Since then Malaysia has progressed to Shah Alam cow head issue, assaults on places of worship and now some poor pigs who also could not die in peace despite like the cows, sacrificed themselves to provide food for Malaysians.
Badawi , like any decent ex-Malaysian Prime Minister (but still an elected Yang Berhormat/Berkhidmat), is liberated to sing a different tune.
Pak Lah pushes for inter-faith dialogue as way forward to resolve ‘Allah’ crisis
MCA has upped its attempt to secure brownie points by having their own version but I think they forgot to invite someone.
Its president, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, said the organisations include the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism.
Good old Nazri, as usual, have his own view (how I love his 1Malaysia, 2 Terminology approach. Politics First)
Nazri says too late for dialogue on ‘Allah’
Of course, there are good men around in Malaysia that has done the right thing. I read in the Chinese press that the NS police chief held an inter-faith meeting between religious leaders and syabas to the man.
While this IFC is deemed too sensitive, too difficult and too risky for Malaysians to dabble in 21st century age of internet, information explosion, knowledge-base economies, blue sea strategies etc, let's see what Indonesia, the source of our maids (abused or otherwise), construction and factory labour is doing:
JAKARTA : Indonesia will soon formalise an Inter-Religious Council that would bring together leaders from major faiths in the country to anticipate and tackle inter-religious conflicts in the country.
Ad-hoc meetings between leaders of different religious groups in Indonesia are not new. But now they plan to institutionalise it and call it the Indonesia Inter-Religious Council.
Well perhaps we should send observers there to learn a thing or two...oops do we do lawatan sambil belajar to Jakarta or further?
According to Bursa Malaysia records, as at 15 June 2001, PKNNS held 21,357,000 shares representing about 18.7% of the Company’s 114,035,500 issued and paid up ordinary share capital. PKNNS has maintained more or less the same shareholding level from 2001 till 2007.
Things became fast moving and interesting in 2007. Suddenly, a long term strategic investor in PKNNS did something significantly different.
On 26 April 2007, PK sold its subsidiary, Emerald Spirit Sdn Bhd (ES) to Gen Glamour Sdn Bhd. GG paid a total of RM49.3 million either by way of subscribing to share capital of ES or assuming the liabilities of ES
ES owns and runs the Allson Klana Resort in Seremban. (It boasted the biggest resort swimming pool in Malaysia when it was first completed, me thinks)
The disposal by PK was approved by the Foreign Investment Committee on 16 May 2007 subject to certain conditions.
Amazingly, 2 days later, on 18 May 2007, PK made an announcement to the stock exchange that PK and GG agreed to a waive a term in the sales and purchase agreement that required PK shareholders to approve the sale of ES by PK to GG.
“With reference to the announcements made on 3 May 2007 and 26 April 2007 pertaining to the above subject heading, the Board of Directors of PK Resources Berhad wishes to further announce that the parties to the Subscription Agreement dated 26 April 2007 have, on 18 May 2007, agreed that the Conditions Precedent in respect of the Company's Shareholders' Approval as stated in the said Agreement and any provisions related thereto be waived.”
Why the rush and did this violate the provisions of Companies Act, 1965 and interest of the shareholders, like PKNNS?
On 23 August 2007, PKNNS exchanged 11,551,000 PK shares it acquired to obtain 5,474,407 ES shares from GG. On 19 November 2007, PKNNS exchanged its remaining 10,070,000 PK shares with 4,772,512 ES shares owned by GG
The cost of PK shares to PKNNS was RM38,917,800 and according to the valuation approved by the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan, the worth of ES shares acquired was RM17,296,000 – a loss of RM21.6 million! (source: audited accounts of PKNNS for the financial year ended 31 December 2007)
PKNNS has given up a strategic 18.96% hold in a listed company that has diversified interest in property development, education services, quarry, operation of golf and country club and landscaping in exchange for a mere 22.75% shareholding in a sdn bhd which sole assets was a resort in Seremban.
Based on the audited accounts as at 31 December 2007 of PK and ES, the net assets of PK and ES were RM558million and RM45million respectively. Had PKNNS not made the share exchange, PKNNS would have a holding of 18.96% in PK which amounted to RM105.8million but instead it ended up with a mere 22.75% in ES which was about RM10.3million.
A reasonable man who wonder about the following:
1) What is the rational for giving up so much to gain so little?
2) Did PKNNS, with its responsibility to uphold the economic well-being and development of the state of Negeri Sembilan, taken sufficient due care to consider the viability of this corporate exercise, e.g. payback period, return on investment etc?
3) Given the short time frame (GG acquired the shares in May and concluded the exchange with PKNNS took place within 6 months), did the Board of Directors of PKNNS performed a proper due diligence to ensure the economic interest of the state and rakyat been properly protected? (normal corporate exercise takes months or even a year before it can be completed)
Here are the answers given by the Menteri Besar of Negeri Sembilan during the DUN sitting in October, which revealed and justified very little or a lot, form your own opinion:
"i. ...pihak PKNNS mempunyai satu matlamat iaitu untuk menjadi sebagai pemegang saham minoriti dari 19% di dalam PK Resources Berhad ke 22.75% di dalam Emerald Spirit Sdn Bhd..."
"ii pembelian dan penjualan saham-saham berkaitan telah melalui proses kelulusan serta penilaian yang sewajarnya telah dibuat dari segi ekonomi, kewangan dan lain-lain secara terperinci dengan mengambil kira fakta impak. Kajian telah dibuat dan taklimat sewajarnya telah diberikan kepada Lembaga Pengarah di dalam membuat keputusan yang bijak untuk bergabung dengan agensi kerajaan Negeri yang lain untuk menguasai pegangan dalam Syarikat Espirit Sdn Bhd"
My own conclusion is
1) What good does it bring to become a minority shareholder in a sdn bhd? You are under the thumb of the majority shareholder
2) First time I hear someone's ambition to become a minority shareholder in a sdn bhd, is that a good investment objective?
3) Any financial consultant with a wee bit of experience would wonder who was the valuer; who did the financial appraisal of the investment and result of the appraisal; who gave the briefing (taklimat); how come a financial due dilligence worth tens of millions can be concluded so fast; who were in the Lembaga Pengarah that voted for the transaction?
In her writing the 31st December's High Court judgment allowing Catholic paper publication 'The Herald' to use the word 'Allah is its BM section, Justice Lau Bee Lan cited the following reasons behind her conclusion:
1. The word “Allah” is the correct Bahasa Malaysia word for “God” and in the Bahasa Malaysia translation of the Bible, “God” is translated as “Allah” and “Lord” is translated as “Tuhan”;
2. For 15 centuries, Christians and Muslims in Arabic-speaking countries have been using the word “Allah” in reference to the One God. The Catholic Church in Malaysia and Indonesia and the greater majority of other Christian denominations hold that “Allah” is the legitimate word for “God” in Bahasa Malaysia;
3. The Malay language has been the lingua franca of many Catholic believers for several centuries especially those living in Melaka and Penang and their descendants in Peninsular Malaysia have practised a culture of speaking and praying in the Malay language;
4. The word “God” has been translated as “Allah” in the “Istilah Agama Kristian Bahasa Inggeris ke Bahasa Malaysia” first published by the Catholic Bishops Conference of Malaysia in 1989;
5. The Malay-Latin dictionary published in 1631 had translated “Deus” (the Latin word for God) as “Alla” as the Malay translation;
6. The Christian usage of the word “Allah” predates Islam being the name of God in the old Arabic Bible as well as in the modern Arabic Bible used by Christians in Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and other places in Asia, Africa, etc;
7. In Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesia, the word “Allah” has been used continuously in the printed edition of the Matthew’s Gospel in Malaysia in 1629, in the first complete Malay Bible in 1733 and in the second complete Malay Bible in 1879 until today in the Perjanjian Baru and the Alkitab;
8. Munshi Abdullah who is considered the father of modern Malay literature had translated the Gospels into Malay in 1852 and he translated the word “God” as “Allah”;
9. There was already a Bible translated into Bahasa Melayu in existence before 1957 which translation was carried out by the British and Foreign Bible Society where the word “Allah” was used;
10. There was also already in existence a Prayer Book published in Singapore on 3.1.1905 where the word “Allah” was used;
11. There was also a publication entitled “An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine” published in 1895 where the word “Allah” was used.
12. Anther publication entitled “Hikajat Elkaniset” published in 1874 also contains the word “Allah”
13. The Bahasa Indonesia and the Bahasa Malaysia translations of the Holy Bible, which is the Holy Scriptures of Christians, have been used by the Christian natives of Peninsular Malaysia; Sabah and Sarawak for generations;
14. The Bahasa Malaysia speaking Christian natives of Peninsular Malaysia, Sarawak and Sabah had always and have continuously the word “Allah” for generations and the word “Allah” is used in the Bahasa Malaysia and Bahasa Indonesian translations of the Bible used throught Malaysia;
15. At least for the last three decades the Bahasa Malaysia congregation of the Catholic Church have been freely using the Alkitab, the Bahasa Indonesia translation of the Holy Bible wherein the word “Allah appears;
16. The said publication is a Catholic weekly as stated on the cover of the weekly and is intended for the dissemination of news and information on the Catholic Church in Malaysia and elsewhere and is not for sale or distribution outside the Church;
17. The said publication is not made available to members of the public and in particular to persons professing the religion of Islam;
18. The said publication contains nothing which is likely to cause public alarm and/or which touches on the sensitivities of the religion of Islam and in the fourteen years of the said publication there has never been any untoward incident arising from the Applicant’s use of the word “Allah” in the said publication;
19. In any event the word “Allah” has been used by Christians in all countries where the Arabic language is used as well as in Indonesian/Malay language without any problems and/or breach of public order/ and/or sensitivity to persons professing the religion of Islam in these countries;
20. Islam and the control and restriction of religious doctrine or belief among Muslims professing the religion of Islam is a state matter and the Federal Government has no jurisdiction over such matters of Islam save in the federal territories
21. The subsequent exemption vide P.U.(A) 134/82 which permits the Alkitab to be used by Christians in churches ipso facto permits the use of the word “Allah” in the said publication;
22. The Bahasa Malaysia speaking congregation of the Catholic Church uses the word “Allah” for worship and instruction and that the same is permitted in the Al-Kitab.
You can get a lengthier report here.
But why only now...?
Interestingly, this goes back to the Mahathir years, right here. Anyway, I'm publishing excerpts from another source, to retain info for my own personal reference in case the link above is lost. I will always remember the 'Allah' case well- because it was one (amongst a few more) of the reasons I started social-political blogging. Back in January 2008, I read through online news the Cabinet had re instituted the cancellation of The Herald's publishing license for using the word 'Allah' in its Malay section. I had thought this was unconstitutional... and what an abusive government.
PMs assured Christians of use of "Allah"
Thursday, 14 January 2010 08:02am
The Nut Graph
By Ding Jo-Ann
PETALING JAYA, 13 Jan 2010: Even though the government banned the use of "Allah" by non-Muslims in 1986, the churches refrained from court action for more than 20 years because of assurances from two prime ministers.
Council of Churches of Malaysia general secretary Rev Dr Hermen Shastri told The Nut Graph that Christian leaders were assured that "Allah" could be used, as long as it was limited to within the Christian community. This was in spite of a 1986 government gazette and 1988 state enactments that declared the words "Allah", "solat", "ka'abah" and "Baitullah" as exclusive to Islam.
"(Former Prime Minister Tun Dr) Mahathir (Mohamad's) position was if Christians use the word 'Allah' among ourselves, sell our bibles in Christian bookshops, and indicate it's a Christian publication, then that was fine," said Shastri.
"Mahathir and [Tun Abdullah Ahmad] Badawi both assured the Christian community that it would not be an issue [using 'Allah'] within our community."
Shastri said although they did not agree with the government gazette and state enactments, the church refrained from legal action in the interest of national harmony because Mahathir had said the issue was sensitive.
Shastri stressed that Christians did not use "Allah" to slight Muslims. Rather, "it's part and parcel of our spiritual and devotional life," he said.
Issue not new
Shastri also said it was unfair to describe the issue of Christians using "Allah" as new, as some have claimed.
He explained that Christians have been encountering intermittent problems for the past two decades, such as Bahasa Indonesia bibles being held at customs, or the occasional compact disc being confiscated.
The items however, were usually released on a case-by-case basis after the prime minister's intervention, he said.
Shastri said this understanding with the government broke down when Catholic paper Herald was banned from using "Allah" by the Home Ministry in their Bahasa Malaysia publication in 2007.
"The Herald had no other choice. The only way open was to take the matter to court," he said.
Challenging the state
Andrew Khoo, lawyer and legal adviser to the Anglican Bishop of West Malaysia, said the 1986 gazette should have been challenged when it was first issued.
But Khoo noted that it was usual for such issues to have been discussed privately and resolved quietly, which could also explain the delay in legal action being taken.
"Perhaps we were satisfied with the then prime minister's assurances," Khoo said.
Khoo added that in 1988, there was no desire to confront the issue by suing the government in court.
This reluctance was in the wake of Operasi Lalang in 1987, where more than 100 people from civil society, including church members, and opposition leaders were detained without trial under the Internal Security Act. The crackdown was followed by the removal of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas in 1988.
With regard to the 1988 state enactments on the use of "Allah", Khoo said no one had been prosecuted thus far.
"The enactments can't be challenged unless there's a prosecution," Khoo said.
He noted that the preamble of the Selangor enactment states that the law intended to "control and restrict the propagation of non-Islamic religious doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam."
"Although the section [on the use of 'Allah'] is very wide, the preamble sets the context," said Khoo, adding that the imposed condition, while not ideal, was workable.
According to Dato Tan Lian Hoe, Timbalan Menteri Kementerian Perdagangan Dalam Negeri Dan Hal Ehwal Pengguna, the ministry will implement a project called "1 Parliament Seat 1 wholesaler" to ensure proper distribution and security of supply of sugar.
According to the Deputy Minister, the supply of sugar is sufficient but the only problem is with the distance of supply runs. Some suppliers refused to transport sugar to remote places. Presently, there are sugar obtained from Perak being delivered from Penang and some sugar in Perak being supplied to Selangor.
To address these issues, the ministry would launch the above project, via the appointed sugar supplier designated according to parliamentary seat boundaries, to cater to the sugar demands of the market. Retailers can directly obtain supply from the appointed wholeseller to ensure no shortage of sugar supply.
The Deputy Minister has articulated the problem of sugar supply well, i.e. fault in supply chain, transport route and business community emphasizing on profitable routes etc
What I cannot comprehend is, the solution of the supply route can be solved by a "supply grind" designed by Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya. Did SPR consulted the Transport Minsitry, Lorry Drivers' Association, reputable logistic companies, public transport companies to iron all these out?
I wonder if the criteria SPR used in chalking up seat areas reconcile perfectly with the supply route in this country. The article unfortunately did not state if the deputy minister explained how the supply route grind within each constituency is the best designed route system.
I heard plenty of griping about gerrymandering like something like 5,000 voters in Putrajaya and 50,000 voters in Kapar or stuff like that..... so I suppose this complaint, notably by Bersih is unfounded because per the Ministry's plan, there is no such thing as gerrymandering and SPR actually designed constituency areas by supply route.
Call me paranoid or whatever, giving a wholesaler a "ministry stamp" sounds like a tacit monopoly endorsement to me. In large constituency areas like Seputeh, why interfer with market? What is the criteria for selection and is the supplier list for controlled items a public document? What would happen to the other wholesellers/suppliers in the market?
We usually hear criticism about don't politicalise this and politicalise that so by fitting sugar supply chain into designated political arena, yeah right, I am not suppose to politicalise this......
Jan 14, 2010
Boy burned books, causing inferno
Teen's mischief last year caused $3.3m in damage to mosque
By Elena Chong, Courts Correspondent
An upset teen set two books on fire in a room and left. The fire subsequently spread to other parts of the Kampung Siglap Mosque. -- PHOTO: BERITA HARIAN
A 14-YEAR-OLD boy, upset that his father thought so little of him, vented his frustration by setting alight two religious books in a mosque. The resulting inferno on Oct 6 last year caused about $3.3million in damage to the Kampung Siglap Mosque in Marine Parade Road.
The teenager admitted yesterday to committing mischief by fire, and pleaded guilty to unlawfully entering Apex Harmony Lodge, a Pasir Ris nursing home, with theft in mind.
Yesterday, the boy stood next to his parents in the courtroom.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Nicholas Khoo said the boy had run away from home on Oct 4, feeling that his father did not love him. He was afraid to go home, as he feared his father would threaten to send him away again to a religious school in Malaysia.
He slept the next night at the mosque, and awoke the following day frustrated with his life and with how his father had berated him for being stupid and unable to memorise the Quran.
That afternoon, he went to the women's prayer section on the second floor and set two books on fire with a cigarette lighter.
He then left the room. The fire subsequently spread to other parts of the mosque, including its main prayer hall, and had to be put out by the Singapore Civil Defence Force. No one was hurt.
Closed-circuit TV cameras at the mosque caught the boy entering and leaving the second floor. Cameras at the nursing home also caught him loitering in the compound in the early hours of Oct 4.
The boy's lawyer Hussien Abdul Latiff said his client never intended or knew that his act would cause that much damage.
He explained that the former madrasah student was more inclined to religious education, having fared better in religious subjects than in the secular ones. He added that the boy's father wanted to put him in a religious institution in East Java, Indonesia.
Mr Hussien asked the court to call for a pre-sentencing report to weigh the merits of this against those of sending him to a Muslim home for children.
DPP Khoo, who did not object to probation, called for a more structured probation to include a stay at the Singapore Boys' Home, given the seriousness of the boy's offence and his parents' inability to control him.
The boy shook his head when asked if he wished to say anything. Judge Lim Keng Yeow postponed sentencing, pending a probation report due on Feb 9.
Inside Story presenter Nick Clark is joined by Khairul Faiz Morat, the vice president of international affairs of the Malaysian Islamic Youth Movement, Reverend Herman Shastri, the general secretary of the Council of Churches of Malaysia, and Zachary Abuza, a professor of political science at Simmons College specialising in the politics of Southeast Asia.
David Drummond, Google's chief legal officer, wrote on the company's official blog that Google uncovered a broad hacking attempt in December that was targeted at more than 20 technology, finance, media and chemical companies. A primary target may have been the Gmail accounts of Chinese human-rights activists. "These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered — combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web — have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China," he wrote. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton quickly issued a statement that Google's allegations raised serious concerns. "We look to the Chinese government for an explanation," the Jan. 12 statement read. "The ability to operate with confidence in cyberspace is critical in a modern society and economy." (See pictures of life in the Googleplex.)
This morning in Beijing, Google.cn was returning results for sensitive topics like the Dalai Lama and the banned Falun Gong spiritual movement. Previously, a search for "Tiananmen" would only return results about the square itself, while noting that because of government restrictions some content was unavailable. Now Google.cn links to pages that include information about the bloody government crackdown in 1989, though the page appears to have fluctuated between uncensored and censored over the course of the day.
Google has long struggled to expand its China operations. After its search engine was routinely blocked or slowed by China's system of Internet controls, it created the filtered Google.cn in 2006. The hope was that by censoring select results, it would speed up searches for Chinese users.
But the decision to offer a censored search page prompted an outcry from human-rights activists and some members of Congress that the company was turning a blind eye to its "Don't be evil" motto for the sake of access to the lucrative Chinese market. "Google came into the market bending some of its own rules," says Mark Natkin, managing director of Marbridge Consulting in Beijing. "It was intoxicated with the prospect of this enormous and still just-beginning-to-develop market. I think it always knew it was already having a little bit of misgiving about being in the market, but it couldn't pass it up."
In the end, Google's compromises did little to help its position on the mainland. Average Chinese Web users never warmed to the company's services, and it came under repeated attacks from the authorities and state media for providing links to pornography. "They were trying to find a way to compromise without completely bending over and it turned out they couldn't win," says Rebecca MacKinnon, an expert on the Chinese Internet. "Over the past year they've been under growing pressure from the government to censor more tightly and been condemned in the Chinese media for exposing children to porn." Baidu, a Chinese search engine with a Google-lookalike home page, has used its better relationship with authorities and its indigenous appeal as a domestic company to surge past Google. Baidu was the first choice for 77% of Chinese Internet users, compared to 13% for Google, according to a September 2009 survey by the state-run China Internet Network Information Center. (See pictures of the making of modern China.)
By dropping its censorship, the company stands to regain some of the moral clout. Today, several Chinese bloggers delivered flowers to the company's Beijing headquarters to thank it for its new stand. "It's a public message that some people in China are picking up on," says MacKinnon. "A large Internet company, the largest in some ways and most influential globally, is saying publicly that the Chinese government's behavior is unacceptable, and that can't fail to resonate."
Google says it will discuss with the government how it will go about running an uncensored search engine in China. "We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China," wrote Drummond, the Google executive, on the Google blog. Given the company's tempestuous four years in China, the odds the authorities will now compromise are slim.
“He did not tell me so it did not happen,”
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 8 – IGP Tan Sri Musa Hasan denied reports of a church attack in Kampung Subang even though Selangor CPO Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar had confirmed the incident.
Ok, if I give Najib the benefit of doubt and he earns his salary from our tax money and he is entrusted with the responsibility of running the country, can he at least let us know who are responsible for contempt of court, betrayal of all religion, treason to the nation and threatening the lives and properties of their fellow countrymen?
And I would like to see what the Royalties have to say about this. His Royal Highness have a pivotal religious role in this country and I hope His Royal Highness can exercise his wisdom and address this serious issue and save our country.
From Reuters India
KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - A church in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur was firebombed early on Friday, gutting the first storey of the building in a residential area, amid a row over the use of the word "Allah" for the Christian God.
"It is confirmed that Desa Melawati church was burnt, at about 12.25 am in the morning. There were no fatalities. We are investigating the incident and suspect foul play," said Kuala Lumpur Chief Police Officer Mohammad Sabtu Osman.
A court ruling last week allowing Catholic newpaper The Herald to use "Allah" for the Christian God has been appealed by the government of the mainly Muslim nation of 28 million people.
The issue has threatened relations between the majority Malay Muslim population and the minority ethnic Chinese and Indian populations who practise a range of religions including Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism.
Malaysian Muslims, who account for around 60 percent of the population, are set to protest on Friday against the ruling.
The church that was burned on Friday was part of a group called "The Assembly of God".
Many churches in Malaysia are situated in residential or retail areas and often occupy a small lot.
According to 2007 statistics, there are 333 Assembly of God churches in Malaysia.
"There are witness reports two persons on a motorbike came near the entrance and hurled in something looking like a petrol bomb. Our church is 90 percent gutted (on the first floor)," said church spokesman Kevin Ang from the Metro Tabernacle Assembly of God.
It is illegal for non-Muslims to proselytise to Muslims although freedom of worship for the mainly Buddhist, Christian and Hindu religious minorities who make up 40 percent of the population is guaranteed under the country's constitution.
The use of "Allah" has been common among non-English speaking Malaysian Christians in the Borneo island states of Sabah and Sarawak for decades and without any incident.
Left: Keep your cool while we burn down a few more churches okie? Hehe. Meanwhile, do not do anything that might aggravate the situation ok.
KUALA LUMPUR: Tan Sri Musa Hassan has warned those planning to stage protest rallies against the use of the word “Allah” by non-Muslims to be cool-headed and not create problems. Otherwise, he said, police would not hesitate to take stern action against them.
The Inspector General of Police said police would monitor the situation, adding that those who posed any threat to the safety of the people and nation would face action.
“Do not do anything that might aggravate the situation.
“We must practise caution when dealing with religious issues because they are very sensitive,” Musa told reporters after opening a Innovative and Quality Manage-ment seminar for police here yesterday.
God means love in many places, but in Malaysia it can also mean politics. That's the takeaway from the United Malays National Organization-led government's attempt to quash the use of the word "Allah" by non-Muslim groups.
At issue is the Catholic Herald's two-year court battle to use the A-word in its Malay-language edition?which it claims it needs to do because there's no other suitable word for "God" in Malay. Last week, the High Court overturned an arbitrary government ban. Yesterday, however, the church agreed to a stay of the decision?at the government's request?until the ruling can be appealed. So the Herald is once again muzzled.
Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail characterized the decision as "a matter of national interest," which implies that somehow Muslims across Malaysia would revolt if the Herald were allowed to reference God in another language. Never mind that Malaysians of many faiths have peacefully co-existed for decades.
The real reason UMNO is politicizing the issue and pandering to its conservative base may be to deflect attention from its own political vulnerabilities. The opposition coalition, led by Anwar Ibrahim, has gained popularity by touting a vision of a secular country in which all religions have equal rights. Even the opposition's Islamic partner, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party?which hasn't always supported liberal ideas?issued a statement Monday saying that the Herald's use of "Allah" is its constitutional right.
Prime Minister Najib Razak called the A-word controversy a "sensitive issue" Sunday. But by allowing his party to continue curtailing freedom of speech, he is only stirring tensions. What a disappointment for a man who ran for office promising to create "One Malaysia."
What I am more concern about is the stand adopted by consumers of tax payers' money. (Fine if their livelihood is not entirely dependant on it .... but leave this issue to another day, ok?)
Home Ministry to allow protests against ‘Allah’ ruling
PUTRAJAYA, Jan 6- The Home Ministry will allow a public demonstration against the “Allah” ruling, planned by Muslim groups this Friday at the Kampung Baru mosque here, to proceed and will only take action if “things get out of hand.”
“There is a balance that needs to be addressed. We (the Home Ministry) have faced this situation before. Right now, if you do not allow the protest, it will cause a lot of emotional reaction. But if you also allow it, it might turn into a security threat,” explained Hishammuddin.
Are they suppose to be be public servants first and politicians second or politicians first and public servant second?
Politics is a game about whipping up enough support for oneself and even generating ill-feelings towards your opponent. However, there must be a limit to this. There must be an application of good taste, common sense and accountability in playing these mind games; especially one is holding a ministerial office and getting paid by tax payers of all race and religion.
The political currency of BN component parties are well known so after getting numb initially reading the above piece, I suppose there is no surprise at all, given Hishammuddin's keris exploits pre-GE12. I anticipate the Court of Appeal will overrule the High Court decision, why much ado over something so little?
I expect an elected administration to be consistent in application of laws.
If stern police action has been taken against cyclists, coffee drinkers, teddy bear givers, candle light holders and even lawyers trying to see their clients in the police station, why is there exemption for this one?
If the Minister says he is giving in into emotional reaction, then he is saying that he will bend the law because of emotions. By the same token, if a judge feels sorry for a rapist with blue balls syndrome then should the judge apply the relevant sections of the penal codes differently?
The Minister has to be consistent. Anti-ISA protest on 1 August 2009 was an emotional event. The Perak DUN grab generated emotional gatherings as well. The street protest after Anwar's conviction by the late Augustine Paul was also an emotional event but on all occasions, the need to let people pour out their emotion, in Hishammuddin words, takes a second seat. Tear gas, mass road blocks and detention were the call of the days.
The position of judiciary in Malaysia also needs scrutiny. By holding such mass-demonstration, can this be construed as a state of lawlessness and contempt of court? An orderly society with respect to laws and regulations will progress economically and socially. All this talk about creating high value income jobs in Malaysia, Vision 2020 can go out of the window if we degenerate into that.
Najib once said we need to go Glokal. Fine dump the Jaguh Kampung tag. If the protesters have such strong conviction then for goodness sake extend your protests to Indonesia and Arabia whereby non-muslims there have been using the same term as well. Take your protest to the relevant international forum, why stop at Kampung Baru? It would be heartening for me to see Malaysians taking a firm stand and getting international community backing for their stand, whether the stand is on human rights, religion, environment issues etc.
This term usage term has been around for ages and yet, only now it was raised as an explosive issue. If our grandfathers and fathers did not kick up the fuss, why now?
Jet engine theft: AG clears top brass
Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail told a press conference today that initial investigations revealed only "rank-and-file" RMAF personnel were behind the disappearance of the two jet engines worth a total of RM100 million -- a case that has embarrassed the air force.
He however did not disclose the number of personnel responsible for the theft of the engines that reportedly went missing when it was sent for maintenance and were taken to Uruguay via Argentina.
"No senior officers are involved…only by those who can be described as ‘rank and file. We will be taking the next course of action (against them) in the very near future," said Abdul Gani. He declined to say when prosecution will take place.
The lack of information is puzzling. If the AG is so sure only low level grunts (a slang for infantrymen used in the American Vietnam War, here I sorta borrow it as it sounds nicer than rank and file) why not disclose the number of them involved?
And if the AG is so sure only low level grunts are involved, why not just get the trial over as soon as it can and fix a date?
Just what is so complicated about this?
In any military organisation, even the fly by night terrorist in the mountain ones, the grunts are suppose to follow orders, not give them.
I wonder how a few grunts can
1) gain access into secured inventory,
2) commandeered moving and transporting equipment and vehicles,
3) breezed past armed guards at the gate,
4) go missing during reveille and not get noticed,
4) cover up during inspection and inventory check,
5) arrange for meeting up with foreign buyers,
6) clear the custom inspection,
and perhaps like all good exporters, purchase marine transit insurance.
I hope the trial can start as soon as possible as I want to find out how many of them and what do they look like (hope there is no more t-shirt as face mask stuff like the last one involving a couple of policemen) and just how did the grunts do all the above and much more.
I never know low ranking personnel can be so empowered here. Sigh once at a training seminar, I was told that middle management are getting the worst of deals. Maybe the consultant has a point