PJ Utara : Chew Mei Fun's "Blurt" and Tony Pua's "Flyer"
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 .
7 comments:
I'd only like to make the following comments. Readers can make their judgements.
1. I find it a little funny how did the UMNO PJ guys et al. conclude that the flyer was only distribute to non-Muslim houses? They got their hands on a copy didn't they?
2. DAP and my views on the issue discussed is available widely on the party's website and my blog - for public viewing by ALL Malaysians irrespective of race or religion. In fact, I've written plenty on freedom of religion recently.
Hence, to accuse me of attempting to "divide and rule" i.e., tell one story to one community and tell another to others, as BN does is complete nonsense.
I have every respect for Islam as a religion. I have written extensively that toleration and respect for each other has to be a two-way process, and not one imposed on another. Only then, could we achieve a real "muhibbah" nation that goes beyond rhetoric.
Please keep the discussion going. I won't be commenting further here. I'll update my blog if I get called up by the police soon ;-)
Tony
Huh ... Tony trying to play innocence.
1. He gave a flyer to a home that in the old voters list is a non Muslim home. The house was sold to a Muslim and the previous owner has yet to change their voting area.
This is a peaceful friendly neighbour and neighbours shared common concern. When checked around the neighbourhood, it was conclusively found that registered Muslim homes are intentionally skipped.
Since you are trying to do a nahi nahi, emulate the Bollywood actress. It is more sultry than your smile; a smile without the crinch at the eyes - a sign of insincerity and lie.
Lair lair pants on fire. You can try to pretend it is funny and laugh all you like Tony. I know how it works and you did it, you crummy liar!
2. Judging from the last GE, Ronnie Liew did miserably in PJU. DAP desperately need a sensational issue to draw the attention of the majority non Malay voters within the shortest of time. The most convenient and oftenly practised DAP way is to stir racial issue.
Hope you do not play ignorance to say DAP never done it and will not do it. No need to pull a cheap diversion by saying BN this and BN that. Fuck BN or Pak Lah for all I care. I'm talking about you and with you.
3. The fact that Tony phrase his opening para as "... silent creeping Islamisation ..." is a precisely well intended target on Islam. So, it is not Islamisation but a silent creeping one. That is a play of word and a convenient exit clause for denial.
How could he say I have every respect for Islam as a religion when he uses Islam as his bogey and intend to instill doubt and suspicion over a non existence so-called policy of Islamisation on the non Muslims?
Precisely Tony, which so-called "islamisation" policy that has denied non Muslim from practising their religion guaranteed under article 11?
Do not give me the list that has been spreading on the Internet. It is a shallow and not thought through accusation.
There is no policy of force conversion of Islam on non Muslim. There is no policy that deny non Muslims from practising their religion in the manner quoted in Article 11 of the Constitution as "in peace and harmony". So Tony what do you actually mean?
4. Generally the cheap trick of Tony is to make accusation based on issues that is administrative nature. Not only are illegal temples are plough down but illegal surau, shops, and homes too. Generally all involved are on illegally occupied land and due notice have been provided.
There may have been isolated possible cases of poor handling of the sensitivity. However, that is a local government matter. It is not part of any Islamisation policy that Tony Pua is irresponsibly trying to play up as responsible for destroying houses of worship. If it is Islamisation, shouldn't it preserve the surau or little Masjid also? What do you have to say, Tony?
5. Another cheap accusation made is to point to dispute of legalistic nature which can only be dealt in the courts and whose judge's decision is the finality. The authority to interpret the law and decide on disputes falls only on judges. It is not within the realm of political party (BN included), NGO (Bar Council included), Parliament, and even the King to interpret and decide!
Discussing court cases in proceeding tantamount to attempting to influence the court and is an offense of the contempt of court.
The fact of life Tony everything other thing in life has procedure, documents and legality involvement. Much of the disputes in court are of that nature. What are you seeking then? Do as you like lawlessness and anarchy.
Although it is sad to see some cases involves family and children, the law is the law. It is beyond Tony to do anything should he be elected MP. Neither could Tony stop spouses from changing religion, having dispute with the spouse and taking it to the court. He is making an issue that has no relevance to him as mere politician.
6. That is the problem with the law and it's insensitive nature. All of us want a law that is not merely law for law sake. There must be morality, humanity, and sensitivity. That is the problem of the precedent-based English Common Law.
This brings the point of Tony's wild generalisation on former CJ, Sheikh Fairuz's suggestion for a Malaysian common law as Islamisation.
Is Tony aware that the Constitution and Law in this counrty has its roots in previous laws? This stretch back to the Syariah law tradition of the Melaka Empire. Read the book "Introduction to Malaysian Legal History".
If he is so fearful and allergic to Islam, how could he claim as defender of the Malaysian Constitution that provide for the role and function of Islam? If the cares to notice, the Constitution makes no mention of any religion other than Islam.
See, 2007 is not the first time Sheikh Fairuz spoke of it. He spoke of it earlier in circa 2004. It was written by IKIM and published in the Star. Where was Tony then? Trying to con investors into his defunk e-Village deal in Singapore? Where was Tony's voice then? DAP too? Why only making such commotion now?
Read back the actual speeches by Sheikh Fairuz. He is trying to address the problem of English Common Law that is not in sync with the Eastern and Oriental value and culture. He specifically mention of incorporating the universal values found in all religion and culture practised in Malaysia.
He did mention of using Islam. That is a natural choice as one of the religion and values for reference. Islam is quite advanced in area of jurispudence. Why should it not be referred to? Furthermore, isn't Islam the religion of the Federation and is part of the historical evolution of the Malaysian Constitution? Rest asure it is intended not for a standalone of only Islamic input.
7. This expose the prejudicial habit of generalising anything and everything Islam as Islamisation by the anglophilic western-centric Bar Council and the likes of Tony and DAP.
Tony's attempt to make simplistic generalisation on Islamisation and claimed secular status of the Constitution exposed his ignorance on the subject. More dangerous is that he is using it to fuel interfaith and interracial prejudice and sentiment among the simple unsuspecting folk in PJU. This is a DAP's hsitorical tradition of communal politics that has not shed it's skin.
8. Now I challenge Tony to reply and answer all the criticisms levelled at him in the 13 million guy ramble blog where his wrongdoing was first exposed. Don't take the wimpy way of running way to refuse comment. Otherwise, he will be permanently known as irresponsible, coward and undemocratic (great Singapore tradition).
Quite a few of his constituency is in that blog. If he wants to be the representative to all in PJU Utara, irrespective of race as he claims, he should be bold enough to clarify and defend himself. He must finish what he started.
If he can speak at dialogue and forums, he can surely face the constituents of PJU. Answer or you will have to answer in PJ Utara during the GE!
Reply coming soon in the next post.
I support Tony Pua. Lets all give him a chance.
Wow "PJU Resident" hopefully you have a blog. Your reasoning skills are not bad, but they are flawed as we'll in my opinion. Nobody can be 100% fully unbiased & neutral. Your biasness however is strongly apparent in the way & what you have written.
I will say this though & not to defend Tony, its just my opinion.
Tony does not need to answer you! I think the letter speaks for itself & people are smart enough to interpret its meaning & on who they will vote for.
In Malaysia, people are commonly categorised into Muslims & Non-Muslims, nothing wrong with that. Muslims have their issues & buttons, & so do the non-Muslims.
For many moderate & urban non-Muslims (& even some Muslims), some issues that they perceive as true, because it affects their personal security are:
- Inflation & a Worsening Economy
- Increasing Crime & Corruption
- Religous Freedom, Tolerance & Secularism
- Islamisation & how it affects the non-muslims
There are a few more minor ones, but these are the biggies & are all supported by things that have & are happening, stories & pure facts.
Looking at those issues, these are things that are happening all over the world. But in this country the non-Muslims feel more threatened because of comparatively higher corruption, UMNO's dominance, 50 over percent of the population are Muslims & Government positions are all dominated by Muslims!
Now, Tony only speaks for us moderate non-Muslims & what we feel, based on history & facts. So, if you Muslims want to make things better, practice what you preach... for action speaks louder then words ever will!
You have no ball, Tony. Why dont you put your thots forward in http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/1024/ and see how your so called would be voters judge you.
Hi,
I am not tony, but i think some of the question raised by the PJ Resident can be answered easily enough, that i ll attempt:
1. Flyer only to non-muslim homes If you have scarce resource/money to print limited amount of flyers on issues that would ignite more reactions from one group of people, do you (a) distribute only to them (b)segment your market and distribute to them first, and then the rest (c) distribute randomly (d) distribute to its own supporters only. With its limited resource, unlike parti dacing, i am not surprised if (b) had happened.
2. Sensational rhetorics from DAP
I would disagree that DAP needs sensational topics to get attention. there re sufficient sensations from paklah's blunders alone. Ronnie liu's 2004 performance is irrelevant really (btw, in 1999, ronnie came close by losing about 2500votes deficit).
3. Targeting Islam or Islamisation?
It is not targeting Islam, duh. It's targetting the fact that THIS BN administration has allowed creeping of Islamisation into its civil services and legal system. Silent n creeping imply "non-existence" policy, but deliberate efforts from the little napoleons to impose their own rules on non-muslim. which rules? why can't my son bring his non-halal lunch to a school where 40% of its student are non-muslim? why liquor license is so hard to get, even if i m serving only to non-muslim?
4. Administrative or local government issues instead?
local government issues are not issues? insensitivity to other religions is not an issue? BLATANT bias for suraus vs other religions' facilities is not an issue?
5. legal system is not up to BN?
What a joke. you live in which country all these while?? If discussing ongoing of court cases is contempt of court, i think 99.9% of adult malaysians are going to the jail for it, because the news report them all the time, and us discussed about it all the time. btw, the law is made by lawmakers, which is what MPs/politicians actually do. obviously he has no real understanding of our political system
6. Common law is inhumane in comparison to Syar'ia law?
wow. you re the first to say that! and our version of common laws actually dated back to Melayu Melaka? Wow 2nd! Who wrote the book "Introduction to Malaysian Legal History"? WOw...what a perversion of history!
7. secular, anglophilic western-centric Bar Council and DAP? Communal politics of DAP?
I think so too...but communal politics seem to be the only politics in malaysia thus far
8. The "13 million guy ramble blog"
Where? Bigdogdotcom?? Okay, i ll go there..
Post a Comment