Protes: "There Is No Democracy..."

The following was published on MSN on January 26, 2007 in regards to the Protes rally that was recently held in front of KLCC:

Malaysian police on Saturday detained dozens of people including a journalist at the capital's iconic Petronas Twin Towers, as they clamped down on an anti-government protest.

Up to 50 people, including many from opposition parties, were hauled away in police trucks. As they were driven off some shouted "Reformasi" or "Reform" which was the catchcry of dissident former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim.

The protest -- the latest in an unprecedented series of street rallies -- had been aimed at highlighting public anger over rising prices of food and fuel, ahead of elections expected to be held in March.

Police, who had warned the protest was illegal, turned out in their hundreds to disperse the gathering of about 100 people at the Twin Towers, which were barricaded and under heavy guard.

"We're not causing any problems, we're just saying that prices are going up and the poor are hurting," Socialist Party of Malaysia chairman Mohamed Nasir told AFP before he was taken away by police.

"The leadership is paranoid, there's no democracy," he said.

Indeed, let’s be honest with ourselves. There is no democracy.

It wasn’t too long ago that Malaysians were treated to the sentence ‘We are a democracy’ being spouted from various yawning orifices of our more prominent of ministers. From Datuk Mohamed Nazri to Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin, this word was thrown around quite lightly without due regard on what it really meant.

With the general elections drawing close, I feel that it is important that we revisit this topic, because if we don’t even know where we’re supposed to be standing, how on earth will we know where we’re supposed to be heading?

To start, let’s look at what the word ‘democracy’ really means. Taken from the Greek words demos, meaning people, and krateo, meaning rule; the literal translation of the word democracy is ‘rule of the people’. It should be note that the ‘rule of the people’, is applied to all of the people.

Remember that, guys. Not just some of the people, not even most of the people, but all the people.

Unfortunately, our ruling coalition does not quite seem to be able to grasp this definition, probably because most of those who populate its ranks have an average IQ of about 55, and are thusly eligible for handicapped parking at Tesco.

So when the ruling party quotes to the masses and the international media that our country is a democracy merely because it has been elected by a majority mandate, it is obvious that our government is not perpetuating a democracy, but rather a fiction of one.

Think about it. If a democracy is to represent all of the people, then elections are a rather undemocratic way of setting up a democratic government, isn’t it? After all, there has never been – and if I may add, there never will be - a democratic government that has been elected with a 100% mandate from the people.

Does this mean that democracy as a theory of governance is a farce? Hardly.

Governments elected from a mandate of the majority can be constituted as a democratic government if - and only if - it recognizes and protects the basic rights of each and every citizen it claims to govern.

And it is here that our ruling coalition seems to have lost the thread of democratic observances. Once a government respects these rights, as enshrined by various constitutions in various nations, then - and only then - can a government derive its powers from consent of those it governs.

In the Ethics of Democracy, Louis F. Post notes that there are two classes of rights in human society; those pertaining to individual rights (self governance), and those pertaining to the community rights. It is surprisingly natural that many individuals believe that the rights of the community supersede that of the rights of the individual.

The perpetuation of this belief perhaps lies with the perception that individual rights are often seen as anarchist. But as stated within Robert Clancy’s adaptation of this:

"Self government implies that as to individual rights individuals shall govern themselves, free from all governmental interference, upon the sole condition that they respect the individual rights of other individuals - and that as to community rights, each individual shall have a voice, and that the majority vote shall be taken as the corporate expression. But even the majority vote cannot deprive individuals of their rights."

Those rights include the right to gather together and protest.

Many – including our ruling coalition - mistakenly hold that the rights of the community supplant that of the rights of the majority. In regards to this, many a Star Trek fan is able to quote a particularly memorable line about this from the movie ‘Wrath of Khan’, where Spock said:

"Were I to invoke logic, however, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

That demarcation of self sacrifice is often quoted as a delineating line for many a government that claims to be a democracy, but it is one that is ultimately flawed. After all, we are not talking about killing one’s self to save an entire Starship from being blown up in a space soap opera.

However, our government is quite fond of reinforcing this belief, as the ruling coalition is often seen as taking the stance that the views of the minority should not be given any weight as they have been given the mandate by the majority, even though they themselves do not have a clue about what the views of the majority are.

If the ruling coalition is truly ignorant of the fact that their supposed mandate by the majority is merely a fiction boggles the mind. If the ruling coalition does understand this, but continues with their single-minded perpetuation and systematic abuse of this fiction is just another form of tyrannical domination of the masses.

In his article, How Do We Measure the Will of the People?, Professor Jack Balkin commented about this by saying:

"…'the will of the people' is a legal and political fiction. Real people do have real desires and real values. And when the state ignores them and oppresses them, that oppression is real too. Yet the 'will of the people' that politicians are constantly prattling on about does not precede the political process. Rather, it is constructed by that process."

Do you hear that, you prats? If you don’t, then let me put it in the simplest of layman’s terms: As representatives of the people, you’re expendable.

Add to this, the fact that there are claims from some quarters that the process – that is, the electoral system – is flawed and has been abused (curtailed for political mileage, if you know what they mean), then I for one would like to question our government’s claims as to the validity of us being a true democracy.

Given the fact that our ruling coalition no longer recognizes 'the voice of the people' is self evident in the manner it is demonizes the BERSIH and the Hindraft rallies, and now the Protes rally, it can no longer say that is exerts ‘the will of the people’, but rather its own self serving delusions in its desire to maintain its status quo as the ruling coalition.

As artfully capped by Robert Clancy:

"The equality of all people is the tap-root of democracy. Not equality in size, strength, intellect or will, but that all are endowed with equal rights, with inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

“No form of government has any right to coerce an individual regarding his or her individual concerns. Such coercion is an invasion, an aggression, and it does not cease to be such because the invader is a government instead of an individual, or a mob."

Read more...

Md Zin, His Arrogance, Hadhari & the word Allah

Let me tell you what little I know of this man.

Although the reason I started this blog was to air my own views. I would encourage you to decide your own opinion of him.

My view?
This man is publicity hungry. He cannot let anything or anyone outdo him :D (Purely my own humble opinion, you don't have to agree with me).

2005

Just Perfect.
In 2005, Zin came to the headlines when he declared the amendment to the Islamic Family Law (Federal Territories) Bill 2005 'perfect'.

Prime Minister’s Department, Abdullah Md Zin, has declared the Bill “perfect” and “without comparison among all countries in the world”. (Berita Harian, Wednesday, 28 December 2005.)

What's the big deal, you ask? Well, in 2005 the Upper House of the Malaysian Parliament passed the Bill amendment unanimously despite it being extremely damaging to women. How they did it? They were sneaky about it. It was done without any due consideration to the many voices against it and also without transparency. (Sound familiar to you? Think of Rashid, EC chairman.)

And Zin, being the 'ultimate authority' in Islam in this country, said that the amendment was 'perfect'.

Details of the five clauses of the Bill that were objected to were:

1. Making polygamy easier by amending the existing condition of “just and necessary” to “just or necessary”.

2. Increasing the husband’s power to divorce by extending fasakh - judicial order for dissolution of marriage - to the husband as well. The provision for fasakh previously granted women 12 grounds for divorce. The amendment to this is discriminatory because the husband still retains his unilateral right to divorce (talak) anywhere, anytime without reason, and even through sms.

3. Enabling husbands to prevent the disposition of property by a wife or former wife, in order to protect the husband or former husband’s financial claims on the woman’s property. This amendment, already adopted in Johor state, has led to our first case of a husband obtaining a court order to freeze the bank accounts of his wife in order to claim matrimonial property.

4. Removing the husband’s responsibility of maintenance in cases of polygamy or divorce. A new section forces the wife of her polygamous husband to choose, as alternatives, either to apply for order of maintenance or to apply for order of division on joint matrimonial property (harta sepencarian).

5. Enabling the husband to claim harta sepencarian from his wife or existing wives, in cases of polygamy or divorce.

Read the issue from Sisters In Islam here.

In reality Islam actually protects the rights of women. Yes folks, believe it or not. Whatever misconceptions some people have, in my opinion, Islam actually protects women's rights. But Zin, being such an authority on Islam, is agreeing to 'improve' Islam by robbing women of their rights and passing it along to the men.

I guess this is the idea of Islam Hadhari huh? To improve an existing religion which prides itself on being untampered since it first began. Fantastic.

2006

Arrogance.
In mid 2006, the Perak Mufti came out on TV3 and said that there is a concern regarding the large number of Muslim apostates (murtad) numbering up to 100,000 in Malaysia as reported by an NGO. Next, TV3 interviewed Zin who is Minister in PMs department (in charge of 'religious affairs').. Zin's response to the Perak Mufti?

"...Siapa dia?....Dia yang perlu menjawab pada saya....Sekarang ni, siapa yang besar, dia atau saya?..."
(Who does he think he is?...He is answerable to me... Now, who is bigger (powerful), him or me?...")

On top of that, Zin even said that there is no need for him to go and meet the Mufti because the Mufti should be the one approaching him, considering his ranking now.

Muahahahahahaha! I laughed my head off! He really belongs in UMNO. Such display of arrogance and idiocy is so becoming of an UMNO member. This man, throws around his position and rank when talking about matters of religion. Listen, I am a Muslim, but I don't have to be one to find this sort of behavior disgusting.

You know what? He probably felt smart saying it, too.

My point here is his arrogance. A good leader will listen to his subjects first, and then make decisions on the issue. The Perak Mufti's concern may be unfounded, but Zin's response is really unbecoming of a person in the position of power.

Lost his backbone?
Another incident in 2006 where Mohd Fauzi Mustaffar, Head of Syariah department in Takaful sent emails to all Takaful staff forbidding them for greeting Hindu friends Happy Deepavali and Ponggal as it makes them apostates.

Zin, being the 'tiger' that he is, disassociated himself from the issue and merely stated that the email is without any 'religious authority' and stressed that in a multi-religious and multi-racial country like Malaysia, it is important to live in harmony and be nice to one another. (Gee, Zin, I didn't know we had to be nice!)

The high ranking and arrogant Zin, did NOT demand that Fauzi make a full retraction and a public apology. Instead, guess who went to meet with Takaful CEO, Mohd Azmi Abu Bakar? Surprise, surprise! DAP Lim Guan Eng. He was the one who gave Takaful 48 hours to direct Fauzi to apologise to the Indian community.

After Lim (DAP) met with Takaful CEO along with some NGOs, then and only then did Fauzi (the bigotted swine - sorry a bit angry here) apologise and retract his email. (He wasn't convincingly apologetic, but he apologised nonetheless).

Who stood up for Islam and Hindu? A Chinese man from DAP did! Talk about ironic. Where was Zin with his high rank and arrogance? As with all UMNO/BN people, they lose their tongues immediately when the going gets tough. But I must say thanks to Lim for doing the right thing. He saved Muslims and Islam from being misunderstood and saved the Indians and Hindus from being ostracized by their Muslim friends. (Read)

Lost his tongue?
On another issue: Zin, in his 'high and mighty-ness', suddenly shrunk to the size of a wrinkled nut when asked about the Lina Joy case. He declined to comment and his spokes person referred question to the government's Department of Islamic Development where officials declined comment too. (here)

Aik, maggots got your tongue ke? Zin, if you can't answer a difficult question, what kind of authority are you? Oh, I forgot, you're the authority on the usage of the word 'Allah'. Why don't you go join Dewan Bahasa & Pustaka then, if you're so smart?

2007

Inconsiderate.
There's more. In August 2007, Zin fully endorsed and agreed with the statements made by the Chief Justice and Attorney General of Malaysia advocating the replacement of the legal system in Malaysia. The CJ called for the abolition of the English Common Law and replacing it with Syariah and customary law.

The editorial of Utusan Malaysia of the same day called for a repeal of section 3 of the Civil Law Act of 1956 to be replaced with a mixture of Syariah and customary laws to form the basis of a Malaysian common law. As a result, my two favorite knuckleheads and future bak choy fertilizer (Nazri and Zin) agreed. One future fertilizer, Md Zin, welcomed the suggestion to implement Syariah to replace the common law and even advocated that it be done in stages (Utusan, 24/8/2007). (read)

I have no problem with Syariah law. Really, I don't. But to impose it on non-Muslims might be pushing it, don't you think? Zin, you really need an education on living harmoniously with other races. Obviously he buta-buta (blindly) agreed with his pals without even studying the Syariah and it's applications towards non-Muslims.

Obviously he did not consider the possibility that non-Muslims might not be able to accept it. If I were him, I would advocate training on Syariah or promote understanding on Syariah laws before advocating the change. Most importantly, let the non-Muslims decide for themselves whether they want it or not. I think it is only fair.

Hadhari
Come to think of it, Zin has broken some of the Islam Hadhari principles:

(i) Faith and piety in Allah; - That is between him and Allah. I can't, in good faith, say anything here.

(ii) A just and trustworthy government; - It is not just when government (him included) suppresses its people.

(iii) A free and independent people; - We are not free without freedom of religion & freedom of speech.

(iv) A mastery of knowledge; - Zin has proven to be a bigot in many ways, especially the issue with the word 'Allah'.

(v) A balanced and comprehensive economic development; - No comment from me.

(vi) A good quality of life; - No comment from me here, either. I prefer you to decide for yourself.

(vii) Protection of the rights of minority groups and women; - Zin, you agreed to taking away the rights of muslims women and you actually gift wrapped it to the men.

(viii) Cultural and moral integrity; - I could attempt to insult him on this one, but he doesn't have either. So I'm drawing a blank here. (hehe)

(ix) Safeguarding the environment; and - Can't comment on this one.

(x) Strong defenses. - I don't even understand what this means.

The main objectives of Islam Hadhari:
1. Restoring moderation and embracing the mainstream, which will help strengthen both the people and the state. - Would you say banning the word 'Allah' from being used by non-Muslims as a form of moderation?

2. Valuing good character, which should be central to the society in order to help it become a role model for both the Ummah and humanity as a whole. - Oh ok, it's ok to throw around your rank and 'high station'...oh, and I guess arrogance is accepted then.

3. Adopting seriousness and accountability in dealing with society’s main undertakings. - right. Would you be accountable for robbing Muslim women off their rights?

4. Building all social relations upon trust and good morals. - The Muslim women trusted you didn't they? Look where it got them.

5. Respecting law and order. - Yeah. And that means you can change the law any time you want.

6. Cherishing unity, cooperation, and solidarity. - Yup, by further dividing the people with the religious politics.

7. Implementing genuine Islamic teachings and realizing the objectives of the Shari`ah - That includes robbing women of their rights.

8. Empowering the state to be in a leading position, not feeble and weak-willed. - Hmm, that includes shutting up when one of your people does something stupid like prohibiting other from wishing friends Happy Deepavali. Good leading position there.

Zin, you approved and endorsed Islam Hadhari. I can't tell you how silly and idiotic this 'non religion' is. It's not a new religion, it's not a mazhab or code word. It's a theory of government. Ok, I get that point but isn't it redundant to create something like that when it already exists in Islam?

(i) Faith and piety in Allah; - already in Islam.
(ii) A just and trustworthy government; - already in Islam.
(iii) A free and independent people; - already in Islam.
(iv) A mastery of knowledge - already in Islam.
(v) A balanced and comprehensive economic development; - already in Islam.
(vi) A good quality of life; - already in Islam.
(vii) Protection of the rights of minority groups and women;.- already in Islam.
(viii) Cultural and moral integrity; - already in Islam.
(ix) Safeguarding the environment; and - already in Islam.
(x) Strong defenses. – I still don’t know what this means.

“Islam Hadhari is an approach that emphasizes development, consistent with the tenets of Islam and focused on enhancing the quality of life. It aims to achieve this via the mastery of knowledge and the development of the individual and the nation; the implementation of a dynamic economic, trading and financial system; an integrated and balanced development that creates a knowledgeable and pious people who hold to noble values and are honest, trustworthy, and prepared to take on global challengers.”

Ok. Believe it or not, Islam also emphasizes development. It’s just that some people tend to ignore that part. Islam strongly encourages mastery of knowledge as stated in Surah Al Zumar 39:9 which says 'Are those who have knowledge and those who have no knowledge alike? Only the men of understanding are mindful.'

Prophet Muhammad (SAW)'s sayings:

(1) "Seek knowledge "even though it be In China."
(2) "The acquisition of knowledge is compulsory for every Muslim, whether male or female."
(3) "The ink of the scholar is more sacred than the blood of the martyr.
(4) "Seek knowledge from the cradle to the grave."
(5) "God has revealed to me 'Whoever walks in the pursuit of knowledge I facilitate for him the way to heaven.' Increase in knowledge is even superior to increase in worship."
(6) "The best form of worship is the pursuit of knowledge."

Economics, trading and financial systems guidelines exist in Islam and I believe these a balanced. Islamic finance is the in thing now too. Islam also encourages a balanced development for its people as mentioned in Surah Al Qasas :77 which states one should not only focus on their lives now, but also in the afterlife. One also should not focus too much in the afterlife so much so as to ignore and not enjoy their lives now. Islam also holds true to noble values, honesty, and trustworthiness and encourages its people to take on positive challenges.

So what is Zin and his boss doing? What’s so special about Islam Hadhari? Is it because him and his boss want to seem pious? Is it because him and his boss want to woo the Muslim voters? Is it because him and his boss have run out of ideas and decided to copy/plagiarize the Qur’an on certain issues and give it a new name, making it theirs? I see his boss’s PR exercises on every article on Islam Hadhari... there’s always a paragraph on his boss and his ‘Islamic ways’ on every article.

On the word 'Allah'.
Lastly, Zin came out and agreed to the ban on the usage of the word ‘Allah’ by non-Muslims. I shan’t elaborate too much on this as I’m sure most of you have read the articles on this by other bloggers or in my previous article ‘Dei Joe, tak sekolah ka?”

In a statement recently, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Dr Abdullah Md Zin said apart from the word “Allah”, the use of the words “Solat”, “Kaabah” and “Baitullah” was also prohibited in other religions’ publications as per the decisions of the Cabinet on July 30, 2002, on the restriction which had been enforced since Dec 5, 1986.

I can only summarise that the Minister Zin, is promoting narrow mindedness for the people. Firstly, like I said before, the word Allah is an Arabic word and he should stop trying to prove to people that Malaysia is more Islamic than any other Islamic country. The words ‘Solat’ translates as ‘pray’ in Arabic and again, it’s an Arabic word which is also used by many Indonesian Christian publications. “Kaabah” is in Mecca.

Why is this prohibited? “Baitullah” is the city where "Kaabah" is. By banning these words to be used by non-Muslims, Zin is promoting ignorance among the people. As it stands now, many people still do not know that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all originate from the middle east (Arabia). Surprised you didn't I? It may be sad, but it is true.

As it stands now, many people (and I mean a lot) do not realize that there are many Arab Christians and Jews too. They just don’t know that Arab does not mean Muslim.

So to further compound this, the 'genius' that is Zin, is advocating the narrowing of the people’s minds, making them not-so-smart and ignorant. Thanks, man but no thanks.

I wouldn’t take advice from a man who:

1. Is an arrogant and rude braggart.
2. Doesn’t think or consider other people’s feelings when agreeing to the change to Syariah law.
3. Is one-sided, one-dimensional as he finds it perfectly fair in taking away my rights and giving it to men.
4. Has no back bone when he is required to reprimand his men.
5. Has no tongue when an explanation is required about apostates even though he is the religious authority.
6. Is ok with plagiarizing the Qur’an and labeling it something else.

His opinion carries no weight with me.

Dr Zin, the expert.
Would you believe that Zin has a Doctorate in the Philosophy of Da'wah and Tasawwuf? At least that is what the Kementerian Penerangan website alleges. I guess (in this case) it must true what they say:

“It doesn’t matter how smart you are. Once you join UMNO, your IQ drops by 200 points.”

Let me ask you this:

Zin has a Doctorate in the Philosophy of Da'wah and Tasawwuf, which is well and good. BUT he does not hold a degree in either Comparative theology, Sociology, Anthropology or even Cultural Science. What gives him the right to dictate others (non-muslims) when he is not qualified? He only knows what he studied, da'wah: inviting people to understand Islam and Tasawwuf: Islamic esoteric philosophy.

To be the ‘authority’ on religious affairs in the PM’s department (no less), he should understand most (if not all) the religions practiced in this country, don’t you think?

My not-so-humble opinion.
I think this Islam Hadhari is just a PR exercise. It’s about showing the people how pious the PM is, how ingenious he is for coming up with this concept (which he stole from the Qur’an and claimed as his) and how he is doing a ‘good deed’ by rebranding Islam as a more tolerant, liberal and acceptable Islam in today’s times.

Makes me sick. First they give Islam a bad name. Then they try to promote the same concepts except with a different name and author. Them.

I even have ‘good’ feedback from one of the Islam Hadhari ‘think tank’ members. I cannot divulge any names, but this Hadhari ‘thinker’ (without any prompting) said that Islam Hadhari is ‘just crap’. Just another silly idea from the Badawi administration.

Why can’t people like Zin promote the beauty of Islam? Why is it always muslims are “not allowed to do this and that”? Why is it always “Islam punishes this and punishes that”? We should promote understanding between the faiths and also the beauty of each. In Malaysia, although majority citizens are muslims, I have met ONLY 2 non-muslims who fully understand the true tenets of Islam.

I’m not asking for a nationwide conversion or anything. Far from it. I just want to promote understanding because so many non-muslims and muslims have got it wrong. This understanding goes both ways, muslims should learn about non-muslim religions and understand their tenets.

Why is our government (and some segments of society) so scared of this? Why are Malaysian muslims so insecure? Probably because they have been doing such injustice to Islam, that they worry that this might encourage people to leave Islam.

But if you practice what you preach and inform people how fair and tolerant Islam (using Qur’anic facts and not dreamt up concepts), you don’t have to worry. In fact, I think I know a little more than the average muslim when it comes to Hinduism, Buddhism and Christianity (because I seek knowledge) and it has strengthened my beliefs.

I wish they would stop all this empty publicity. Start to have some substance for god's sake. And do not use geographical lottery (there happens to be more Malays in this country) to make your decisions. Be kind and fair to all races. Consider our differences but don't let it compel you to make silly suggestions and decisions.

I'm so sick of all their shenanigans and dramas.

(After rereading this post i realized that some people might come out and say: "Klconfidential, are YOU qualified to talk about this? Do you have a Phd in politics, islam or even a Phd on Md Zin?" or something along those lines.
To this, my answer would be, "Nope. No Phd, nothing. But I'm not a leader of the people, am I? I don't hold the fate of the people in my hands, do I?"

The line in the movie 'Spiderman':

"Remember, with great power, comes great responsibility.")

Read more...

Dei, Joe! Tak Sekolah ka? Part 2 of 2

(Ah,... see? I knew the issue wasn't over. That's why I had part 2 planned for this topic. The idiocy of some people are just too predictable. Only this time, Md Zin is the one who needs an education. An article on him coming up.)

This issue has a bigger impact in your daily life than you think. It does not only affect the Muslims and Christians, it affects Malaysians as a whole.

We've established how ridiculous and bigoted Joe is. Now I want to talk about what I think the real problem is. Also why (I think) Johari had the audacity to say it in the first place.. with no apology to follow.

Malaysian Constitution

Joe, on Dec 21 2007, said that to prevent confusion, the word 'Allah' could only be used in the context of Islam and not other religions. "Only muslims can use 'Allah'. It's a Muslim word. It's from the Arabic (language).

Our problem is at its most basic. It's the definitions AND the level of understanding of those definitions.

Our so-called leaders, do not know the difference between culture and religion. Malay is a race which has its own culture, language and traditions.
Islam is a religion.
Arabic is a language.
Is it that so hard to understand?

The problem is actually at a higher level than the definitions of culture and religion. Way higher. It's in the Malaysian Constitution.

In the Malaysian Constitution, it states that to be a bumiputra (malay) you must fulfill 3 requirements:-

• "Malay" means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom and -
  • (a) was before Merdeka Day born in the Federation or in Singapore or born of parents one of whom was born in the Federation or in Singapore, or is on that day domiciled in the Federation or in Singapore; or
  • (b) is the issue of such a person;

I find this wrong on many levels.
Firstly, the definition of Malay is wrong. Malay is a race which consists of culture, language, traditions and genetics among other things. Not religion. There is not such thing as a Malay Religion, is there?

In Malaysia, Malay is a constitutional definition.
(MGG Pillai, Malaysia Today)

This article by Pillai, although written in year 2005, should be read again. It applies to our issues today.

Secondly, it is wrong to assume that if you are to be Malay, you must be a Muslim.

Thirdly, does this mean, once a Chinese/Indian Malaysian converts to Islam, he will lose his culture? Does this mean he will lose his Chinese/Indian heritage? Is that fair?

You should look into our constitution, it's an interesting read.

Basically, if Ah Chong or Muthu were to:
-convert to Islam ( M'sian Const: "professes the religion of Islam"),
-wear a baju melayu once in a while (M'sian Const: "conforms to Malay custom" )
-have the ability to converse in Bahasa Malaysia (M'sian Const: "habitually speaks the Malay language")

This makes them a malay/bumiputra.

On the other hand, if Lina were to convert from Islam into Christianity, does this automatically shift her from being a bumi to a non-bumi status?

I feel that this particular section in our constitution is interesting to say the least. This particular constitution helped the 70s singer, DJ Dave (real name: Dhammi Jagjit Sukhdev ) become an active UMNO member.

Interesting ain't it?

Sad when our leaders cannot tell the difference between religion and race.
Especially when they fail to realize that you can change your religion but you cannot change your race.

The BN government is (indirectly) telling us Malaysians:

Bahasa Malaysia is only for the Malays.

It is not for the Chinese and Indians. Even if they have no intention of saying this, the fact that the ban is condoned, tells me that these are their true colors.

Extremist Tendencies?
I will digress a bit here and tell you about an incident that pissed me off...again.

Hypocrisy. Hmmm... walking on egg shells here. I do not mean to insult the PM here but I speak from my point of view and I assure you that this point of view is shared by many.

During the Christmas High Tea celebration hosted by the Christian Federation of Malaysia, he reminded Malaysians not to allow extremist tendencies to take root and undermine interracial harmony in the country.

Hogwash! My advise is, Prime Minister, look at your own jamban to see the 'extremist tendencies'. Look at the turd floating there called "Joe Baharum". Flush him down and you'll win half the battle with "extremist tendencies". Extremist tendencies does not only encompass the topic of religion. It also covers a host of other issues, like arresting bloggers for comments left on their page and even saying that the word Allah only belongs to one race/religion.. (that's extremist and narrow minded, isn't it?).

This is an example of the ruling coalition's double standards. Pathetic, really.

By bringing up this issue, are they (Joe and Zin) attempting to be more Islamic that Saudi? Well, sorry sonny but you are all the more bigoted, i say. Why are many Malaysian so obsessed about who is more religious than who? Why can't we leave that between God and ourselves?

Why do we have to proclaim or show people how religious we are? Same with other things in Malaysia, this is a case of mendabik dada sendiri ala King Kong (bragging King Kong style by hitting one's own chest).

My guess is...
My guess is (it's only my humble guess) is that elections are coming up in March (that's what many little birdies told me) and UMNO has already begun its campaigning for the majority Malay votes.

They are going to drag this issue on and on till elections. It is human nature that as time goes by people tend to forget the main issue they were fighting for/against. Memory gets diluted and fades only to be replaced by a tamer version of the truth. Passions die down only to be replaced with excuses and misplaced understanding.

Come election day, the kampung people (majority votes) will not think that UMNO were the idiots who banned the word Allah to be used by non muslims.
They will think that UMNO are fighting for Islam. Thus, winning their hearts. Why?
Because as you and I have experienced, UMNO is very talented in twisting and manipulating the truth until it becomes lost to us.

Read more...