That is from my simple observation of history, and of the media – both mainstream and alternative ones. Whether or not you agree with me is none of my business as nothing that I have written thus far was to beget your seal of approval nor was it to get your agreement. Like it or not, the Malays were born to be fools…
…and to be fooled by others.
Being fools and being easily fooled by others is what other races recognise. Because of that, they keep pushing the envelope.
From 1930 through 1970, the Malays were minorities in their own land. They were sidelined from the riches of their own land and Dr Lennox A Mills noted:
“…when the British came, the Malay was a poor man in a poor country; when the British left, he was a poor man in a rich country.”
The Malays remained backwards and were told to stay as peasants or tillers of the soil, the Chinese inherited all the tradings in the Malay States and became the richest residents, and the Indians remained as rubber-tappers without proper infrastructure. The Malays, according to Chai Hon-Chan:
“…merely retreated from the tide of commercial activity and material prosperity…whereas the British, Europeans, Chinese and Indians had the lion share of the country’s wealth…”
For those reasons up there majority of the Malays rejected the idea of the Malayan Union and automatic citizenship for the immigrants. The only Malays who were keen on an independent Malaya were those who originated from Sumatera and wanted to unify Malaya with the rest of Indonesia under Batavia so the Malays do not come under the rule of other races. However, the. Malays of Malaya were united in wanting a Malay rule with the protection accorded by the Malay rulers i.e the status of Islam as well as the status of the Malays. The Chinese especially, kept pushing the envelope. When the straw finally broke the camel’s back in May 1969, the Malays retaliated with a violent outcome.
Economic advantage post-1969 brought about purchasing power to the Malays. As a result, the Malays began to worship money, as money would bring more power to bring in more money: in short, greed has taken over unity, protection of Islam and the Malay rights as the paramount priority. Malay leaders are seen to live lavishly. With them come the jockeys, parasites in short, much like the Cobias that swim with Whale Sharks hoping for whatever scrap that comes out from the sharks in order to live. When the mule collapse, the jockeys cry foul, as we have seen in 1988 and again ten years later. The greed for power in order to make money remains with the Malays nevertheless, only in a cruel way. The Malays are now more gullible because of the greed, and are willing to sell their values, their rights, their religion, and the Malay rulers institution just so they can grasp at whatever that is within their reach. The fools that the Malays are, they split into several political factions and even dare to bring each other down, supporting the non-Malays in pushing the envelope – Quislings helping the non-Malays destroy Islam and the Malays.
And every single day we find the Malays jeering at those who defend Islam and the Malay rights. Although the majority, the Malays are effectively minorities because of the multi-polar split. And this time around, when the straw breaks the camel’s back, the Malays will die foolishly.
While some Muslims continue to invite me over Facebook to attend an apologetic forum; while Muslims including the daughter of a very prominent senior politician become apologists upholding the notion that the Trinity God of the Christians and the Muslims One God is one and the same, I remembered one of my postings made in January 2012 called “The Case for God – Part 2” where I made mention of the origin of the concept of Trinity. It must be remembered that Emperor Constantine 1, a Pagan and worshipper of the Sun God, was the one responsible in introducing the Trinity doctrine to unite the Christians. Those who did not subscribed to this doctrine were persecuted and banished.
“Surprise, surprise!” as Cilla Black would exclaim on the show produced for ITV by London Weekend Television.
While it is true that it is a Muslims belief that Allah is The Supreme Being, God for All, Allah as God in Islam neither begets nor is He begotten. This is the fundamental belief that all Muslims hold to. The Pope and the Vatican, I believe, worship Deus. Deus is the Latin word for God, derived from a proto-Indo-European word deiuos or deiwos and cognates with the Sanskrit word Deva or Dewa. For that reason I do not see any of the die-hard adamant Allah-wannabe-users would still use the name Allah to describe God if they were to migrate to, say, Australia, the UK, USA, or Italy.
Even the origin of the crucifix is said to have come from pagan practice (I know you naughty people have been saying that Allah and Islam are of pagan origins). Christians only started to use the symbol of the crucifix 300 years after Christ had established his church. The Babylonians of Chaldea were the first to use the crucifix to symbolise the God Tammuz and the use spread to China, India, Mexico centuries before Christ.
In 46 B.C., Roman coins show Jupiter holding a long sceptre terminating in a cross. The Vestal Virgins of pagan Rome wore the cross suspended from their necklaces, as the nuns of the Roman Catholic church do now. The Davis Dictionary of the Bible states about the origin of the cross: “The pre-Christian cross of one form or another was in use as a sacred symbol among the Chaldeans, the Phoenicians, the Eqyptians, and many other…nations. The Spaniards in the 16th century found it also among the Indians of Mexico and Peru. But its symbolic teaching was quite different from that which we now associate the cross” (p. 159).
And for the true believers of Christianity, do read up where the Bible clearly teaches that Christians must not practice or tolerate any pagan ways, customs, traditions or practices, specifically in Deuteronomy 7: 1-6; Jeremiah 10: 1-5; and Revelation 18: 1-4.
And as it goes in John 8:32 – “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
For you Muslim apologists of the Trinity concept, I leave you with this from the Quran 9:30
Discovered on the Internet today is this article on Christian Today that speaks of the Allah issue and how Christians have made headway in getting Muslims to accept that Allah, or God, that is worshipped by the Muslims, is the same as the Trinitarian god worshipped by the Christians.
Go back to my article above after you have read this one and decide for yourself if subtle evangelism is not real:
When people think they have too much freedom and show disrespect to others, you get the very person Jebat Must Die identifies in his latest blog post. If showing disrespect towards others, questioning the fundamentals, criticising the religion of others is being regarded as a right, but in turn being criticised is portrayed as being victimised by racists, then the atmosphere is set for the undermining of the unity of this nation.
While Jebat Must Die refers to a posting by the said person, this whole fracas had started more than a year ago as the person identified by Jebat Must Die has on several occasions been taunting Malays and criticising Islam. The apex of the brawl happened yesterday (3rd December 2013) when the person tweeted the following (please read the image bottom up):
During the 13th May 1969 tragedy, a well-known Imam in Kampung Baru by the name of Dahlan made an amulet to protect his brother, Abdullah (a.k.a Abdullah Botak) who was a senior police officer, from harm as the racial clashes escalated. Abdullah declined and asked Dahlan to use it to protect himself saying:
Don’t be fooled by the Chinese. I have seen what they are capable of in Bekor!
Not many young Malaysian would know where Bekor is, let alone what had happened there. But Bekor was witness to what was to come 23 years later.
A subtle reminder of the atrocities that had taken place in Bekor
The incident in Kampung Bekor, near Manong in the district of Kuala Kangsar was not the first incident that had involved the killing of Malays by the Chinese, led by the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army. What is even sadder is the fact that some Malays were also involved in assisting the Chinese slaughter their own kind. To understand the mood of the day, we would need to go back in time to when migrant Chinese workers started flooding into the Malay states.
According to a paper jointly written by Mohamed Ali Hanifa and Mohammed Redzuan Othman of the History Department, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, the University of Malaya, the Chinese immigrants first came to the Malay states in 1777, and first settled in the state of Perak in 1830 (Patrick Sullivan, 1982: 13). Within 44 years, they numbered 26,000 in Perak alone. In 1921, the number of Chinese immigrants in the Malay states numbered 1,171,740. Ten years later, it was 1,704,452. In 1941, it became 2,377,990 while the Malays were at 2,277,352 (Paul H Kratoska, 1997:318). The explosion of numbers of Chinese immigrants brought about social ills. In 1901, the ratio of Chinese women to men were 1:100 in the Federated Malay States alone (Victor Purcell, 1948: 174) and this brought about the setting up of prostitution dens. According to the Straits Settlement Annual Development Record 1906, there were 543 prostitution dens in the Straits Settlement alone, employing 3,894 women (Siti Rodziah Nyan, 2009:200). The Malays remained a minority in their own land until 1970.
When the Japanese invaded Malaya, they portrayed themselves to the Malays as liberators, getting rid of the pseudo-colonialistic British, and began hunting for the Chinese whom were known to have sent money back to assist the Chinese in their war against the Japanese. As such, the Malays did not face as much hardship as the Chinese did during the Japanese occupation. Although the Malays and Chinese share the same hatred towards the Japanese, it was the Chinese that ran a boycotting campaign against the Japanese. This led to the execution of 70,000 Chinese in Singapore labelled by the Japanese as Communists (Colonial Office Records CO 537/3757: 27-28). As a result, many Chinese formed the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army (MPAJA), a subversive organisation that was administered by the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) (War Office Records WO 172/9773, No 23: 384).
After the war, the Sino-Malay relations took a turn for the worse. The Chinese, known for their coarse and rude behaviour began upsetting the Malays. Kenelm O.L Burridge quoted the Malays as saying:
Before the war we and the Chinese lived in peace. But now they want to swallow the people (makan orang). We Muslims do not chase money. That is the Chinese way. They are not Muslims and they do not have the same understanding (faham). If they became Muslims it would be all right (Kenelm O.L Burridge, 1951:163)
Economic competition caused the Chinese to spread rumours about the Malays to put the latter in bad light (War Office Records WO 172/9773, No.30:479). In Batu Pahat, Johor, there was a community that did not respect the local culture (Kenelm O.L Burridge, 1951: 166) and brought about the culture of drinking alcoholic drinks and gambling, and were often found meddling in the affairs of the Malay customs (Seruan Ra’yat, 17 November 1945: 2).
Between the Japanese surrender in August 1945 and the formation of the British Military Administration on 12 September 1945, the MPAJA/CPM left the jungle and occupied police stations and towns and displayed its authority (WO 172/1784, No.51: 180). They took the opportunity to take revenge on the Malays. Throngs of Imams, religious teachers, Malays who had worked in Japanese offices, and commoners were captured and executed. Many Malay houses were burnt at night while their occupants were fast asleep (Mohamed Ali & Mohammed Redzuan, 2011:280).
The violation of the sanctity of Islam also became a factor in the bloody Sino-Malay conflict (WO 172/9773. No.30: 478) when the Bintang Tiga/CPM disrupted religious activities in Muslims places of worship. This started in Batu Pahat, Johor, just before the surrender of the Japanese occupiers, during the Muslim month of Ramadhan. Muslims were forbidden from congregating at mosques or suraus to perform the Terawih prayers (Hairi Abdullah, 1974/5: 8-9). The same occurred in Perak and some parts of Batu Pahat where Muslims were gunned down and burnt together with the mosque they were in during Friday prayers. Mosques and suraus were often used as places of meeting for the Chinese community (WO 172/9773, No.30: 478) and were tainted by incidents such as slaughtering of pigs, and mosques’ compound was used to cook pork, where Malays were forced to join the larger Chinese groups. Pages were torn from the Quran to be used by the Chinese using these mosques as toilet paper.
Facing the atrocities by the Chinese communists, and the betrayal by the British through the formation of the Malayan Union, the period between 1945-46 saw the Malays struggling for the survival of their race and religion.
According to Dr Cheah Boon Kheng, a historian at the School of Humanities, University Sains Malaysia, who is also the author of “Red Star over Malaya”, the Sino-Malay conflict in Johor began between march and August of 1945 (Cheah Boon Kheng, 1981:109). In May 1945, a Moain bi Saridin @ Shahidin, and a Hassan Akasah were brutally murdered by the Chinese communists. When found, they were just a mixed pile of bones without their head. They were murdered for not supporting the CPM. In another incident, a group of Chinese communists attacked the house of the penghulu of Kampung Sungai Tongkang near Batu Pahat, where 30 Malays sought refuge and shot them repeatedly before burning down the house. This conflict spread to the towns of Semerah and Sungai Balang.
When the Japanese announced their surrender on 15th August 1945, the CPM assisted by the Chinese in the MPAJA began to round up Malays suspected of working or assisting the Japanese. Many Malays had their hands and feet bounded and put into gunny sacks before they were thrown into the sea alive (Ibrahim Mahmood, 1981: 32). The Chinese community in Kampung Koh, Sitiawan, Ipoh, Kampar, Langkap and Chuchap assisted the Chinese community in Sungai Manik. Several small skirmishes ensued. In one incident, two of my granduncles were slaughtered by the Chinese near the Sungai Manik railway bridge, while their friend was put into a suitcase alive before he was thrown over into the Bidor river. In another incident, two Malay men returning to Sungai Manik were attacked by a group of Chinese who stabbed and slashed to death one of them while the other jumped into the Bidor river and hid for four days, moving only at night, before he reached safety.
In Bekor, near Manong in the Kuala Kangsar district, alarmed by the growing attacks by the Chinese, the villagers united and held a discussion with the Chinese in January 1946. Pressured by the Chinese who outnumbered them, the Malay representatives stated three demands to the Chinese:
Sa-orang guru Tauhid di-Manong di-dalam suatu mashuarat antara China dengan Melayu kerana hendak mendamaikan perkelahian di-situ telah mengeluarkan 3 tuntutan dengan chakap yang keras dan menghentam-hentam meja dengan tinju-nya sa-hingga China-China yang di-dalam mashuarat itu puchat muka-nya (Suara Ra’yat, 7 Januari 1946: 1)
The first demand was to return all the Malays captured by the Chinese and held in the jungles. If they were executed, the Malays demanded that their grave be shown. The second demand was for the return of their belongings confiscated by the MPAJA, while the final demand was for the Chinese to surrender all their weapons to the government.
Shamsiah Pakeh, a former Quran teacher, and member of the Communist Party of Malaya, approached the villagers of Kampung Bekor to persuade them to join the CPM. In a blog by Amam Fuadi, a descendant of one Haji Hassan bin Khatib Mat Sin who was present when the Chinese attacked Kampung Bekor, he described the story as told by the late Haji Hassan:
” Shamsiah Pakih pakai baju kebaya putih datang kerumah mengajak Tok masuk komunis Tok tak mahu. Pada masa itu siapa yang tidak mahu masuk kominis akan di bunuh. Orang Bekor banyak terlibat dan berdosa kerana bersubahat dengan kominis dan membunuh orang melayu yang tidak mahu masuk kominis. ” (Akhirnya mereka juga mati dibunuh komunis dalam perang Bekor- Penulis) ” …………….dibekor Ada telaga yang di panggil telaga lubang raya tempat memancong orang yang tak mahu masuk kominis.” ”Tok ngah juga hampir hendak dimasukkan kedalam lubang. Salah seorang penduduk Semat yang mati dalam lubang raya ialah yeob tali”
On 5th March 1946, the Chinese began their attacks on Kampung Bekor. At 10am, approximately 100 armed Chinese attacked the village, but this attack was repelled by the defending villagers (WO 172/9773, DT00 07:281). This attack was believed to be the CPM’s gauging the village’s defence.
On 6th March 1946 is what Abdullah Botak was talking about to his brother, Imam Dahlan, on 13th May 1969.
Between 5am to 5.30am, Kampung Bekor was again attacked by the Chinese, assisted by the CPM. All roads leading in and out of the village were guarded by members of the CPM while the Chinese, reinforced by 500 Chinese from Kelian, attacked the villagers. It was a well-planned and orchestrated attack (CO 537/1580: 21 and Majlis, 24 Februari 1947:5).
The attack lasted two hours. 57 men and women who were about to leave the Kampung Bekor mosque after Subuh prayer were murdered by the Chinese (WO 172/9773, No.19: 234-235). From this figure, only one had gunshot wounds while the rest had slash and stab wounds. 24 children were murdered while they were sleeping in their homes, while 15 men, seven women and eight children were missing. The defence of Kampung Bekor was quickly organised by Tuan Haji Abdul Rahman bin Abdul Manan, Tuan Haji Kulub Alang, Tuan Haji Salleh bin Abdul Manan and a few others who managed to kill several Chinese attackers. The Chinese moved in three waves: the front-most attacked, followed by a second wave whose duty was to retrieve bodies and injured Chinese attackers, then move behind the third attacking wave to carry out the dead and wounded. As a result, not one single body of the Chinese attackers could be found in the aftermath of the attack.
The above was what senior police officer Abdullah Botak had described to his brother, Imam Dahlan.
More Malays were attacked and killed by the Chinese in Kota Bharu (Kelantan) on 19th September 1945, in Alor Gajah (Melaka) on 26th September 1945, in Selangor, the districts of Selama, Taiping, Parit, and Sitiawan in Perak, and in Terengganu. In Batu Malim, Raub (Pahang), a skirmish at the local market on 11th February 1946 involving 200 Malays and 150 Chinese caused the death of 30 Chinese including 10 children, while 16 Chinese and 10 Malays were injured.
So heightened was the anger of the Malays towards the Chinese that when the British formed the Malayan Union and planned to grant Chinese and Indian immigrants with automatic citizenship, the Malays united for a common cause, and that is to return the power of the Sultans and reinstate the ownership of the land to the Malays. Left behind economically and lacking education, as well as being the minority in their own land, the Malays never saw any good in granting citizenship to the outsiders. To appease the Malays, the administration saw it fit for the Chinese to be sent back to China. Some 15,000 were sent back until Mao Zedong proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in October 1949. This led to closure of ports, and subsequently beaches, to prevent overseas Chinese from returning. Hence, the Chinese in Malaya had no choice but to learn to live with the Malays. The administration insisted that only those Chinese who would pledge loyalty to Malaya would be granted citizenship.
The Malays and Chinese lived peacefully side-by-side. But when China launched the Cultural Revolution, the Communist Party of Malaya issued a directive on 1st June 1968: Hold High the Great Red Banner of Armed Struggle and Valiantly March Forward. This brought about the Second Emergency and again, the Malays being minority, prepared to defend themselves and their religion. Almost every weekend strikes and rallies would be organised by opposition parties, supported by the Communist Party of Malaya, and this culminated in the 13th May 1969 tragedy.
The history of Malaysia, contrary to belief, has been filled with bloodshed. We, as a growing nation, have seen more than enough to last us a life time. And as time goes by, piece by piece our history is being forgotten. When we are a nation without a past, we will become a nation without soul. The above demonstrates how dangerous racial strife can be, and how easy it is to explode again if sensitivities and assimilation is not done or handled well. I strongly believe that both vernacular schools and Islamisation of the National schools do not benefit anyone in Malaysia, and will only contribute to greater rift between the races. Children who do not grow up together will never learn about or respect each other.
As for the Malays, we seem to feel comfortable hiding behind the fact that we make up 71% of the population of this country (including the Bumiputras of Sabah and Sarawak) but we fail to see that we are in fact split into various groups. I doubt if ever an event such as the above were to happen, that the Malays would unite, as we now have the Malay liberals, the so-called Islamists, and the pro-Malays. I won’t be surprised if only 20 percent of the Malays would be prepared to defend their race and religion again.The Malays, are once again, minorities in their own land. But this time, they are asleep as the villagers of Kampung Bekor were almost 68 years ago.
I write this as a warning to my Muslim brothers and sisters. No matter how you conduct your life, you should never compromise your attestation to Allah being the True One God, and that Muhammad is His Messenger through whom His message was delivered to complete what started millenniums before.
The issue of the use of Allah in the Herald has been resolved…well, more or less. I still see on my timeline some people still tweet about it, or have it as part of their Facebook status. I see the occasional Christian politician from Sabah still trying to flog a dead horse by crying foul over the issue although the ruling does not affect Christians of Sabah and Sarawak; while many others who do not understand the history and reason behind the permit to use of Allah in Bibles and Christian literatures in Indonesia, Sabah and Sarawak but not in the peninsular should read my previous writings on this issue:
I also wrote about the word to describe God in Malay in The Case For God Part 2, and I wrote on the subtle ways to undermine the faith of Muslims in the peninsular. You may say that the issue of faith is petty, but if you have met, as I have, Muslims whom have proselytize, you would be shocked to see the numbers and where they are originally from, and with what background.
If I mention the name Joshua Massey I am sure many Malaysian Muslims do not know who he is. I don’t know who Massey is either but that is the pseudonym of a Christian missionary who has written many articles on how to minister Christianity to the Muslims. Among the articles he has written include Should Christians Use Allah In Bible Translation?
In this article, Massey concluded that it is necessary to use Allah in Bibles and not to discard such easily redeemable terms, but to fill them with Biblical meaning. The more a Muslim’s understanding of Allah is informed by the Scriptures, the more Biblical their theology of God will become. Filling familiar words with new meaning, rather than tossing them aside as irreparable, is something the church has wisely done from the beginning.
Of course, in a non-Arab speaking Muslim country, it would be a lot more difficult to penetrate the Muslim community to spread the gospel. Enter the C5: the so-called liberal Muslims who, amongst us, have been saying that it is a small matter for others to use Allah to refer to God. C5 is a category among a spectrum of Christians ranging from C1, referring to those missionaries who set up churches and conduct masses and prayers in the missionaries’ original language, to C6 – those who still retain their Muslim identity and never reveal their faith to Muslims. This spectrum was introduced by a missionary who writes under the pseudonym John Travis. Like Massey who lives amongst Muslims in Asia, Travis too has spent a large portion of his life living amongst the Muslims.
C5 Muslims do not call themselves Christians. They call themselves the Followers of Isa al-Masih, or Jesus the Messiah. They are the Messianic Muslims who reject any unbiblical Muslim practise, and dare to label Muslim practices barbaric, or against human rights, or restricting women’s rights. Anything and any platform they could use to attack the sanctity of Islam, they would. Do not get me wrong: C5 Christians still go to the mosque to pray, still attain their identity as Muslims, but they will back their Christian friends when attacked by other Muslims, not literal attacks though.
Massey knows that Muslims will not attack, as it is unIslamic to be the belligerent, but will defend to their death their land and faith. So you get the C5s to do the attacks for you, therefore the defenders will then be labelled racists, extremists and other labels already thrown by these liberals. In the words of Travis:
“Some C5 believers adopt Samuel Zwemer’s approach toward Muhammad by affirming all the truth Muhammad brought and never speaking disrespectfully of him. They emphasize that Muhammad was a great statesman and religious reformer, bringing Arabs from pagan polytheism to Abrahamic monotheism. They are quick to add that Muhammad spoke of Isa the Messiah (his virgin birth, miracles and sinless- ness) and acknowledged that the Torah, Zabur and Injil are God’s Word and must be obeyed. When it becomes clear that the Muslim listener is ready for more, they, like Zwemer, share Jesus as Lord and Savior. My observation is that over time, without dictating how new MBBs should view Muhammad, he becomes less and less important to them as they grow in their love and obedience to Jesus”.
The above is taken from John Travis’s article in the International Journal of Frontier Missiology, telling how a Muslim was befriended by a Christian friend, not to accept Christianity, but to also accept the other Books: a concept not unfamiliar in Islam. Working on this and the other concept mentioned in the Quran that Allah does not make any distinction between His Prophets, they work towards undermining the Shahadah.
Similar modus operandi have been seen here in Malaysia. In one case that involved a friend of mine putting a stop to it, a Muslim factory worker was befriended by a fellow male worker, a Christian. She got pregnant and was shunned by her family. With nowhere to go, her boyfriend brought her to see a priest who showered her with compassion. Her roommate managed to sniff the method and alerted an agency my friend was with, and rescued her. In fact, among the DUMC attendees whom I had met last year all spoke of similar subtle methods. Some had converted over a few pair of jeans, some money, rice, so on and so forth. For me, I blame the Malay/Muslim society for failing to help the needy, or for driving away family members who are in need. I remember one Pusat Pungutan Zakat officer who argued intensely with me, insisted that there were no poor people in Petaling Jaya, until I showed him a squatter village.
But that is the fact of the matter – we Muslims in Malaysia are not caring enough. And Muslims are oblivious to threats, not just from the outside, but from the inside as well. Muslims always think that they are strong, and at the same time allow every attempt to chip away at the foundations of Islam in this country, namely the Federal Constitution, and the institution of the Malay Rulers as custodians and protectors of the religion of Islam and the Malay customs. Every attempt to defend these institutions are being portrayed as acts of racism and oppression of the minority, when in essence it is the 60.4 percent Muslim population is the minority. They are split into three: two one thirds that have nothing better to do but claw at each other, while the other third collude with the evangelists to attack the other two thirds.
I leave you with an extract from a missiology website about the one third that is helping to destroy us, and urge all you Muslims to pause for a moment and think:
Addendum: 5th Nov 2013
For all those who remember my previous posting on the Allah issue (The Case For God – Part 3, I wrote on Christian publications in Malay in the 19th Century, and how similar publications have made their way into modern-day peninsular Malaysia. One must be wary of religious books bearing Arabic terms that may be representing Christianity but with an Islamic image. I was also informed that in some mosques in this country, as mentioned in Massey’s and Travis’s articles, Arab Christians or Christian Malays have begun preaching to youngsters. Dressed as pious Muslims, they confuse the youngsters using the modus operandi mentioned above.
And I will also be meeting with a Christian friend, who has told me how some of his family members and friends have been actively proselytising needy Muslims in the south of the peninsular. Hopefully this time, I will get to learn more of their modus operandi.
The greatest news I received on Malaysia Day was of Chin Peng’s death. I was some 250 nautical miles from Kuantan and had been sailing for more than a week without receiving any form of news from home, so imagine my feeling of jubilation.
Yes, it has almost been 24 years since the signing of the peace treaty in Hatyai between the Government of the Federation of Malaysia and the Communist Party of Malaya. I will cover more on the treaty in the second part. Many do not understand that the treaty was about the ending of hostilities between the two parties, but not about the CPM having to give their ideology up. So, when The Sunday Star decided to ask 19-year olds if the thought the communist is still a threat my mind instinctively asked, “what is the purpose of asking those who were still swimming inside testicles when the treaty was signed?” It just hinted malicious intent. Of late, the popular mainstream daily and ASTRO’s Awani sound like some leftist publications.
Many in KL would not remember the bombings, and shootings of police officers that occurred in KL itself. The last I heard of a gun-battle between the police and the CPM was in May 1983 on the old trunk road between Gombak and Janda Baik, near Mimaland. One policeman died, the other wounded but managed to kill both Min Yuens.
I read with disgust both on the mainstream media as well as on the online social media how sympathisers asked the government to allow for Chin Peng’s ashes be brought back to Sitiawan. After all, “the man is more a threat alive than when he is dead” quoted a member of a BN component party. If that was supposed to have moved me, then it had failed miserably.
Equally disgusting was the comparisons made between the bodies of the Sulu terrorists, bomb-making terrorists Azahari and Nordin Mat top, with Chin Peng. Nobody ever claimed the bodies of the Sulu terrorists, Azahari and Nordin Mat Top were Malaysian citizens and never did they wage war against their people – unlike Chin Peng whom I believe was never a citizen of the Federation of Malaysia, nor was he a citizen of the Federation of Malaya, as described in Part 1.1 (a) of the Second Schedule of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. I doubt Malaysian-born Kamahl calls Malaysia home!
Worst is when PAS members also went to Bangkok to attend the wake of the man so determined to eradicate the Malays and their religion. I suppose in the name of politics and power, God comes second. After all, God is intangible, unlike Chin Peng.
And the statement made by a former Inspector-General of Police on the matter saying that the world would laugh at us if we do not allow Chin Peng’s ashes to be brought back for final rites is an insult to us servicemen (police and military), especially to those who continue to suffer as a result of the loss of limbs, or loss of a father, husband, or son. Perhaps this is why an ex-IGP was made an Ambassador while this ex-IGP continue to find recognition for the things he had done; but all he was famous for was punching Anwar Ibrahim while in custody!
Hitler killed Jews for only five years. Chin Peng waged war against the people he was supposed to liberate for 41 years. Why did not Chin Peng stop as soon as the Tunku had announced Malaya’s independence in Melaka in 1956? Why did he continue to wage war against this nation and her people? The British government servants were all serving the Sultans and Rajas and were answerable to the latter, with the exception of Penang, Melaka and Singapore that were colonies of the British Empire. So Chin Peng was not interested in fighting against colonialism, the Japanese also did that in Malaya!
Chin Peng was more interested in assuming this nation under communism, as a satellite nation to the People’s Republic of China. And thousands died fighting this man who was adamant to destroy their religion and way of life.
To those who continue to ask for Chin Peng’s ashes to be allowed a final trip to Malaysia, and ask others to move on, forgive and forget, do ask the Jews to forgive Hitler for the five years of atrocities committed against them. Then we should be able to move on eight times the amount of time taken for the Jews to forgive Hitler.
Chin Peng never showed any compassion, nor did he ever exhibit remorse. He was a psychopath worshipped by idiots who deserves not even a single whiff of sympathy.
Therefore, he should just stay out forever and not tarnish the soil of this beloved nation.
As Malaysia approaches its 50th year, I cannot help but think that while being in its infancy this nation is ageing far too fast and is fast being tired of itself. The cohesiveness of its people in the run up to the events on the 31st August, 1957 and 16th September, 1963 is fast coming undone. Many a times have I written on how far more cohesive we were immediately after the 13th May, 1969 tragedy than we are now, despite claims of how far more mature we are in the political sense. That may be true, but we behave like immature kids behaving like we are politically mature.
Elements once found destructive, such as Communism, is now being looked up to. A few days ago, left-leaning students were audience in a forum that had a former member of the all-but-defunct Communist Party of Indonesia, and students were seen wearing t-shirts glorifying Tan Malaka, a Marxist who once lived in Indonesia. To add insult to injury, Karpal Singh has also been reported as supporting the move to allow former leader of the Communist Party of Malaya, Chin Peng, to return to Malaysia. Of course, humanitarians would argue that there is nothing wrong with allowing an octogenarian back to the land he was born in, and liberals would think the same. I hope these same people would also condemn Israel for still hunting former Nazis and tell the people of Cambodia they should forgive the Khmer Rouge.
For whatever reasons too did the police not act previously on criminal elements. The removal of the ISA and the Emergency Ordinance rendered the police virtually helpless in its fight against crime, let alone be able to maintain peace and order and breathe at the same time. Kudos to the good teamwork of the present Inspector-General of Police and the new Minister of Home Affairs. We have not seen this kind of teamwork since the days of Tun Dr Ismail – Tun Salleh, and Tun Ghazali Shafie – Tun Haniff days.
I have read comments from politicians from both sides of the political fence who are against giving the police emergency powers and say that the police should learn from their British counterparts on how to police the law without having firearms. Britain, for those who did not study geography, is an island, unlike Malaysia that has land borders with neighbours. A simple ferry or train ride from the European continent requires passengers and luggages to be scanned. My former college mate who is now a Chief Inspector in the Thames Valley Police lamented how he sometimes wish he was given a gun, especially in the wake of the two incidents where two women constables were gunned down by armed criminals. Imagine our police fighting crime with porous borders.
The introduction of the proposed Criminal Prevention Act should hopefully allow the police to conduct interdiction strikes on hardcore crime gangs. This Act will allow the police to hold criminal elements for up to 70 days pending trial. I have not seen the draft in full but I am sure it will uphold the rights of those who want peace.
Was there political interference in the police’s operations before the new Minister and Inspector-General came into office? I would leave that to the former Inspector-Generals to answer. But I know a gangster was awarded one of the highest Federal titles. How his name had made it through police vetting definitely puzzles me.
I know for sure there are politicians from both sides of the political fence whom have been seen with criminal elements, and photographs of these politicians meeting with criminals exist. These are prominent politicians and I know the police has full knowledge of this. Whether their presence with the criminals is for political or for personal reasons, only they and the police can answer this.
Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar once remarked that the BERSIH rally had communist elements involved. I would not be at all surprised if there are members of the CPM whom have made it into political parties, as they did before 13th May, 1969. Today, we have former police Director of CID Tan Sri Zaman Khan saying that an ex-convict who was a triad chief is also holding a lower office in a political party in Penang (NST, Nation page 25, 5th September 2013).
I particularly like Ben Tan’s article “Youth gangs today lack ‘basic values’.” (NST, Comments page 18, 5th September 2013). Ben, NST’s Johor bureau chief wrote:
GANGSTER’S LIFE: The members just crave money and power.
Ironically, the same can be said of the young politicians mentioned above, and of most politicians too. I certainly hope the Home Minister will give all the support the police needs in making this nation a safer place to live in.
At 50, Malaysia is already more divisive than it should be. Political fanatics are to be blamed. With the underworld and subversive elements making a breakthrough, it will not be long before our children begin to face the mistakes we have all made. Criminals, subversive elements, politicians with links to the underworld should never be allowed to represent the people of Malaysia, and I urge the Malaysian people to reject them and reject those who protect them. If we don’t, we won’t see Malaysia living past 100.
Tanda Putera is finally shown on the silver screen, slightly more than a year too late, more than a year since I watched it. It would have been better to show the movie BEFORE the previous general elections. But of course, no matter whether you are a recalcitrant or a minister, not everyone was born smart.
Anyway, for a year there was this question related to a scene in the movie where two members of the Opposition was shown urinating at the base of a flag pole. If you were wondering if it was Lim Kit Siang, the answer is a big NO.
Kit Siang was busy doing even worse elsewhere, and on 13th May 1969, he was in Kota Kinabalu; as shown below:
STATEMENT UNDER SCTION 11(2)(b) ISA, 1960.
NAME OF DETAINEE: LIM KIT SIANG.
GROUNDS ON WHICH THE ORDER OF DETENTION IS MADE:
Since July, 1968, you, Lim Kit Siang, have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in Malaysia in that in the several speeches you have made since the date you have deliberately and intentionally roused intense communal feelings thereby promoting feelings of hostility between different races in Malaysia and causing suspicion and disunity to grow between them.
ALLEGATIONS OF FACTS:
1) On the 27th July 1968, at a DAP public rally at Tanjong Malim, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government policy on Education by telling your audience that the policy was designed to achieve and eventual extermination of Chinese newspapers, Chinese schools and Chinese languages. Such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malay in this country.
2) On the 24th August 1968, at a public rally at Slim River, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government’s policy on language by telling your audience that a tourist poster with the Malay wordings “speak the National language only” clearly illustrated the one language policy of the government and that the dubbing of English, Chinese and Tamil T.V. films with Malay was unfair to the other races as their languages were not being given equal status such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malays in this country.
3) On the 7th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at 24 milestone, Sg. Besi road, Kuala Lumpur, and on 21st. September 1968, at Sungei Way new Village Selangor, on both these occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the MCA had instead of striving for the rights of the Chinese Language and Education in fact assisted the government in suppressing the Chinese Language as evidenced by the Non-recognition of Nanyang University project. The speeches are evidence of a deliberate misinterpretation of actual facts and had resulted in generating suspicion and animosity between the Malays and the Chinese in Malaysia and thereby creating a feeling of tension and racial hatred.
4) On the 29th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at Batu Pahat, Johore, on 2nd November 1968, at Lawan Kuda Bahru, Gopeng, Perak, and on 26th January 1969, at Jalan Yow, Pudu, Kuala Lumpur, on these three occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the alliance’s policy was a “racialist policy” as the Alliance had given more privileges to Bumiputras in University education and that there were first and second class citizens – the Bumiputras being first class citizens, and that the awards of honour such as P.P.M, are not worth anything because they were given to men in the streets and that P.P.M. stands for “ PELAN PELAN MATI”. By these utterances you had deliberately distorted the actual Government policies and by doing so you had generated racial tension, hatred and disharmony in the country.
5) On 12th, Feb 1969, at a DAP public rally held at Jalan Lengkongan Brunei, Kuala Lumpur, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was showing discrimination between the various races in examination entry to University of Malaya, employment and in the distribution of land and that special privileges were being given to the Malays. By these utterances you deliberately distorted the Government policies and thereby causing suspicion and animosity between the various races.
6) On 13th May 1969, at a public rally held at Kampong Ayer, Kota Kinabalu, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was trying to have a Malay Malaysia by dividing the people into bumiputras and non-bumiputras, that “the Malays were first class Bumiputras” and that the Government was carrying out a policy of “Malaysiation” of Sabah whereby all top post were held by the Malays. You also stirred anti-Malay and anti-Islamic religious feelings by telling your audience that the Government was pursuing the policy of exploitation by Malays of other races and that the Government by holding an International Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur had intended to send Malaysian citizens to die in the Middle East in order to capture Jerusalem for the Muslim World. By this speech you had made dangerous statements of a communal nature there by fostering communal resentment fear and apprehension amongst sections of the public in Sabah.
The answer to that would be yes, but it is not. The correct answer would be it is but it is being misinterpreted by its followers. And as such, the doings of Muslims have allowed anti-Muslims to further feed fuel to the Islamophobic fire as depicted above.
Many Muslim men think it is their right to beat their women if they have wronged the former. I have been quoted Surah an-Nisaa’ verse 34 (hereinafter referred to as Surah 4:34) which have been quoted again, by Islamophobists, below:
In Malaysia, the number of reported cases of domestic violence hovers at around 3,500 annually. I emphasise on the word reported because there still exists the stigma about reporting and how the victim would be viewed by both family members and the society at large. With the recent video of a domestic violence act taking place in the state of Penang going viral, many comments were made about the video; ranging from “Islam does not permit wife-beating” to “maybe she deserved it.” Some even said, “He shouldn’t have kicked her. He should have used the siwak as the Prophet had taught.”
I believe it is time to clear this misconception and confusion so no one can belittle Islam – the religion of peace that places the welfare and rights of women in so many verses.
In Surah 4:34, the verse was interpreted by many as such:
Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand
The Quran uses the Arabic word qawwamuna in the beginning of this verse, so it reads “Men are the qawwamuna of women.” The word qawwamuna means to continuously stand over something (e.g. a guard or a caretaker) or to maintain something. The closest single word in English to the root qawwam is probably guardian. The grammatical form of qawwam combines the concepts of physical maintenance and protection as well as responsibility. The word denotes no superiority but responsibility. A correct translation of “qawwamuna a’ala aln-nisa” would therefore be “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women“. To use “in charge” is quite a loose translation.
So a husband must be a protector/guardian and maintainer of his wife. It is important to note that the expression “men are qawwamuna over women” only describes the relationship between husband and wife within the family. The expression does not refer to the relationship between men and women in general.
Abu Hurairah r.a narrated that the Prophet said: “The most perfect of the believers in their belief are those with the best manners, and the best of you are those who are best with their wives.” (Sahih Bukhari)
Therefore, why does Surah 4:34 allow wives to be beaten by their husband? Well, it does not! It ends with the sentence “….Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.” Characteristically, this reminds men that if they misbehave God is watching over them and will deal with them. It is relevant here to mention the story of how the Prophet once saw Ibnu Mas’ud with his hand raised, about to hit his slave. The Prophet cried out, “God has more power over you than you have over him“, so Ibnu Mas’ud dropped his hand and set the slave free. In the theme under discussion it is important to observe that four successive verses end in the following ways: ‘God has full knowledge of everything . . . ’ (4:32), ‘God is witness to everything . . . ’ (4:33), ‘God is most exalted and grand. . .’ (4:34) and ‘God is all knowing, all aware. . . ’ (4:35).
The Arabic word used is Surah 4:34 is “idribuhunna” which is derived from the word “daraba” which means “hit” or “beat.” The problem is, not all words derived from “daraba” carry those meanings. The word “idribuhunna” in Surah 4:34 could also mean “leave.”
Or it could mean “strike” as in “daraba al-ma’ `ala wajhihi” which literally means “to strike the face“, but if you take that in the literal sense, then Muslims would be smacking each other’s face, when in fact this sentence refers to “striking your face with water” as in performing the ablution.
If I say to you in Arabic “daraba laka mathal,” then don’t start avoiding my hands because all I just said was “give you an example.” This word was used in Surah 14:24:
Do you not see how Allah has given the example of a good word? It is like a good tree, whose root is firmly fixed, and whose branches reach the sky (اَلَمۡ تَرَ كَيۡفَ ضَرَبَ اللّٰهُ مَثَلًا كَلِمَةً طَيِّبَةً )
Another derivation of the word “daraba” is “darabtum” which means “to go forth” or “to separate” as in Surah 4:94:
Believers! When you go forth in the way of Allah…. ( يٰۤـاَيُّهَا الَّذِيۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡۤا اِذَا ضَرَبۡتُمۡ فِىۡ سَبِيۡلِ اللّٰهِ
Therefore, “daraba” can mean “beat“, “give example”, or “go forth.”
If the explanation above still fails to move the Muslim men who believe beating women is their birthright, I can quote other verses and Hadith Sahih that forbid the beating of women:
The first is Surah 4:19:
Believers! It is not lawful for you to become heirs to women against their will. It is not lawful that you should put constraint upon them that you may take away anything of what you have given them; (you may not put constraint upon them) unless they are guilty of brazenly immoral conduct. Live with your wives in a good manner. If you dislike them in any manner, it may be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed much good for you.
Next is Surah 30:21:
And of His Signs is that He has created mates for you from your own kind28 that you may find peace in them and He has set between you love and mercy. Surely there are Signs in this for those who reflect.
So do you think the beaten wife in the video deserved being pummelled as such? Even if she, hypothetically, had done something really nasty? For Muslim men, I give you Surah 3:134:
Who spend [in the cause of Allah ] during ease and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people – and Allah loves the doers of good.
The Prophet whom we as Muslims claim we love and whose examples we follow underscored Surah 3:134:
Narrated Mu’awiyah al-Qushayri: “I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)”
Narrated Mu’awiyah ibn Haydah: “I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2138)”
What about the right to beat a wife but not on the face? Let us examine the two Hadiths regarding this matter:
Narrated Salim: “… Omar said: ‘The Prophet forbade beating on the face.’ (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Hunting, Slaughtering, Volume 7, Book 67, Number 449)”
Narrated Abu Hurairah: “The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: When one of you inflicts a beating, he should avoid striking the face. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 38, Prescribed Punishments (Kitab Al-Hudud), Number 4478)”
Neither narration above provides any proof about beating the wife being as alright as long as it is not on the face. The striking can be used when disciplining our children, but stresses on avoiding striking the face. The importance of this is underscored in the following Hadith:
“He who has no mercy towards younger ones, and does not acknowledge the honour of our older ones, is not one of us.” [At-Tirmidzi]
There have you, why you cannot strike, beat, pummel, kick, beat lightly, beat but not the face, the woman whom you love enough to marry her and promised to protect and provide for her, taking that responsibility from her father or guardian, as in the Ijab performed during marriage.
Abu Hurairah reported: “I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: One is not strong because of one’s wrestling skillfully. They said: Allah’s Messenger, then who is strong? He said: He who controls his anger when he is in a fit of rage. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Virtue, Good Manners and Joining of the Ties of Relationship (Kitab Al-Birr was-Salat-I-wa’l-Adab), Book 032, Number 6314)”
And I leave you with, again, what Allah SWT has commanded us:
Who spend [in the cause of Allah ] during ease and hardship and who restrain anger and who pardon the people – and Allah loves the doers of good.
If you still think it is your birthright to beat your wife, I suggest you beat up her brothers too…if you are a man.
SeaDemon Says 
You must be logged in to post a comment.