghukum (memberi keputusan) tentang apa yang kamu perselisihkan. "

Az-Zukhruf (43:61): Dan sesungguhnya Nabi Isa menjadi tanda kedatangan hari kiamat, maka janganlah kamu ragu-ragu tentang (hari kiamat) itu dan turutlah (petunjukKu); inilah jalan yang lurus.

(Translated) Al-Imran (3:55 ): Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute"

Az-Zukhruf (43:61) And Jesus shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about the (Hour), but follow ye Me: this is a Straight Way. (Yusuf Ali translation)

According to ISLAMIC history, Muhammad was a 'restless soul' who used to withdraw from society to contemplate all alone in a deserted cave for days on end. In this isolation or 'solitary confinement', Muhammad would ponder in search of the Creator.

One day, the Angel Gabriel descended to earth to command Muhammad to read. Muhammad replied that he was unlearned and could not read whereby Gabriel repeated the command to Muhammad who continued protesting that he was not capable of reading.

Gabriel finally grabbed Muhammad and shook him with such great force that he was compelled to obey the command lest his very life get shaken out of him.

Muhammad was greatly disturbed and in utter shock. He ran back to his wife, Khatijah, and jumped under the blanket while relating to her what he had just experienced. Khatijah, who was older than him and probably quite intelligent considering she already owned a successful business enterprise before she married Muhammad, decided to go see her cousin. Some accounts say she brought Muhammad to meet her cousin.

Suffice to say, whether Muhammad did or did not go along, Khatijah did go see her cousin and there appears to be no dispute on this.

Khatijah's cousin had much earlier converted to Christianity and was an ulama or learned person. When he heard what Khatijah had to relate he said that Muhammad was destined to become a Prophet and he prayed he would still be alive to see this happen.

He also predicted that Muhammad would face much trials and tribulations in his God-given mission to spread the word and to bring the Arabs out of the darkness of paganism in the period that Muslims call the era of ignorance or jahil.

Yes, it was a Christian who in a way 'anointed' Muhammad as the Prophet of Islam when Muhammad himself thought he was going mad and told his wife so.

But Khatijah's cousin, the learned Christian, convinced Khatijah that Muhammad was not going mad but had been chosen by God as the next Prophet and that she should go home and inform Muhammad of this.

Muhammad would probably never have returned to that cave and would instead have asked Khatijah to commit him into a mental asylum if not for her learned Christian cousin.

That, in a nutshell, was the relationship between Muhammad and Christianity in the days when Muhammad had not yet 'seen the light'. And it took a Christian to convince Muhammad that he was not going mad but was in fact a Prophet. And, yes, the Christian cousin of Muhammad's wife was an Arab, as was Muhammad, and the Arab Bible was in Arabic, the language of Islam, and the Arab Christian God was called Allah, as was the God of the pagan Arabs who also had 360 other Gods alongside Allah -- which about 22 years later were all 'sacked' in favour of just the one God, Allah, the same God of the Jews and Christians of the Arabian Peninsular of that era.

Controversy of use of Allah by non-Muslims

This controversy about banning the Bahasa Malaysia version of the Bible and banning the use of the word Allah in the Bible is not new. Of course, more than 1,500 years ago in Arabia, the Arabic version of the Bible was not banned, nor was the use of the word Allah in the Bible. In fact, there was already an Arabic Bible long before there was an Arabic Quran and the Arab Christians already called God Allah long before Gabriel commanded Muhammad to read.

Stupidity of Malaysian Ministers

Malaysian Ministers are expected to be learned in matters of religion and Islamic history. And if they are not then it is expected that those from Pusat Islam and the Religious Department who are would be able to guide the Ministers on what is right and what is not.

But ignorant Ministers make stupid statements and come out with stupid policies while learned Muslims from Pusat Islam and the Religious Department, who are there only for the salary and not because of Islam, shut their mouths and do not dare make a squeak.

Hypocrisy of Malaysian Muslims

The hypocrisy of Muslims is so mind-boggling that sometimes I am ashamed to admit I am a Muslim. Stupid Muslims do and say stupid things while those who know better keep quiet and pretend what is being said and done by these stupid people is correct. Their silence and inaction in opposing and correcting transgressions and violations to Islam makes these people guilty of complicity. Those who remain quiet are as guilty as those who commit these crimes against Islam.

I give up on Muslims who are all bloody hypocrites. These people are more concerned about young people who hold hands in a park or about whether the clothes they wear are too 'sexy'. These people do not care whether there are injustices to Islam perpetuated in the name of Islam.

Islam is being put to ridicule. And our government and Prime Minister says one thing but does the opposite.
- Raja Petra Kamarudin

RELATED ARTICLE

Read here for more on "ISLAMIC AWARENESS" Website and HERE

(Click here for the Bahasa Malaysia version of the article below)

Assalamu-alaikum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:

Waraqa is one of the four men who left the pagan faith of Mecca in search for the Hanifite roots ( the religion of Abraham) and returned as a Christian.

Even he was claimed to be the source of the Qur'ân.

(The) hadîths narrated in Sahih al-Bukhârî:

Narrated 'Aisha' : Volume 4, Book 55, Number 605:

"..The Prophet returned to Khadija while his heart was beating rapidly. She took him to Waraqa bin Naufal who was a Christian convert and used to read the Gospel in Arabic.

Waraqa asked (the Prophet), "What do you see?"

When he told him, Waraqa said, "That is the same angel whom Allah sent to the Prophet Moses. Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."

The other hadîth is:

Narrated 'Aisha' : Volume 1, Book 1, Number 3

Khadija then accompanied him to her cousin Waraqa bin Naufal bin Asad bin 'Abdul 'Uzza, who, during the pre-Islamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters.

He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write. He was an old man and had lost his eyesight.

Khadija said to Waraqa, "Listen to the story of your nephew, O my cousin!"

Waraqa asked, "O my nephew! What have you seen?"

Allah's Apostle described whatever he had seen.

Waraqa said, "This is the same one who keeps the secrets (angel Gabriel) whom Allah had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people would turn you out."

Allah's Apostle asked, "Will they drive me out?"

Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said, "Anyone (man) who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly." But after a few days Waraqa died.

Waraqa was an old man and died shortly after Muhammad had received the revelation of the Qur'ân; as clearly can be read from the above hadîth.

While the revelation of the Qur'ân continued for more than twenty years after the death of Waraqah bin Nawfal, the Prophet was receiving the revelation in different places and even while he was among his Companions.

Also, he was answering direct questions raised later by the Jews in Madinah.

And finally Waraqa himself announced in all of the hadîths reported in Sahih al-Bukhârî that he would support Muhammad strongly if he lived long enough:

"Should I live till you receive the Divine Message, I will support you strongly."

"...if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly."

Subashini Case: Federal Court Sets Very Unsettling Precedent for Non-Muslims in Malaysia

From Malaysiakini: Read HERE for more and HERE

Read more on analysis of the confused ruling by the three Muslim judges on the Subashini case on Screenshots
Must Read Article: " MALAYSIA' S FAMILY LAW - CUSTODY AND RELIGION" by Foo Yet Ngo (click here to read .pdf file)

Malaysian Unplug says:

" It is obvious the Federal Court is waffling and skirting around the edges on the issue of the supremacy of the Federal Constitution.

The Muslim judges in the Federal Court sitting on this case, for reasons only known to themselves, seem to be cherry-picking legislations to suit the framework of the Syariah law. The result of which is a court decision that basically denies the fundamental rights of the Hindu woman, firstly as a citizen who is protected by the Federal Constitution and secondly, as a mother of her two children.

The Court decision has virtually destroyed whatever remains of a family structure for the Hindu woman, and the endearing child-mother relationship, all because the Federal court deemed it fit to apply the Syariah law above fundamental rights of the Hindu woman as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

To the dismay of the legal profession and to the man-in-the-street, the decision coming from the learned judges is not only confusing and equivocal, in fact, it creates more problems for the Hindu mother than solving her predicament.

One can only suspect, and rightly so, that the religious and personal sentiments of the learned Muslim judges may have a big part to play in the outcome of the decision of the Federal Court on this case and on other religious issues.

When it comes to religious issues, the court shamelessly shies away from the Federal Constitution instead.

It is a continuing confirmation in the minds of ordinary Malaysians that our Malaysian Judiciary, in its present form and constitution, is simply unwilling, will not, and is unable to take its stewardship responsibility as a Protector of the Supremacy of the Federal Constitution. "

Malaysia's secular Federal Court (the highest court in the land) made the landmark ruling that a Muslim could apply to the Islamic court to convert his or her underage children WITHOUT permission from the NON- Muslim spouse.

Read here Child Act, 2001 - Act 611:Laws of Malaysia, which states:

ACKNOWLEDGING that a child, by reason of his physical,mental and emotional immaturity, is in need of special safeguards, care and assistance, after birth, to enable him to participate in and contribute positively towards the attainment of the ideals of a civil Malaysian society:

ACKNOWLEDGING the family as the fundamental group in society which provides the natural environment for the growth, support and well-being of all its members, particularly children,so that they may develop in an environment of peace, happiness,love and understanding in order to attain the full confidence, dignity and worth of the human person.

CLICK HERE to read the full text of the Judgments of Dato' Abdul Aziz bin Mohamad & Dato' Azmel bin Haji Maamor in Subashini v Saravanan 07

The Federal Court ruled that Saravanan (the Muslim-convert husband) did NOT abuse the LAW by converting his four-year-old son to Islam without the knowledge of the mother.

The court also ruled that it was within the right of Saravanan as a Muslim to file the divorce proceedings in the Syariah Court.

The Muslim judges in the secular Federal Court for this case used the Islamic law to rule that only ONE parent need to be informed in the conversion of a child.

This time, THREE Muslim judges sat to rule on the case. They are:

Justices Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman (the presiding judge)

Justice Azmel Ma'amor and

Justice Abdul Aziz Mohamad

In a 2-1 decision, Malaysia's highest court Thursday rejected on technicality a Hindu woman's plea to stop her Muslim-convert husband from divorcing her in an Islamic court, and upheld the man's right to change their son's religion to Islam.

Justices Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman and Azmel Ma'amor struck out Subashini’s case while justice Abdul Aziz Mohamad was the lone dissenting voice.

The Federal Court ruled that Subashini’s divorce petition was prematurely filed under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (LRA).According to the Act, the wife can only file for divorce three months after the date of her husband T Saravanan’s conversion to Islam, as stipulated under Islamic law.

Subashini’s divorce petition was filed nine days before the three months expiration date. The divorce petition is deemed null and void. But Subashini can apply for a fresh application.

SECULAR COURT WILL DECIDE ON THE DIVORCE

The presiding judge, Justice Nik Hashim, who ruled against Subashini, said:

1. the Syariah courts can CANNOT dissolve a CIVIL marriage ,

   He said: “The non-Muslim marriage between the husband and wife remains intact and continues to subsist until the High Court dissolves it pursuant to a divorce petition by the unconverted spouse under the LRA." This means Subashini could go to the civil courts for her divorce since theirs is a civil marriage.

2. all dissolutions made in the Religious court is only effective within the confines of the Islamic law.
   
   
3. Civil courts and Islamic courts have EQUAL status in Malaysia.

(Note: Judge Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad had said in another case the CIVIL court was the right forum because non-Muslims could not commence action or appear in syariah courts. He said the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court were creations of the (Federal) Constitution but that was NOT the case for syariah courts.

"In fact, the position of the syariah court is similar to the Sessions court and magistrate’s court. The Constitution refers to them as INFERIOR courts. (Read here for more. ) The syariah courts will have NO jurisdiction if the the state legislature did not pass an enactment to give them the power," Justice Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad said. Read here for more

THE CASE BEFORE THE FEDERAL COURT

Subashini, 28, is a Hindu. She is trying to stop her husband, who has converted to Islam and assumed the name Muhammad Shafi Saravanan Abdullah, from taking matrimonial proceedings to the Syariah Court.

Subashini wants the civil court to decide on her divorce case, not by the Islamic court since she is a Hindu.

Her husband converted in May 2006. He converted his eldest so, Dharvin Joshua, 4 to be a Muslim. He then went to the SYARIAH COURT to launched proceedings for divorce and to take custody of their second son, Sharvin, 2. He went to the Syariah Court to demand his right to convert the second son, Sharvin.

Subashini married Saravanan Thangathoray, also an ethnic Indian, in a Hindu wedding in 2002. The couple have two sons, Dharvin and Sharvind, now aged 4 and 2. Saravanan told his wife in 2006 that he had converted to Islam. Subashini attempted suicide and was hospitalized. When she returned home, Saravanan had left with Dharvin, whom he claims has also converted to Islam.

Subashini Left High and Dry After the Decision

After the decision was handed down, Subashini said she was disappointed with the judgement, saying she wished the judges had looked into her rights as a mother.

“It is unfair to treat me like this. I gave birth to our children and I have a right to make a decision about my children, as a mother,” she said in a phone interview with theSun.

“How can they say my estranged husband has the right to convert our second child? Does this mean I will lose my second son as well?” she added.

Subashini has NOT met her first son, Dharvin Joshua, for the past two years since her husband, Saravanan, converted the boy.

She said Saravanan, was only willing to grant her access to Dharvin in exchange for access to their youngest child, Sharvin.

Subashini said she was willing to give up not seeing Dharvin for fear that Saravanan would convert their second child as well.

“If that happens, then I am afraid that both my kids will be taken away from me, and I will have no one,” she said.

Subashini said it was unfair that her newly-converted husband seems to have been granted more rights over her as a mother.

“Where is my right, as a mother?” she asked, adding that she was still discussing her next course of action with her lawyer.

Subashini’s lawyer K. Shanmuga told theSun Subashini was distraught over the judgment.

“She’s uncertain about her future and her children’s future. It’s a blow to her because she’s been told she can’t stop her husband from going to the syariah court to get orders regarding the breakup of their marriage, and she can’t stop him from converting their younger child,” he said.

Meanwhile, Saravanan's lawyer Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar, said it was difficult for him to respond to the latest development in the court case as they have yet to get the full written judgment.

"We have to wait for the full judgment first as we need to see what we can or cannot do. We have to see the reasonings of the judgment," he said to theSun when contacted today. Read here for more

From Malaysiakini: The Landmark Decision Summarised

Majority decision - Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman and Azmel Ma'amor

• Subashini’s divorce petition under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act is deem null and void because it was filed before the requisite three months period.

• Saravanan and Subashini’s civil marriage can only be dissolved using civil law. The husband can still dissolve it under syariah law but it will have no effect in the civil courts.

• Saravanan can seek relief in the syariah courts but it cannot compel Subashini to do the same because she is a non-Muslim.

• Saravanan did not abuse the process by converting his child because the consent from one parent is sufficient according to Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution .

Article 12(4) says: For the purposes of Clause (3) the religion of a person under the age of eighteen years shall be decided by his parent or guardian.

(Note: What about the decision of Subashini, as a parent and a mother to boot, of the two children ?- Malaysian Unplug)

Dissenting ruling - Abdul Aziz Mohamad

• The evidence of Saravanan’s conversion must be tried in order to determine whether the conversion date was based on his certificate or on facts made available to Subashini.

• Saravanan had abused the process in seeking the custody of the children in the Syariah Court because the religious court has no jurisdiction over a non-Muslim marriage.

• Saravanan’s conversion of the children is not unilateral and the wife has a right to object to the conversion as well as seek an injunction to stop the procedure.

• The High Court has exclusive jurisdiction in matters of dissolution of marriage, maintenance, custody and other ancillary reliefs because the marriage was solemnised under civil law.

Commentary

From R.Surenthira Kumar and Jacqueline Ann Surin: Read here for more in "The Sun"

"...In handing down what is widely seen as an EQUIVOCAL decision today, the Federal Court drew away from answering the question of which court, civil or Syariah, has exclusive jurisdiction to hear cases involving non-Muslim spouses whose partners had converted to Islam.

However the apex court made it clear, when it unanimously decided, that the High Court still has jurisdiction to hear cases involving non-Muslim spouses involved in a matrimonial disputes, even though the other partner had converted to Islam.

By Jalil Hamid: Read here from Reuters

"... Malaysia's highest court threw out on Thursday a bid by a Hindu woman to stop her estranged husband from converting their youngest son to Islam.

Her case is another sign of strain in the social fabric of the multi-racial nation, where many non-Muslims believe their rights are being trampled by the Muslim majority.

Family law has become an emotional battleground between Malaysia's religious communities, with non-Muslims complaining civil courts are too willing to surrender jurisdiction to their Islamic counterparts in cases involving a Muslim conversion.

Marriages between Muslims and non-Muslims are forbidden in Malaysia, so once a non-Muslim spouse converts to Islam, the union is broken, lawyers say. While it can still exist under civil law, in reality the Islamic court does not recognise it.

Her lawyers had told the Federal Court the civil system was the right place for this case because she was not a Muslim.

They cited a landmark ruling by the Federal Court in July which stated that if one party was a non-Muslim, the sharia court had no jurisdiction. This was a rare ruling that went against a tide of decisions granting jurisdiction to the Islamic courts..."

Read here on Malaysia-Today

"... In a confusing verbal ruling, the Federal Court FAILED to clarify the status of Malaysia's minorities, such as Subashini, in marital disputes where the spouse is a Muslim.

Civil rights groups have voiced fears that minority rights have become subordinate to Islamic jurisprudence in this predominantly Muslim nation, thanks to a series of rulings that have gone in favor of Muslim spouses.

The Federal Court said that as a principle, marital disputes involving a converted Muslim spouse and a non-Muslim partner should only be decided in a civil court and not in the Islamic SYariah Court.

But at the same time, the court said Subashini's husband has the right to approach the Shariah court to seek redress.

Defense lawyers were taken aback by the seemingly contradictory ruling.

They said the picture can become clearer only after reading the full written verdict, which will be released later.

Muslims, who are 60 percent of Malaysia's population, are governed by Islamic courts while non-Muslims go to civil courts to settle family, marriage and other personal disputes. But the law is vague on which court has the authority to deal with disputes between Muslims and non-Muslims, especially within a family.

Civil courts have generally steered clear of taking a position in such cases, allowing Syariah courts to take the lead.

Read here Press Statement by President, Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism

PRESS RELEASE
27th December 2007

ONE PARENT CAN CONVERT A CHILD CREATES FEAR AMONGST NON-MUSLIMS

The Federal Court’s decision in the Subashini case that a non-Muslim who converts to Islam after contracting a Non-Muslim civil marriage ought to fulfill his obligations under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 is a welcome relief to non-Muslims.

However, the Federal Court’s opinion that either parent can convert a child into another religion does not take into account the special laws which will be applicable to the child when the child is converted to Islam. The other non-Muslim parent will not be able to re-convert the child out of Islam.

This is a gross injustice to the other parent.

The child will also be deprived of its right to convert out of Islam at the age of 18 under Syariah Laws in Malaysia without facing various sanctions and possible prison sentence.

A child’s religion should NOT be changed without the consent of BOTH parents.

Until the child attains 18 years of age, the child ought to be brought up by each parent according to the tenets of that parent’s religion while the child is under that parent’s care and control taking into consideration the delicate nature of contradicting the tenet’s of each other’s religions.

There is much in common between all religions. The child should be exposed to and taught the good values acceptable to both religions without offending any sensitive feelings of either parent. This can easily be done without converting the child before the child attains the age of 18.

Converting a young child without the consent of both parents will cause much heartbreak. This conflict ought to be avoided in all the circumstances of this day and age.

Thank you,

Datuk A.Vaithilingam
President
MCCBCHST

Mr. Prime Minister, WALK the TALK

LATEST NEWS:

Despite protestations from Christians and non-Christians alike, the UMNO-led Government has effectively banned the Malay-language section of a Catholic weekly newspaper, "The Herald" , due to its use of the word 'Allah.'

The Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi did NOT intervene on behalf of his Malaysian Catholic citizens on the action of the Internal Security Ministry. Read here for more and HERE and HERE

Read here related article on the controversy created by Deputy Minister, Johari Baharum that Allah is a God belonging ONLY to (Malaysian) Muslims and not to the 'Children of the Book'

-- end of update --

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi called on the people to uphold the spirit of tolerance and mutual respect that they had been practising in a multi-racial community. He made the call at a Christmas tea party organised by the Christian Federation of Malaysia and hosted by KL Archbishop Datuk Murphy Pakiam.

He said Malaysia was a land of opportunity and a land where everyone knew how to respect one another and knew how to give and take. Read here for more

Well said, Mr. Prime Minister. Very well said.

As our Prime Minister and as President of UMNO, you will have our full and undivided support on this as citizens of our beloved nation .

But preach and tell that EVERYDAY to UMNO Youth Leaders and to your UMNO Ministers and Politicians. Because, if you are not aware, that is where the CAUSE and SOURCE of Malaysia's Problems of Racial Intolerance and Lack of Mutual Respect are located.

And, one more thing, it gets nauseating for past and present Malaysian Prime Ministers to keep on pontificating and giving sermons to OTHERS on tolerance and respect, when OTHERS are being forced to react to the dangerous politics of UMNO and UMNO Youth leaders over the last three decades.

What we are saying, Mr. Prime Minister, is that to achieve racial tolerance and mutual respect in Malaysia, YOU and future Presidents of UMNO should take the "bulls by the horns", so to speak, in YOUR OWN Political Party, ie UMNO.

On that note, we wish you, your family and Malaysia, a HAPPY and PEACEFUL NEW YEAR 2008

RUBBISH! " Kaum India dan Cina Tak Minat Berkhidmat Dengan Kerajaan."

FROM BERITA HARIAN

MUST READ ARTICLE : "The Representativeness of the Bureaucracy in Malaysia: The Problems of Public Administration in a Plural Society" by Lim Hong Hai, University Sains Malaysia. " (click HERE to READ . Click here to DOWNLOAD .pdf file)

Note: The fact is the Malaysian tax-payer-funded Malay-dominated Malaysian civil service is self-serving in the recruitment and promotions. There is an entrenched disconnect between Policy and actual Implementation of public service rules and regulations by the senior Malay bureaucrats in the Public Service Department and in all the line Ministries and Departments.

Related articles:

• Racial policies which promote academics based on race and not on performance is a key reason why people like Dr. Lee pack their bags and leave our local universities despite their best intentions on wanting to 'serve' our country: Read here for more
  
  
• Testimony from an Ex-Serviceman:

It's not that the non Malays are not interested. You may NOT know the truth if you're NOT in the government service or military.

You'll know the truth once you're inside. This is real life experience from yours truly. I served in the Malaysian Armed Forces for 12 years.

Do you know why I didn't stay on?

The main reason is that we're marginalised. It's about time we stand for our rights as Malaysians.

So long as the quota system based on race and promotion opportunities based on race still exist, you will not find many non Malays with the government, even one wants to be in. Read here for more

• The Facts: (Read here for more)
  

  - 5 % has been given to non-Malays for government scholarships in over 40years.
  
  - All TEN (10) public university vice chancellors are Malays. (Are non- Malays that academically incompetent, that they lack scholarship excellence or that they are such poor managers/administrators, to be appointed as Vice Chancellors in Malaysian public Universities, or the reality is that the appointments are essentially based on RACE ? OR are we to hear that non-Malay academics "tak minat" to become Vice Chancellors)
  
  - 5% of the government universities' lecturers are of non-Malay origins. This percentage has been reduced from about 70% in 1965 to only 5% in 2004.
  
  - 7% is the percentage of Chinese government servants in the entire government (in 2004); a drop from 30% in 1960.
  
  - 2% is the present Chinese staff in Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF), a drop from 40% in 1960

• In 1990, the government had 773,997 employees; in 2000, the numbers increased to a total of 894,788 – a 15.6 percent increase and since then, the numbers have increased to an additional 210,000 – resulting a 23.5 percent jump in a time frame of only six years.
  Mahathir's privatisation policies which started 20 years ago were meant to cut the number of civil servants by 500,000 to reduce the government's expenditure. Tony Pua of DAP claimed that the government sector is a dumping ground for bumiputera graduates who failed to obtain jobs in the private sector. Read here for more
  
  
• Read here article in Al-Jazeera, "Racial Tensions Simmer in Malaysia"

• Status of Malaysia's Ratification of the Main UN Human Rights Treaties
  Malaysia has NOT yet ratified the following: (Read here for more)
  
  

  (a) Racial Equality: The International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), entry into force: 1969
  
  (b) Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
  
  (c) Civil and Political Rights: The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
  
  (d) Anti-Torture: The Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)
  
  (e) Migrant Workers' Rights: The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (MWC), which was adopted by the General Assembly in 1990 and will enter into force when at least 20 States have ratified it.
  
  (f) Refugees' Rights: The United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951

JPA Director-General's Rhetorics Don't Match With Facts and Realities in the Malaysian Public Service's Actual Recruitment and Promotions (read below)

Excerpts from Berita Harian : Read here for more

Kurang minat berkhidmat dengan kerajaan dan tidak banyak permohonan daripada kaum Cina dan India adalah antara faktor utama wujud jurang besar antara dua golongan itu dengan pegawai Melayu dalam sektor perkhidmatan awam.

Statistik Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam (SPA) menunjukkan hanya 1.78 peratus kaum Cina dan 2.5 peratus kaum India daripada 486,802 individu yang memohon untuk menyertai sektor awam tahun lalu.

Kenyataan Ketua Pengarah amat berat dipercayai

Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA), Tan Sri Ismail Adam, berkata situasi itu sukar diubah walau pun pihaknya dan SPA, yang bertanggungjawab dalam urusan pengambilan kakitangan awam, sentiasa berusaha memastikan tidak wujud perbezaan ketara antara kaum dalam senarai penjawat awam di semua peringkat.

Beliau menegaskan, kerajaan TIDAK pernah mengamalkan sikap pilih kasih atau diskriminasi dalam pengambilan kakitangan baru termasuk peringkat Pegawai Tadbir dan Diplomatik (PTD).

"Aspek utama yang diberi perhatian dalam pengambilan penjawat awam adalah merit atau kelayakan akademik, bukan kaum. Tidak ada kebenaran jika ada pihak menganggap faktor kaum menjadi pertimbangan dalam proses pengambilan kakitangan kerajaan.

"SPA sentiasa mengutamakan kelayakan pemohon untuk memastikan sistem penyampaiannya awam bermutu dan sekali gus dapat membantu rakyat yang berurusan dengan kerajaan," katanya kepada Berita Harian, semalam.

Menteri Kerjaraya, Datuk Seri S Samy Vellu, pula dilaporkan berkata hanya 46,054 kaum India bekerja dengan dalam perkhidmatan awam daripada 1.2 juta orang.

Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (telah) menjelaskan, pelbagai langkah diambil bagi menambah penyertaan bukan Bumiputera dalam perkhidmatan awam, termasuk mengiklankan kekosongan jawatan dalam akhbar Tamil dan Cina, selain memudahkan proses permohonan menerusi laman web.

Ismail berkata, SPA sentiasa mengambil tindakan untuk memastikan hebahan berkaitan kekosongan jawatan dalam perkhidmatan awam mendapat perhatian semua kaum, bukan kaum tertentu saja.

"Iklan jawatan kosong dalam perkhidmatan awam bukan saja dibuat dalam akhbar yang khusus untuk kaum tertentu saja, tetapi seimbang untuk semua, cuma permohonan yang diterima adalah kecil daripada bangsa Cina dan India.

"Memang permohonan jawatan awam paling tinggi diterima di kalangan Melayu dan ia bukannya disengajakan. Itulah senario sebenar yang berlaku," katanya.

Beliau berharap pengumuman kenaikan gaji kakitangan awam baru-baru ini dapat menarik minat lebih ramai bukan Melayu untuk berkhidmat dalam perkhidmatan awam yang menyediakan pelbagai insentif sampingan.

Gerakan Youth Leader Penalised for Telling Painful Truth After UMNO YOUTH Threatens Gerakan Party Leadership

Gerakan acting president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon has initiated disciplinary action against his Youth vice-chief S. Paranjothy over his remarks against Umno and UMNO Youth.He said the action against Paranjothy could be in the form of a suspension or explusion from the party. Read here for more

Such a situation NEVER happens to UMNO Youth leaders by UMNO's leadership, despite the public display of keris wielding of the UMNO Youth Chief implying threats to non Malays and the racist remarks of the Deputy UMNO Youth Leader about Indian newspaper vendors.

This is another obvious indication of the subservience of Gerakan as a Component party in the BN Coalition to not only UMNO, but to UMNO Youth. All the feel-good rhetorics by Gerakan members in the last Party General Assembly simply turn pale to the threats from a Youth wing of UMNO.

Paranjothy spoke what is generally known and talked about by Malaysians all these years. What had been said by Paranjothy were brazenly displayed in the media and in public by UMNO Youth leaders.

Even the Gerakan Youth members lost their precious marbles after hearing UMNO Youth's threats. The Youth wing of Gerakan disassociated itself from the scathing comments of its own vice-chief S Paranjothy yesterday. Gerakan Youth deputy chief Lim Si Pin and party central committee member Kohilan Pillay said the Youth wing was “shocked” by Paranjothy’s statement.

Lim Si Pin and Kholian Pillay are either being NAIVE or simply HYPOCRITICAL?

Gerakan members should ask themselves and to their leaders:

Has the "Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia" become more and more irrelevant to the political landscape of Malaysia or it has past its use-by date , left behind since the days of its founding fathers, Prof Syed Hussein Alatas, Tan Sri Tan Chee Khoon, Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu and Dr. J.B.A. Peter ?

The Current Mandate of the Gerakan Party Leadership

Umno Youth Chief Hishammuddin Hussein hopes Gerakan will explain the racially sensitive remarks allegedly made by its Youth vice-chief S. Paranjothy.

The threat: He added that Umno Youth would make its stance known should a good explanation not be forthcoming from Gerakan. Read here for more

update: On his statement that Umno Youth may consider severing ties with Gerakan if the movement was dissatisfied with the explanation over Paranjothy's remarks, Hishammuddin said it was not a threat against anyone. "I was merely stating the facts."

UMNO Youth's friendly advice to BN Component parties especially MCA, Gerakan and MIC:

DON'T Ever Do What I do, Just Do What I Say.

Commentary

From Roslan SMS Read here for more

"... Sejak kebelakangan ini banyak sungguh suara ketidakpuasan hati kita dengar dari kalangan saf kepimpinan BN sendiri terhadap sama ada BN ataupun Umno selaku tulang-belakang parti komponan tersebut.

Kalau sebelum ini saya pernah paparkan suara-suara keras semasa Perhimpunan Pemuda MCA dan Gerakan, pernah juga Zaid Ibrahim dan Tengku Razaleigh mengkritik, tidak ketinggalan PPP, kini terbaru seorang lagi pemimpin dalam komponan BN bersuara lagi.

Beliau adalah Naib Ketua Pemuda Gerakan Kebangsaan iaitu Sdr S. Paranjothy. Kata Paranjothy Umno khasnya Pemuda Umno memang sentiasa membakar sentimen perkauman di kalangan masyarakat berbilang kaum di Malaysia.

Malah kata beliau isu-isu perkauman sentiasa dibangkitkan oleh Umno untuk kepentingan politik mereka khasnya di kalangan masyarakat Melayu. Lalu yang selalu menjadi mangsa adalah parti-parti komponan dalam BN yang sentiasa menjadi "punching bag" dan batu oncatan untuk Umno meluncur ke atas.

Paranjothy melemparkan serangan ini dalam kenyataan 4 muka beliau berjudul "Discrimination from womb to tomb" ataupun "Diskriminasi dari kandungan sehingga ke liang lahat"!

Cetusan politik ini membuktikan memang BN bermasalah dan memandangkan ianya kerap sangat dibangkitkan sesama mereka maka masalah itu semakin menggunung dan menunggu masa untuk meletup.

Rakyat perlu menggunakan kebijaksanaan bagi menilai semua ini, kalau hak untuk bersuara dan tegur-menegur sesama parti komponan sudah tidak ada sudah dilihat dengan penuh prejudis dan dianggap menderahaka, maka apa lagi hak rakyat untuk menegur dan menuntut untuk didengar. ..."

From Lee Ban Chen: Read here for more on Malaysiakini

......dakwaan-dakwaan bagaimana pemimpin-pemimpin Umno sering mengapi-apikan sentimen perkauman untuk meningkatkan karier politik mereka, malah parti-parti komponen juga sering dijadikan sasaran untuk mencari populariti di kalangan masyarakat Melayu.

Insiden-insiden yang disebut termasuk:

Ketua Menteri Melaka Mohd Ali Rustam yang menghina Parti Progresif Rakyat (PPP),

Ketua Pemuda Umno Hishammuddin Hussein yang menghunus keris di perhimpunan agung Umno,

kenyataan Naib Ketua Pemuda Umno Khairy Jamaluddin bahawa jika Umno lemah kaum lain akan mengambil kesempatan untuk kepentingan mereka, dan

gesaan Ahli Parlimen Parit Sulong Syed Hood Syed Edros supaya tanda salib dan patung Kristian di sekolah-sekolah mubaligh dibuang.

Mudah saja Paranjothy dikorbankan demi “semangat Barisan Nasional” (baca: kemahuan Umno), tetapi pimpinan Gerakan dan parti-parti komponen BN yang lain perlu memberi jawapan kepada soalan-soalan berikut untuk meyakinkan ahli-ahli parti masing-masing:

1. Berbanding dengan kenyataan-kenyataan pemimpin-pemimpin Umno seperti yang disebut oleh Paranjothy dalam kenyataannya, jelas sekali kenyataan-kenyataan terbabit lebih bersifat perkauman daripada kenyataan Paranjothy. Jika Paranjothy harus dipecat, kenapa tiada sesiapa yang berani meminta agar pemimpin-pemimpin Umno terbabit juga dipecat, atau sekurang-kurangnya diambil tindakan tatatertib yang sewajarnya?

2. Jika mengkritik Umno secara terbuka seperti yang dilakukan oleh Paranjothy adalah tidak dibenarkan oleh “semangat Barisan Nasional”, maka adakah mengugut secara terbuka untuk memutuskan hubungan Umno dengan Gerakan seperti perbuatan Hishammuddin Hussein yang jauh lebih serius itu sebaliknya dibenarkan oleh “semangat Barisan Nasional”?

3. Adakah semua pemimpin Umno, termasuk Ketua Pemudanya, bermandat atau dibenarkan mewakili Umno untuk membuat kenyataan yang boleh menjejaskan hubungan baik antara parti-parti komponen BN seperti yang dilakukan oleh Ketua Menteri Melaka Mohd Ali Rustam terhadap Parti Progresif Rakyat (PPP) dan Hishammuddin Hussein terhadap Gerakan?

4. Adakah Umno berkuasa untuk memecat mana-mana parti komponen dari Barisan Nasional, atau hanya pimpinan Barisan Nasional saja yang berkuasa untuk memecatkan mana-mana parti komponennya?

5. Jika saluran dalaman BN untuk menyelesaikan masalah secara tertutup sudah menemui jalan buntunya seperti dalam kes ketidakpuasan golongan pinggiran kaum India yang tercetus sebagai demonstrasi jalanan besar-besaran, selain daripada memprotes secara terbuka, apa gunanya berpaut kepada retorik “semangat Barisan Nasional” lagi mengikut telunjuk Umno?

From reader of Malaysia-Today: Read here for more

"... Dr. Koh is in a hurry to please UMNO. After all, he agreed to UMNO's request to have a deputy CM(the first state in the country) to have an UMNO deputy CM in exchange for UMNO supporting him as CM.

Why were no action taken against the UMNO ultras from Perlis and Melaka at the UMNO G.A. last year when they made racist remarks against the Chinese? They were not even given any warning, and they will continue to climb the political ladder fast.

Why was krismuddin not given any ultimatum by MCA for waving the keris to threaten the non-Malays? Maybe we should ask this keris guy to personally answer. ..."

From reader on Malaysia-Today: Read here for more

"...What happened when the last time when Datuk Seri Dr. Lim Keng Yaik was attacked by UMNO, a fellow BN component party? Is this team work?

Did you Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon seek clarification from UMNO to seek disciplinary action to those who bad-mouthed the former Gerakan President?

From this action, you are losing voters like flies when Gerakan is fighting to hold on to Penang. But most of all, it proves that Gerakan and UMNO do not look at each other as equal...."

From reader on Malaysia-Today: Read here for more

"...What Koh Tsu Koon did is dangerous.

As a leader he did not stand up for his man. And he jumped the gun before taking action. Doesn't Parajonthy have a chance to be heard. Why is he so afraid of UMNO.

He must be shit-worried about his CM post. He need not worry..his actions will alienate the Penang voters.

Gerakan can take any action to including sacking him, but the truth is what Parajonthy said is the truth.

The racial posturing by UMNO, the kris wielding madman. If you can take action for speaking the truth because of the fear of UMNO, Gerakan will be seen as running dogs .."

From "Malaysian State of Mind" Blog: Read here for more

"... Paranjothy merely pointed out the obvious and stated what so many others cannot find the integrity to say themselves. He vocally supported uniting all the BN parties into one single, non-race based party.

If he was wrong-- let's see the truth.

Did Khairy not say that other BN parties would take advantage of a weakened UMNO?

Did the keris waving Hisham not cause a turmoil among other BN component parties? Did Khairy not disparage Indian newspaper delivery groups at last month's UMNO General Assembly?

Did UMNO not ignore the Deepavali holiday and plan its 2007 General Assembly to fall on the principal Hindu holiday of the year?

Did the Government of Malaysia not create a double standard by allowing UMNO/BN youth to hold demonstrations but refuse to allow other groups to do likewise?

If he was wrong in any of these things, show it now.

If not, he should be applauded not alienated. So show us where he was wrong, or GET OFF HIS BACK!