Chew Mei Fun's "Blurt"
I had previously written two blog entries about a recent incident of "Lesson 1969":
1) Najib's "Kg. Baru" After Chew Mei Fun's "Lesson 1969"
2) Lesson 1969, Voting and Chew Mei Fun ?
In the entries above, I have quoted Lulu , the mainstream blogger regarding her translations on Chew Mei Fun, the current Wanita MCA member and Member of Parliament of PJ Utara 's infamous "blurt" :
"If we do not have enough representation in the Barisan Nasional, then to the Chinese community, the lesson of 1969 is sufficient. I think we cannot afford another such scenario.”
It seems that it was mentioned by Lulu and another Wanita MCA member through a mail addressed to me, China Press misquoted Chew Mei Fun by originally publishing her "lesson in 1969" as "May 13". In fact, China Press had apologised for the blunder.
Which brings us all to one question : What is the most significant event in 1969 if it is not May 13? I would like to direct this question towards our PJ Utara lady, Miss Chew : If you were not referring to the May 13 lesson, then which "lesson" were you talking about? Otherwise, can I, in my personal opinion conclude that you have problems communicating with the public?
"Misunderstanding" seems to be a favourite word used by many politicians on the public when similar incidents occur. Luckily, Miss Chew had yet to say that. In order to avoid such issues, Miss Chew must clarify exactly what she meant on "Lesson 1969". That is the job of a Member of Parliament, functioning as a citizens' representative. Explanation is necessary especially when the "misunderstanding" causes a big resentment from the people who voted for you to speak for them. I believe when people resent, that would mean you are not exactly speaking for them. Miss Chew, please do your job. It is not good to lose votes for the "lesson 1969" remarks. Everybody is waiting and the votes are counting, please do not hesitate. It's been days.
Tony Pua's "Flyer"
Today, I found a new comment in my previous entry by someone nicknamed "PJ Utara Resident".
PJ Utara Resident said...
Muhibbah is a personal side but politics is a different animal. So it is best to keep it apart.
Many attacked Chew Mei Fun, why is there no one attacking Tony Pua. He was found to distribute materials only to non Malay houses.
The material is intended to raise racial disharmony in the community. The issues he raised are those that are going through and have gone through the court process. He is challenging the court decision and disrupting it;s process. That is a contempt of court.
Sagadoola, Mob1900 and Zorro, how? Whats your answer?
As I see, right and wrong must have its basis and rationale. Just coz you'll favour him, you are not blinded by the danger his act could cause and the offensive nature of his act.
Friday, February 08, 2008 5:12:00 PM
The blogger Big Dog, who is a pro-UMNO supporter had published the flyer and the article in his post Police report made against Tony Pua .
In order to highlight the NEUTRALITY of this blog, I would like to bring to attention two paragraphs from the flyer" :
1) We have been following the silent creeping in of Islamisation which are affecting the lives of non-Muslims.
2) The Federal Constitution guarantees the freedom of religion. The DAP hopes that we will join hands to defend the Federal Constitution. We strongly believe that a secular state is the best form of government to protect the interests of all religions, including Islam in a multi-racial and multi-religious country like Malaysia.
I would like to state that I do not quite prefer the tone used in sentence 1 although there is nothing logically wrong in it. It is indeed true that the Islamisation process is somehow affecting the lives of Non-Muslims. Islam is the religion of Muslims and should only affect the lives of Muslims. It should not affect the lives of non-Muslims as our Federal Constitution promises the freedom of religion in a secular state of which Islam is the official religion as highlighted in sentence 2. Nothing seditious or inappropriate with that.
I find that it would best that Tony had provided an additional paragraph to clarify that "Islamisation should only affect Muslims and non-Muslims, therefore 'so on and so forth' incidents should be avoided. "
" 'so on and so forth' party would ensure the interests of all would be protected" (already mentioned in sentence 2).
The combination would be perfect. It would be good if Tony can make extra clarification in his blog. I would recommend that such flyers to be distributed to people of all races and religions. Therefore, I would like to pose a challenge to this "PJ Utara resident", which part or sentence in Tony Pua's flyer is causing racial disharmony. Tell me point by point and I may publish them because I can't find any.
Whether Tony Pua is in contempt of court or not, I would like to say that I do not find that he has done any of that. Just because the cases are in court, that does not mean one cannot speak, opine or comment about them. Besides, I leave it for the court to decide as I am not a judge.
So, "PJ Utara resident" , I am now giving you a chance to provide your opinion. I would like to write something not in favour of Tony Pua but one cannot criticise another person of something that the person hasn't done. As you said earlier, right and wrong must have its basis and rationale. I need your help. Time for you to prove it.
The Difference Between the Flyer and the Blurt
The least of all, one can understand the meaning Tony Pua was trying to relate. I take it that this Chew Mei Fun is not talking about "May 13" because China Press was told to readjust the phrase to "lesson 1969".
Again, I would like to remind that May 13 1969 is a significant date in Malaysia of racial clashes. The Malaysian chinese and malay casualties were many. Is that because, at that pont of time, the people did not vote for this so-called "chinese representation" party? What is this "lesson 1969" that Chew Mei Fun was talking about that is not significant for everyone to recall? Miss Chew, please tell us if it is not "May 13", then what is it? Please answer all the questions posted.
It would be great if Miss Chew Mei Fun can write a letter of explanation and get it published in Malaysiakini .