Muslim burial for elderly convert after court ruling




SEREMBAN: Amir Gan Abdullah, 74, who died last Sunday, and whose Muslim and non-Muslim children laid claim to his body, was buried yesterday as a Muslim after the Syariah High Court ruled yesterday that he was a Muslim convert.
His eldest son, Abdul Rahman Gan, 47, claimed the body from the Tuanku Jaafar Hospital. Amir Gan was buried at the Tuan Haji Said Muslim cemetery about 6.30pm.Syariah judge Mohd Nadzri Abdul Rahman gave his decision after hearing an ex parte application seeking to declare Amir Gan a Muslim.The application was filed by the Negri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Council, the Negri Sembilan Islamic Affairs Department, the Registrar of Converts and the plaintiff, Abdul Rahman.The non-Muslim members of Amir Gan's family did not turn up in court although a notice had been sent to them on Tuesday.
According to the facts of the case, Gan Eng Gor had embraced Islam on July 3 last year at his house in Taman Mega Way, Sikamat, near here and took the name of Amir Gan Abdullah.
The non-Muslim members of Amir Gan's family had failed in their attempt to obtain an injunction to defer hearing of the application in the Syariah Court. -- Bernama



Nation

Monday January 21, 2008

Eldest son claims dead father was a Muslim

SEREMBAN: Police yesterday took away the remains of a 74-year-old man from a Chinese funeral parlour near here after his eldest son claimed that the deceased was a Muslim.Abdul Rahman Gan Abdullah, 47, who had embraced Islam several years ago, lodged a report at the Seremban 2 police station claiming that his father, Gan Eng Gor, had converted to Islam on July 3 last year and had taken the name Amir Gan Abdullah.When met at the funeral parlour, one of Eng Gor’s eight other children, Hock Sin, said the family was shocked to hear of this.“When my father died this morning in Klang, I called to inform Abdul Rahman as he was the eldest. The entire family is shocked at his claim.“We have been practising Buddhists all our lives. How is it that none of us, including my mother who has been looking after my sick father for the past two years, has no knowledge of this?” asked Hock Sin.Temiang assemblyman Datuk Tiger Lee Yuen Fong and Rahang asemblyman Datuk Yip Chee Kiong, who were at the funeral parlour, appealed to all parties to remain calm and allow the authorities to assess the situation.They also spoke with Eng Gor’s widow, Chua Chun, 65.Hock Sin said it was not possible for his father to have embraced Islam as he had been bedridden for the past two years after suffering a stroke.“He could not talk, so how was it possible that he converted?”
State Islamic Affairs assistant director Mohd Yusof Tahir, who arrived at the funeral parlour later, produced copies of a certificate and a card from the department which stated that Eng Gor had embraced Islam on July 3 last year.Abdul Rahman was not present.Speaking to reporters later, Mohd Yusof said the matter would be heard before the Syariah Court today.Lee told reporters that the MCA would help appoint a counsel for the aggrieved family.Eng Gor’s remains are being kept at the Tuanku Jaafar Hospital mortuary. Court defers hearing on man’s religious status

SEREMBAN: The Syariah Court here yesterday deferred the hearing to determine the religious status of a 74-year-old dead man to allow his family to appoint a syariah counsel.
Registrar Abdul Razak Mat Nayan told the dead man’s children that they would also have to submit the names of those who would testify during the hearing as part of the court process.
On Sunday, police removed the remains of Gan Eng Gor from a Chinese funeral parlour near here after his eldest son claimed that Eng Gor was a Muslim.
Abdul Rahman Gan Abdullah, 47, who had embraced Islam several years ago, lodged a police report claiming that his father converted to Islam on July 3 last year and had taken the name Amir Gan Abdullah.
However, Eng Gor’s widow, Chua Chun, 65, who had been looking after her bedridden husband over the past two years and the couple’s seven other children, denied this.
Wednesday January 23, 2008

Family disputes dead man’s conversion, takes case to court

By SARBAN SINGH

SEREMBAN: The family of a 74-year-old Chinese man who died on Sunday filed a case at the High Court here yesterday challenging his conversion to Islam.
The summons was filed by Gan Eng Gor’s sixth child, Gan Hock Lim, 40, a supervisor living in Klang.
In his application, he named his eldest brother Abdul Rahman Gan Abdullah and Shasainie Siau Abdullah, who purportedly witnessed the conversion, as first and second defendants.

He also named the state Islamic Affairs Department, Islamic Affairs Council (MAINS) and the National Registration Department as defendants.
On Sunday, police took away Eng Gor’s remains from a funeral parlour near here after Abdul Rahman claimed that the deceased was a Muslim. Eng Gor’s remains are now in a hospital morgue.
Abdul Rahman, 47, who embraced Islam several years ago, lodged a police report at the Seremban 2 police station claiming that his father had converted to Islam on July 3 last year and taken the name Amir Gan Abdullah.
Eng Gor’s widow Chua Chun, 65, and the couple’s seven other children were shocked when told of this.
Speaking to reporters earlier, Hock Lim said it was strange that his father could have converted because he had vehemently opposed his son’s decision to embrace Islam.
“My father suffered a stroke five years ago and another one two years ago. Since he was unable to talk or walk, how could he have indicated his intention to embrace Islam?” he asked.
In his application, Hock Lim also asked MAINS to defer the case at the Syariah Court to decide on his father’s religious status. An application was filed at the Syariah Court on Monday by MAINS officials.



Chinese buried as a Muslim after ruling



Posted by Raja Petra
Saturday, 26 January 2008
Syariah Court ruling angers his Buddhist family, who insist his conversion was impossible A CHINESE man was buried as a Muslim following a court ruling, sparking angry protests yesterday from his Buddhist family who said it was medically impossible for the paralysed man to have converted to Islam.
An Islamic Syariah High Court in Negeri Sembilan ruled on Thursday that Mr Gan Eng Gor, 74, also identified as Amir Gan Abdullah, was a Muslim and should be buried under Islamic rites. The burial took place late on Thursday afternoon in Negeri Sembilan. 'My father was paralysed for the past two years after a stroke, he couldn't walk or talk at all. How could he have converted?' said Mr Gan Hock Sin, 42, one of the deceased man's eight children. He added that the only proof the family had of their father's conversion was a thumbprint on a document. 'We have been practising Buddhists all our lives. How is it that none of us, including my mother, who have been taking care of my sick father for the past two years, knew of the conversion?' he told The Straits Times.
'My father was paralysed for the past two years after a stroke, he couldn't walk or talk at all. How could he have converted?'

MR GAN HOCK SIN, a son of the dead man.The man's body was seized by police when the family was carrying out Buddhist rites at a Chinese funeral parlour. The police action came after a complaint by the deceased's son, Mr Abdul Rahman Gan, 47, who became a Muslim 10 years ago. He claimed his father converted to Islam last July. But the rest of the family denied the conversion and launched a legal battle. The deceased's wife, Madam Chua Chun, 65, has said that her husband did not perform his duties as a Muslim and continued to eat pork. But Negeri Sembilan Syariah Court judge Mohamad Nadzri Abdul Rahman said he ruled in favour of the eldest son because Madam Chua and her seven other children were not in court and he could not hear their arguments. Mr Gan Hock Sin said the family did not go to the Syariah Court because they felt it was unfair to hear the case there when they were not Muslims. 'I am not satisfied with the way the courts handled this. It is unfair for us, for non-Muslims,' he said. The family had asked the state's civil High Court to hear the case, but a judge ruled he had no jurisdiction in the matter as the Syariah Court had already made a decision. Malaysia has a dual court system for civil matters, with secular courts for non-Muslims and syariah courts for Muslims. In interfaith disputes involving Muslims, the syariah court usually has the last word, making a favourable decision for professed non-Muslims less likely. The case is the latest in an increasing number of religious disputes that have raised tensions among non-Muslim minorities who feel that their rights are being eroded in favour of the official religion of Islam. In a separate case earlier this month, the Islamic authorities had claimed a Chinese woman's body, arguing that she had converted. But the dead woman's husband, who maintained that she had been a Christian until her death, won the case after the authorities withdrew their claims, saying her conversion had not been carried out according to Islamic law. By Hazlin Hassan,

The Straits Times hazlinh@sph.com.sg

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it



Where is the Hikmah?, the so called muslim intelectual like Dr Syed Tawfik Ali may I ask? If this thing keep going than it erodes my self believe in Islam in Malaysia. My faith remain intact but my believe in the people remains weak. I am a Muslim, I remain so because I believe in it but I decry that many who sits on the bench do not have hikmah but mostly overzealous bigot. I have no faith in man of robe, forgive me for I do not understand. Tell me what I say is wrong and I beg to be taught for basically the fundemental religion that I know of do not condone this act of stupidity. The little bit of Fekah and Usuluddin taught me that the body is a vassal. The carrier of soul, when a Muslim dies he soul will go to another world, Alam Barzakh, a world where we were taught is not our domain but God's. In faith we accept it, so I beg to ask who has right on the vassal? That is the question we have to ask. A kadi(Islamic Judge) should be about dispersing justice, not avoiding one. We are wrong for not caring for our brothers, for not consoling him for not being there when he needed the most is it right we have ownership on the vassal? As a Muslim we know we can pray (sembahyang Jenazah) without the body being present, we can still conduct our gatherings of prayers to him without him, do we need the body to be buried according to Muslim whereas his conversion is suspect? If there is a dispute isn't it better if we look at ourselve whether we have done any wrong? Why do we need to create hardship to the family bereaved? It was our mistake for not attending to him, burrying him doesn't make it right? The living continues to live while the dead lies dead! Why do you have to make two wrongs and think it is right? Whether he is cremated or buried or thrown to the sea, it is just a vassal, let's contest on the vassal and look at the fact of the case. The Kadi must be wise enough to understand the dispute. Whether he is a Muslim that is secondary, look at the history of Islam, look at perjanjian Hudaibiyah and look at the tragedy of the Jews in Madinah. Muhammad never dispense justice of the sword, he has always been magnimonous, in his last hadiths(speech) he says those who follow the book and my sunnah will never be let astray so follow that please!
The great thing about islam is its justice and if you care to read Karen Armstrong, justice was the focal point of the religion development. Justice must be serve done and not just heard. Sometimes it is hard to the right thing but a kadi should be rule by facts and understand the facts. If the reason for the ruling is because the non muslim family did not come to the court then, are they wrong? When the tribe of Israel in Madinah was tried for treason they refuse to accept Islamic Law and court, Muhammad relented and tried them under Torah law which mandated that all Male age 11 to 60 to be kill so be it, it was their law. Look at fact of the case, when a person has stroke one of the blood vessel in your brain has burst, some is so severe you lost the ability to talk and walk. You are incapicated. It affect the brain, does it affect your cognative ability, your reasoning, perhaps no but from experience it does, a bit. So judge base on the facts available. Two wrongs doesn't make a right, it make worse. Here is some more disturbing news and I appeal to the Muslim to ponder Wherein lies justice in Islam as practise in Malaysia?


Justice and Fair play for the family of Gan Eng Gor (deceased)


Posted by Raja Petra
Monday, 28 January 2008
The Majlis Agama officers came and attempted to snatch the dead body, all our family members more shocked and angry, we resisted and strongly protested against the removal of our father’s body.

1. Our father was seventy four (74) years old. He suffered a severe stroke in 2006. He was as immobilized,bedridden, mentally unsound, cannot speak, partially deaf and has very poor vision.
2. We transferred him to stay with one of our brothers in Klang. Our aged mother looked after, bathed and fed him. She also helped to look after our nephews and nieces.
3. Our father died on 20th Jan 2008. As Gan Hock Seng (the eldest son) is a member of the family, we informed him of our father’s death. He was then told us that our father is a Muslim, we were shocked and did not believed him. So we continue to perform the wake service as our father have never led a muslim life. The Majlis Agama officers came and attempted to snatch the dead body, all our family members more shocked and angry, we resisted and strongly protested against the removal of our father’s body.
4. We obtained his alleged conversion papers from Majlis Agama the second day.
5. We were advised by our solicitors that there are serious irregularities in the said conversion papers especially the Declaration of Conversion into Islam.
a). The declaration was before a Pegawai Ukhuwah. His rubber stamp was on the paper but that officer did not sign.
b). Further there was no signatory at the certification column.
c). There was an illegal alteration on the date to 3rd July 2007.
d). The thumb print was questionable as we are certain that our deceased father was in Klang and not at the address No. 451, Taman Megaway, 70400 Sikamat, Seremban as stated in the application form.
e). His address stated in the Borang Perakuan Memeluk Islam is No: 1272, Jalan TBK 6/2, Taman Bkt Kepayang, 70200 Seremban, the residence of the eldest son. We wish to state that our father has never resided at this address.
f). The Majlis Agama Authorities claimed that our deceased father made an oral declaration in Arabic accepting the Muslim faith. Our family has medical confirmations from three doctors that our father was unable to speak.
g). We were asked to appear before the Syariah Court Seremban, we believe the Syariah Court is for Muslims only.
h). We refused to attend at the Syariah Court on a matter of principle as non-Muslims. We refused to submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court.
i). The Syariah Court made a unilateral declaration that our father is a Muslim and is to be buried in accordance to Muslim rites.
j). We filed an application at the High Court Seremban to adjudicate on the validity, authenticity, veracity and legality of the conversion paper especially the declaration of acceptance into Islam.
k). The High Court Seremban dismissed our application on the ground that he has no jurisdiction to hear this matter as the subject matter falls within the purview of the Syariah Court. We beg to differ.
l). We were indeed shocked and aggrieved at the simplistic way the High Court disposed off this matter. We only seek justice, fair play and to find out the truth on his alleged conversion.
10. The eldest son Gan Hock Seng converted to Islam years ago. Our father and mother had strenuously opposed his conversion.
11. This eldest son had allegedly converted our father without the knowledge of our other and all other seven siblings.
12. Further, the eldest son had NEVER taken care of him physically and financially. He hardly visited him too.
13. Even if the eldest son had converted our father, we like to ask:
i). Why is it that he did not take care of him and brought him to stay in his house to lead a Muslim life?
ii). Why did he allow our father to continue living in a non‐Muslim home in Klang ? Our father had never prayed and continued eating pork and other non‐halal food. He never revealed to anyone that he has converted to Islam.
iii). Why he as a Muslim, did not ensure that our father (if he had been indeed converted) led a Muslim life ?
iv). Why is it that the Agama Islam authorities did not visit and follow up with our father – the alleged new convert, after his conversion?
14. We believe we have been unfairly treated by our eldest brother and the Agama Islam authorities in this alleged conversion of our father. If there had been a conversion, we firmly believe that the Agama Islam authorities should have informed all members of the family. There should not be a fight over the body of dead person. There should be dignity and respect on the dead person.
15. We hope the PM and the higher ups in the Islamic Authorities review this case and to ensure that the truth is unravelled. We hope that all conversions to Islam is fair and transparent and made known to all the next of kin of the convert.
We Seek Justice, Fair play and Truth in this matter.
From,
Gan Hok Ming for and on behalf of the family members of Gan Eng Gor (deceased)
Date: 25th January 2008
Justice and Fair play for the family of Gan Eng Gor (deceased)

It’s no guarantee that just because you are born to a Hindu, Buddhist or Christian parent — or even a Muslim parent — that you will remain in that religion., says Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas

Ikim D-G sheds light on Subashini case: 'This has nothing to do with religion'
By ANIZA DAMIS 01 January, 2008

The Federal Court's judgment in the R. Subashini case on Thursday has gouged a deep groove in the legal system. The court decided that only civil courts could decide on the divorce of a union formed under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976. However, where one spouse has converted to Islam, the Muslim spouse has a right to seek relief from the syariah court. This means the non-Muslim spouse can only seek justice in the civil court, while the Muslim-convert spouse can seek justice in the syariah court. Two parallel avenues of justice. To complicate matters, the court also found that a parent could, unilaterally, convert a child without the consent of the other parent. ANIZA DAMIS speaks to Institute of Islamic Understanding of Malaysia (Ikim) director-general Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas on the impact of the ruling on Muslims and non-Muslims in the country
Q: What is justice in Islam?
A: Justice means putting things in the right place. Everything has a place. In this case, if you make a contract in a civil ceremony, the right place to seek a termination of that contract would also be at that civil ceremony.
T. Saravanan @ Muhammad Shafi should have been told, by the people who furthered his interest in the religion, that Islam places a great emphasis on the making and breaking of contracts.
Here is a person who had conducted a marriage in a civil ceremony with R. Subashini, a Hindu. Therefore, in order to terminate that contract made in a civil ceremony, he should go back to that civil authority and break it.
Q: The Federal Court has decided only the civil court can dissolve the marriage. At the same time, it says Shafi also has a right to seek relief from the syariah court and get a divorce there.
A: Yes, but that divorce (in the syariah court) would not be recognised. It would only be recognised by the civil court as evidence that such a thing took place under syariah.
Q: What is Saravanan's responsibility to his family and what is Shafi's responsibility to his family? Are they different?
A: No, they are the same. It's not that he is Saravanan or he is Shafi. He is one and the same person, therefore, his responsibility remains. As a Muslim, his responsibility now is to teach his children about Islam. His responsibility is to educate them. The mother is not responsible for that -- she has not been entrusted with that responsibility.
Q: The second child is not Muslim at the moment.
A: Who said the child is not Muslim? According to Islam, all children are born with fitrah, meaning a natural inclination towards Islam.
You could be the product of a Hindu, Buddhist or Christian marriage, but for Muslims, children are not seen as Christian, Buddhist or Hindu. What we see is, "Here is Allah's majesty. Look at what He has created".
Q: So, then there would be no need for conversion?
A: Exactly. How can you convert a child? First of all, when you talk about conversion, you are talking about responsibility. In order to have responsibility, you have to comprehend what you are responsible for. Can a child of that age understand what he is being held responsible for?
Allah does not hold a child accountable. That is why in Islam, there is this thing called the age of baligh -- the age of maturity -- which is generally thought to be around 15. He is then ready to accept the responsibility entrusted to him. And he is also ready to accept accountability -- in other words, punishment. But before that, there is no punishment.
Q: So, why the need to convert?
A: There is no need. God Himself does not consider the child responsible.
Q: What about instances where one parent is of one religion and the other is of another?
A: Shafi's responsibility is to raise his children in accordance with Islam. His responsibility is to educate them, feed them, clothe them.
If he is worried that his sons will grow up to follow the mother's religion, well, his fears are unfounded. Because he is an example of that not being the case. It's no guarantee that just because you are born to a Hindu, Buddhist or Christian parent -- or even a Muslim parent -- that you will remain in that religion.
Q: What about people who convert without telling their families or wives, and suddenly, the wives find out they are no longer the wife.
A: If you start putting these things down as law, there is a tendency to look at it literally. There is no hikmah (wisdom).
Supposing there is a person who is not a Muslim, living in a large community of non-Muslims. He wants to become a Muslim. For his own safety, he might feel, "If I go and tell my community, they might not agree with it, and they might harm me. I will have to keep it silent".
But he still wants to convert and he does. There is also wisdom in that. Fearing for his safety, he doesn't inform other people. It could be that.
Q: In our multi-religious, multicultural society that is supposedly tolerant and respectful, what's the value of professing a religion if you can't practise it in the open?
A: Who said there is "no freedom" here? You can practise whatever you want in this country.
Q: But a person can't change her religion very easily.
A: You cannot extrapolate on one case. If you are referring to the Lina Joy case, how do you know that it's not easy to convert based on one case?
The Lina Joy case had nothing to do with religion or with whether she wants to convert or not. She just didn't want to follow the rules set by the National Registration Department.
The assumption is that the syariah system is unjust. Her lawyers supported this idea because they extrapolated that you won't get justice in the syariah court.
Therefore, the onus of responsibility now is not on the court and the individuals in the court, but on the religion itself.
That's ridiculous. In her case, too, the Muslims are upset and angry, not because she is leaving Islam, but because they are denied their responsibility to guide her on the path of Islam. Her lawyers are screaming that we are denying her freedom of religion. This is not the case. If she wants to be a non-Muslim, be a non-Muslim.
But the community of Muslims has a right to consult with her and ask her why she wants to leave Islam. For Muslims, Islam is the most complete, perfect religion. Therefore, it is strange to any Muslim for anyone to want to become a non-Muslim. This is the Muslim's right of responsibility -- he has a right, because he has a responsibility to the ummah to ask this question. If you deny them this right, obviously the Muslims will get upset.
Q: That's looking at it from a Muslim perspective.
A: Look at the non-Muslim perspective as well. They get upset if they are not allowed to consult with those who wish to leave the flock and convert to Islam.
Q: The thing that upsets non-Muslims is that Muslims are detained when they wish to leave the religion.
A: Does that have to do with religion or is it an administrative injustice? It has nothing to do with religion, as far as I am concerned. How they do it, that's another matter altogether. When you start talking about detention, rampas mayat (seizing the corpse) and so on, those are all administrative. I disagree with all that.
Q: Why is it happening?
A: Loss of adab (manners), ignorance, and people who are put in positions of power who really have no ilm (knowledge). They don't have any hikmah. They are just allowing these things to occur and they don't care. All in the name of religion. You can't do that.
I don't care whether your religion is Islam, Christianity, Hinduism or Buddhism. You cannot use this as a tool for your political considerations. And that's what's happening.
Now, in the Subashini and Saravanan case, I feel very, very badly for these two people, and for the children. These are the victims.
As far as Islam is concerned, the Prophet abhorred divorce. He really despised it. But he did say, "If there is no other choice but to divorce, let the divorce be amicable". Let it be settled in a nice way.
Why was Shafi not advised about this? Why are Subashini's lawyers not advising her like this? Ultimately, these are the people who are suffering. You think the lawyers and the judges suffer? No. These people -- Shafi, Subashini and the children -- they suffer.
This is a family case. Why is society sticking its nose into this?
Q: Maybe they have become the standard-bearers of a bigger fight?
A: Society has become confused. What is the bigger fight? Freedom of religion? Are you not free? Nobody is forcing anybody.
Q: Perhaps not in the case of Shafi, but there have been instances where non-Muslims convert to Islam to escape responsibility.
A: They are abusing the system. You cannot simply run to the syariah court, to Islam, to escape something else. Contracts are very important in Islam.
Q: But in the instance where someone says he is Muslim, you have to take his word for it that he is Muslim. Should the syariah court be giving him shelter, where perhaps he is seeking shelter for the wrong reasons?
A: When somebody claims he is a Muslim, you can actually judge if he really is a Muslim or not, by three things:
When he makes a contract, he breaks it; when he is given a responsibility, he shirks that responsibility; when he speaks, he lies. These are the signs of an evil person.
So, if a fellow claims he is a Muslim, and yet his actions do not reflect it, then he is not a Muslim. So if a fellow is converting because he wants to escape something, you cannot shelter him for that. You have to live up to your responsibility.
If a person has recently converted to Islam, there is no question about the division of property according to Islam, because he accumulated all that when he was not a Muslim.
Whatever property he accumulates after he becomes a Muslim, that's different. That belongs to him -- his wife has no say in that.
In my opinion, in the Subashini case, the wife should have custody of the children. They are still young. They need their mother.
Q: This judgment is different from Lina Joy, in that the court this time did not say "We have no jurisdiction". It said: "We have jurisdiction, but you can go to the other side (syariah courts) as well."
A: It's an ambiguous judgment. I'm worried. This is going to escalate, and people are going to start accusing Islam, and religion generally, as being the problem. But it's not Islam. This is not a problem just for Muslims, it is a problem for everybody.
Q: If the non-converting spouse refuses to file for divorce in the civil courts, but the Muslim spouse gets a divorce from the syariah court, does that absolve the Muslim spouse of his responsibilities to the civil law marriage?
A: That is a problem. On the one hand, the syariah court only listens to Muslims. On the other hand, civil courts cannot interfere with the syariah court. Therefore, if the husband decides to divorce and the wife doesn't, then we have a big problem. It doesn't make sense. If the syariah court grants a divorce, the civil court only takes that as evidence. But, strictly speaking, he is still married in the civil system.
As I said, they should have been told: "If you have a marriage in a civil ceremony to a non-Muslim wife, and now you have become Muslim, your responsibility is to go back and resolve that in a civil ceremony as well". That would solve the problem.
Q: What should the conclusion to the Subashini case be?
A: As I said earlier, if you have conducted your marriage in a civil ceremony, then you should conduct your divorce in a civil ceremony.
Shafi should be advised properly. The wife should also be advised properly. There should not be so much acrimony.
The wife says she is being treated unfairly. I agree with her. But I also agree with Shafi. He is also being treated unjustly.
Q: What would you say to people who see this as a Muslim/non-Muslim argument?
A: It's not. This has got nothing to do with religion. This has to do with administrative justice.
Q: So, what do we need to do to correct this administrative injustice?
A: Remove the people who are causing the problem, and put in the ones who are qualified to deal with it. Remove the unqualified, because they are misguiding society.

Why am I pasting this article, simple it has everything to do with the following article above. Most Islamic intelectuals live in a bubble which gave them a skewered view of the real world. The truth is what he say might be right but what is done in the name of Islam is not. Dr Syed Tawfik Ali came from a prominent johore family whose share the same Grandmother as Dr Hussein Onn our second Prime Minister, he is half welsh and has Arab and Turkish blood in him but no Malay. Has a sister Dr Shifa who is also well known. He comes accross as a pedantic, and at most times full of himself. His Father is Dr Syed Naguib Al Atas who wrote a thesis on Hamzah Fansuri the great Malay sufi in the 19th century, A co founder of GERAKAN, a political party. His Uncle is the late Dr Syed Hussein Al Atas the vice chancellor of University Malaya.

Man this is totally entertaining,this article with its wits is wonderful to read.




Doc Chua is indeed a 'strong and hard' man to keep down


Posted by Raja Petra
Sunday, 13 January 2008


Indeed, strong men do not disappear with a whimper, they can return with a bang. One cannot keep strong men down. Look at the Sun (Tuesday, Jan 8) this morning, page 5. The headline says it all - "Chua planning comeback!"
A political satire by Casey Sze Tho

Anyone who has viewed the DVD or read the 'blow-by-blow' blow job in the many political commentaries would agree that by any account, Doc Chua is a 'strong, hard man' to keep down. Throughout his entire performance – in bed and out of bed – he is without doubt a man of strong resolve. Strong and upright, he stood up when others stood down. While others ran away, he came out honestly frank and was vividly stark naked, even before the press conference. Even his partner, the florist ran away to hide, but not ole' Doc Chua. This wily old politician proudly and with much subtle defiance screamed at the Press: "I am the man in the DVD." Such forcefulness we saw in private is no pretence; this guy is the real Mc Coy. His mouth is bigger than her mouth. And he carries a big stick when he talks. When he wags you, you'll unbolt your mouth in absolute amazement.
His reputation 3 ½ years as our Health Minister is unconditionally confirmed; this 61 year old stud is certainly healthy in every sense of the word. Small wonder he was selected to head this portfolio. He has a head for such things.
In my local community, many old women were asking me where they can get more details of his sexual romp. And this is not an exaggeration: I cannot tell a lie. It might shock you to know that many toothless women between 65 -80 are busy sending SOS to their sons to see if they can get the revealing website address featuring Doc Chua so that they can bring their fathers out of hibernation.
Out of the blue this week, Doc Chua has brought hope to old, infirmed and the aged. In the squishy corridors all over the country, old folks are now whispering quietly, "there's life after 60". Doc Chua has brought renewed vigor and new found hope to the aged like no other health minister has done before him. Doc Chua has awakened sleeping giants all over. The man who until last week was only a health minister is today admired as a living incarnation of good health in every sense of the word. His name is reaching legendary proportions after his 45 minutes of fame. The fact he never once rested proved that there is hope for those over 60.
Indeed, strong men do not disappear with a whimper, they can return with a bang. One cannot keep strong men down. Look at the Sun (Tuesday, Jan 8) this morning, page 5. The headline says it all - "Chua planning comeback!"
Yes, old hardy Chua is not to be written off. He is making a quick comeback – in spectacular fashion too. The daily went on to elaborate that "Chua took a chance and is winning many sympathy 'votes'. This unexpected turn of events may have surprised even his distracters. For someone who commands a great deal of party support in Penang, Selangor and Perak, apart from his own power base Johor, it is not hard to figure out what Chua meant when he told the media just days ago that he would be invited to a walkabout around the country soon."
A comeback? For a guy who can come and come, I am not surprised. Were you?
So it seems our MCA strongman is not dead. Not only is he sexually alive, he walks still today a dangerman within MCA politics. He is in actual fact returning with a vengeance of such sheer magnitude, Ong Ka Ting better put on a helmet for himself and his brother.
I once used to think that if you are caught with your pants down in politics you are finished. Obviously, I was wrong. The truth is, if you are caught with your pants down, you must quickly announce it, admit it, tell the whole world about it. Then you are exonerated as quickly as you are caught. Then, like the Man of Steel, fight like hell back. And fighting back is what our local Johor man of steel is doing. He's bouncing back on a spanking new wave of popularity; he doesn't wear rubber to bounce back, he bounces back because he has no need for rubber.
Even more astounding is what a little bird has told me. The little bird has told me that the government is reconsidering a review of obsolete sex laws, so that these obsolete sex laws cannot be used against those who may have inadvertently broken them. Like Doc Chua inadvertently has.
You see under Section 377 of the Penal Code, carnal intercourse against the order of nature is an offence. Under this section, any person who has sexual relations with any other person involving the introduction of the sexual organ into the anus or mouth can be jailed up to 20 years. Additionally, the guilty party is also liable for whipping. However, much of the time, for an offence to take place, someone must make a police report. And this is the amazing part: Doc Chua has not made a police report. Since no one else has made one either, he cannot be charged for a sexual offence.
Never mind that the police has dusted the hotel down for fingerprints. Never mind Doc Chua has committed a sexual crime. This repulsive law only applies to Anwar; Doc Chua is a free man because no one has reported him and thus he cannot be charged.
And what possibly can he return as if he is successful in his political comeback?
My guess is, he should at least be the Senior Entertainment Minister. He was already a Health Minister, so he should get a promotion at the very least in another portfolio where he has already displayed great talent.
This could be an important new portfolio for Pak Lah to consider. After all, Doc Chua has proven he can work; he has proven he does not need to rest very much; he has proven he has lots of stamina under stress and he is without doubt a Minister of Steel. More importantly, he has demonstrated that he can be an entertaining distraction to sidetrack Malaysians from the other political core issues, such as widespread corruption, an unjust ISA, the indomitable Hindraf and the unrelenting Bersih organizations, and a failing judiciary. Not to mention a quickie erection…solly…election.
Going into erection… I mean election, Pah Lak needs only wave the picture of an outstanding minister who delivers and delivers. And you can be assured; thousands of amazed senior citizens will give him the sympathy vote.



My Question to all this is simple, to the Muslim malay Moralist like Subky Latif who condemn Dr Chua, well what about his leaders parties who married 2,3 and 4. Like P Ramlee movie Pak Belalang kahwin dua tiga atau empat is selalu(often) kadang kadang(seldom) jarang(rare) but happen, The crime Dr Chua made was to be caught in his hand in a cookie jar, he has no protection because the civil law on marriage and reform has been change in 1975. The court does not consider temple marriage thus making many who went on through temple marriage as mistreses. Let's face it the second and third wife of a Muslim generally are no more than that. If it was an affront and immoral for Dr Chua I beg to differ, both were consenting adults, they just screw their brains out and doesn't hurt anyone but gave both of them immerse pleasure I cant say much for the corrupt and inept officers and Ministers whose job is to line up their pockets with dollars which deprieve others of fairness that is too me much worse then fucking!!

Professor Shamshul Amru Baharin of the National University of Malaysia.

I am quite prolific this month. I have too, because I know soon I will not be able to be connected again. Here is one person whom I greatly admired. I remember in 1975 reading Newsweek and this guy picture came out in the newsmaker section. He was then a graduate/undergraduate? student and the statement was made in Australia. As usual he was very vocal and he predicted then, which has come to pass, of the the clash of ideas between the elite and liberal Malay and the Islamic group. He is not far off but I admire him for that , I forgotten his name then and now he is a professor at that time, I remember a leather jacket now a suit how times have fly but the person is still the same, cutting edge ideas, brilliant to a fault!

Face to Face: Shamsul Amri Baharuddin



Posted by Raja Petra
Sunday, 06 January 2008
About 50 universities in the THES 2007 list of the top 200 don't use English as their medium of instruction. They use Japanese, Mandarin, Dutch, French, Spanish, German and Russian. In THES 2006 ranking, UKM and UM, both using Malay as their medium of instruction, were in the top 200.
Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob is a trained lawyer and Malaysian political commentator. He writes for numerous international newspapers and online journals as well as hosts Face to Face, an interview segment of Malaysian/regional issues and personalities hosted on Malaysia Today . He also serves as Foreign Correspondent for foreign news organisations.

Shamsul Amri Baharuddin is a professor of social anthropology and, formerly, Director [1999-2007], the Institute of the Malay World & Civilization (ATMA), and Founding Director [ Oct.2003 - Jan. 2007), Institute of Occidental Studies (IKON), and, currently, Founding Director [since Oct. 2007],- Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, (UKM). He is known among Malaysian academia and political pundits as a man who speaks his mind. Not one to mince his words, he is acknowledged as an Occidentalist par excellence among international circles. Face to Face asks the pointed questions to get his plain-spoken answers.

Q1. The issue of the use of the English language as a medium of instruction in Science and Maths is contentious again. Any wonder that our universities are not even ranked within the top 200 in the world ranking released by Times Higher Education Supplement (THES)? Care to comment?
I think we should separate the English language issue from the THES 2007 ranking.
About 50 universities in the THES 2007 list of the top 200 don't use English as their medium of instruction. They use Japanese, Mandarin, Dutch, French, Spanish, German and Russian. In THES 2006 ranking, UKM and UM, both using Malay as their medium of instruction, were in the top 200. So, I believe there are other reasons as to why these two Malaysian universities aren't in the top 200 of the THES 2007 list, certainly not because of the English language factor.
The recent public concern about the English language issue relates, most likely, directly to the general poor performance of our schoolchildren, especially, in the national stream schools, at the primary and secondary level. Some observers say that this is temporary. However, without doubt, education is still the single most important vehicle for Malaysians to achieve social mobility. Malaysian parents would be very concerned if their children don't perform hence they have a bleak future.
Q2. Mukhriz Mahathir pointed out that it is not the issue of learning English but in fact it is the pursuit to master the sciences and technology. Do you agree?
I don't agree. It's a totally misinformed opinion.
How has the Russian been able to send their astronauts to space? How has the French been able to send their satellites into space, one after another, for a decade? Both don't use English. In fact, ironically, we have had the help of both the Russian and the French, not from the English-speaking American (of NASA fame), in our space program.
It's a myth that scientific knowledge could be acquired and master only in English. I feel we all have been duped to believe that it is so.
Nonetheless, it is true that English has become a hegemonic global language of communication. Perhaps we should have taught English literature, or a selected social science or the arts subject to be fully taught in English. Lots more hope there.
Q3: Allegations of the apparent lack of meritocracy in local universities hint at the underlying racial tendentiousness. What is your view?
Since the late 1990s, meritocracy has been the main principle used to select new entrants to local universities.
The issue was not about meritocracy but about the extremely stiff competition to get into the 'elite' faculties, such as medicine and dentistry.
The fact that the predominantly bumiputera students from the exclusive pre-university classes have also been allocated places into these 'elite' faculties, along with those who have taken the more open STPM exams, invited the perception amongst disgruntled parents that there exists a 'selected' meritocracy into these 'elite' faculties. There has been no complaint about meritocracy not implemented in the selection of new entrants to local universities in other faculties.
It reflects more of the general public out-moded perception that if their children aren't doctors and dentists they can't make money. Ask the accountants, the IT grads and the lawyers, am sure they would disagree!
Q4: The Malaysians of non-Malay descent seem to want a re-write of the social contract agreed upon at the time of independence. Is this realistic or justified?
Theoretically, any legal contract could be rescinded if the parties involved agree.
Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on which side of the fence one belongs, our Federal Constitution, although it is a legal document, it is generally not perceived as such. It has been perceived a 'social contract' between the different ethnic groups in this country. This is due to the specific historical-structural circumstances involved in the construction of our Constitution.
If we were to change any part of it, it has to be done in the Parliament. It seems only the multi-ethnic BN could do this, currently enjoying an overwhelming majority in the Upper and Lower Houses of our Parliament. If the component parties within BN don't initiate it, nobody else could do it from outside, even how realistic or justified.
Q5: Delving into the issue of the definition of a Malay. Today it seems that many Yellow races, Caucasian races, or of Arab descent are accepted as a Malay. This is a peculiarity as far as the definition of race is concerned. Please elaborate…
The term Malay during the pre-colonial era was an inclusive category. Islam wasn't the main criteria. Embracing the Malay culture was central in the making of the Malay as a social category. Loyalty to the Raja (keRAJAan = polity of the RAJA) was another. Every Malay then has been the subject of the RAJA (a Sanskrit and not Arabic word). To be proficient in the Malay language was thought as another important element or identity indicator.
However, upon the arrival of the British, which, in turn, had introduced the Census in the 1870s, the term 'Malay and Other Natives' became exclusive. Indeed, for the purposes of labelling, every Malay was deemed to be a Mohammedan. If an Orang Asli were to be a Muslim, most likely he/she would be classified as a Malay, if not he/she remains an Orang Asli. We know of the great difference in terms of social position that exists today between these two groups.
Whether the term Malay is inclusive or exclusive isn't really significant. It is when being 'a Malay' entitles one to get economic advantage, political privilege and so on, I think, that's when the term Malay, and who they constitute, became contested. The issue may not be about Malay and not-Malay, it could also be what advantages come with being a Malay or non-Malay. The issue is broader than simply about ethnicity.

Q6: Has the right Honourable Prime Minister lived up to your expectations?
This is a totally subjective question which warrants a subjective answer. Hence I would like to take a comparative viewpoint that is open to contestation, and I welcome that.
In the first four years of Tun Mahathir as a prime minister he had his share of success and challenges. Our present Prime Minister has had his, too, in the last four years.
I don't expect very much from Tun Mahathir in his first four years as a Prime Minister then and so, too, from our present Prime Minister.
Others may have much more expectations than what I have. I respect that. However, we are entitled to our subjective opinions. There is no one standard measure, anyway.
Q7: The Deputy Prime Minister, Najib Razak appears to be in the forefront of the Rakyat's consciousness. The local broadsheets feature him regularly. Is this an implicit signal of Najib Razak's imminent rise as PM?
I don't think the Rakyat of Malaysia has much say about Datuk Seri Najib's future. It is the 2,500 delegates at the UMNO General Assembly who have the final say. If they endorse him as Deputy UMNO President in the next UMNO elections then he remains to be the Deputy Prime Minister.
However, whether Najib likes it or not, or Malaysians like it or not, the incumbent UMNO President-cum-Prime Minister has the final say. Tun Mahathir had four DPMs. So, what's new?
Q8: To your mind, is there any one ethnic group in Malaysia that can be deemed as a second-class citizen?
It's a perception issue, highly subjective and politically a highly-charged and contested category. Usually, it is the result of self-identification, justified or otherwise.
There are advantaged and disadvantaged groups in every ethnic category in this country. If the disadvantaged is perceived as a second-class citizen, then the spread is across ethnic.
Some may want to use 'the victimized group' not 'second-class citizen.' Name calling never ends!
Q9: The Malaysian Chinese abhor the Muslim-Malay led Government on a host of issues. Do you believe that this community has legitimate concerns or are they just ungrateful as alleged by UMNO leaders?
I always worry when we homogenise the highly divided ethnic groups in Malaysia. When we do that we are walking straight into a chauvinistic trap. It is too convenient and too easy to say that "the Malaysian Chinese abhor the Malay-Muslim led Government on a host of hot issues."
We do know that there as many Chinese who abhor and who enjoy the Malay-Muslim led Government. We also know that many Malays who themselves abhor the present Malay-Muslim-led BN government.
So, we do this question or argument takes is to? Indeed, into a cul-de-sac. But I am not denying that people have all sorts of grievances, justified or otherwise. Some expressed in ethnic idioms others not.
Q10: Has Anwar Ibrahim had any effect at all on the electoral mood? What message would you deliver to Anwar Ibrahim ahead of national elections?
Many observers, again depending on which side of the fence they belong, have judged Anwar Ibrahim either negatively or positively.
The negative viewpoint suggests that Anwar is only interested in achieving his ultimate personal ambition, that is, to become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. He is said to be doing everything he could to achieve it, including willing to destabilize the country so that he could present himself as the messiah who could bring back peace.
The positive viewpoint suggests that Anwar is a global statesman who has strong first-class global political network built before he joined the government, improved in leaps and bounds when he was in the government, and still keeps one. It is suggested that he could do a lot for the country if he is given the chance to be Malaysia's ambassador-at-large because his charm, network and also charisma would serve well for Malaysia, both on the economic and political front, especially, on the subject of Islam and the Muslims.
Whatever one thinks of him, Anwar has proven in the 1999 general elections that he can lead an alternative coalition of multi-ethnic political parties, appropriately named "Barisan Alternatif." Leading a "Barisan Bersih" for 2008 is not the same. Why not? In the public perception and idiom "where got politician bersih?"
Q11: What is your assessment for the next elections?
Taking into consideration a number of factors, it is most unlikely BN, as the incumbent ruling coalition, would lose its two-third majority in Dewan Rakyat. Admittedly, it is a bit tough for them to repeat the same record level of success that they enjoyed in 2004 elections this time around. Even some people in UMNO seemed to be talking about this.
Besides, the 'feel good' factor that was attributed to Abdullah Badawi isn't there anymore.
Q12: What is your hope for the new year of 2008?
Malaysia will continue to thrive economically but not without the expected difficulties in view of the fluctuating global economy and the slowing down of the troubled US economy. Without doubt, Malaysia is harvesting the fruit of its long-term investment in R&D to achieve a high level of economic development with science and technology as its knowledge base. Billions have been invested in the S&T-based R&D.
The other pillar of Malaysia's success thus far is its relative political stability. However, it has not seriously invested in the shirt- and long-term R&D of this fundamental aspect of its resilience and robust existence. The knowledge base of this endeavour is the social science, humanities and the arts.
The establishment of the National Science Council which has successfully identified the niche areas in S&T that, in turn, has contributed handsomely to our economic development should be matched with the setting up of a separate National Social Science Council. This Council would be able to list the niche areas in solidarity-making efforts beneficial to Malaysia and recommend generous funding to be given to each. This is one important method in creating a sustainable political stability in this country.
Malaysia has its National Economic Action Council (NEAC), why can't Malaysia have a National Integration Action Council (NIAC), asks someone?
My cheeky answer was perhaps Malaysia prefers the social scientists to continue to play the prescriptive "Bomba and Penyelamat" role instead of the more preventive role of the "sprinklers" that we now find in all the new buildings in Malaysia today!

The gateway from the airport and the Padang Museum. See the quaint roof resemble two horns of a buffalo, yes like the Hindoos the Malays at one time revered the cow.

why so long I never update. I went for a holiday? Nope, it just that the beginning of the new year is kind of upsetting for me. The new Year begins with me visiting the Income tax Department and to be told that i cant travel overseas since my passport for not paying my taxes! Urgh! the taxes mention was when I start work in penang 12 years back but was never inform by my Employers of the EA form they suppose to give me for me to fill up to pay my taxes. After 14 years it has elapse they manage to track me down by using my address which I never change and sending a summon to my parents house. So when they want to drag me to court then they know where I live,funny!

Then I got a bout of Diarrhoea which landed me on my back and today I receive a call I might have to be in Padang Indonesia and be station there semi permanent. Hmmm the monies is not that good but the opportunities to be there is something I hate missing. It is in a Malay heartland, lots of mystical charm, magics and I could be in touch with my roots.

Padang is very Malay, you can only found Chinese or non Muslim in Padang town but hardly anyone outside it. They still believe in old magic and charms and amulets are next to nothing. I love the fact that in this Malay Kingdom still exist all that is Malay. So that's why I am looking forward to it. maybe i meet a few leprechauns and get my pot of gold.

Padang is the Capital of west Sumatra and I am staying in a very unstable region on earth, no not any fighting but I am going to stay at the earth's fault line. So I have to be prepared for earthquakes which currently in my life I needed. So here is a bit info about Padang history.

Padang on Sumatra's west coast is the island's third largest city with a population of about 700.000. It is the provincial capital of West Sumatra and most of the products from this region is exported through Padang. The major export articles are coal, rubber, coffee, spice, tobacco, rattan and tea. Padang is situated at the foot of the Minangkabau highland, which is named after the original inhabitants of west Sumatra.
The Minang people converted to Islam many centuries ago, and a majority of the population today are Muslim. The traditional adat-laws however often have priority before Islamic laws (see Bukittinggi). A legend says that the Minang descends from no other than Alexander the Great, their forefathers arrived Sumatra under king Maharjo Dirajo, the youngest son of Alexander, better known in Indonesia as Iskandar Zulkarnair.
Anthropologists however suggests that the Minang people probably arrived West Sumatra from the Malaysian peninsula some time between year 1000 and 2000 BC, but not much is known about the history of this region before the arrival of Islam in the 14th century AD. West Sumatra was probably under control of the Malay kingdom from Jambi on Sumatra's east coast between the 11th and the 14th century.
The region was later divided in small Islamic sultanates, and the Dutch did therefore not meet any united resistance when they arrived early in the 17th century. A trading station were built in Padang about 1680. In the 19th century the Islamic "Padri" movement went to war against the traditional Minangkabau adat (law) followers. The Dutch entered the war and joined the traditional leaders in 1821 when the Padri's controlled much of the highlands. The Benteng de Kock fort in Bukittinggi became the new main base for the Dutch and in 1837 they finally conquered Bonjol, the headquarters of the Padri leader Imam Bonjol. Padang was under British control during the Napoleon war from 1781 to 1819 when the Dutch again seized control. During WW2 it was occupied by the Japanese before Sumatra became a part of the new Indonesian Republic.

So that is the gist of Padang History.In a nut shell Padang Sumatra and Malaya are closely knit culturally than most other Islands in the Indonesian Archipelago. Will I accept the job it all depends on this few weeks. If everything works out as plan than Here I come! Till then I keep you posted, the only drag is perhaps Internet assess is kind of slow there and I hope they will get me Internet ready in Padang. They still using dial up so we see.

This is a paste up, why?, because Im lazy to write at the moment and I dont want this article to be lost .


The new Muslim anti-Semitism



Posted by Raja Petra
Tuesday, 08 January 2008
The Jerusalem Post
ISLAM AND Judaism had (and continue to have) much more in common than Judaism has with Christianity.

Jewish-Muslim relations are at a nadir today. But the mutual hatred and anti-Semitism on the Muslim side are relatively new phenomena, born of political, rather than religious factors. When the Islamic caliphs ruled large swaths of Asia and Africa, their Jewish subjects enjoyed a protected status their brethren in Christian Europe - victims of anti-Semitism - never thought possible.
Today, Muslim apologists have distorted this age of coexistence. They appropriate an old Jewish myth about an "interfaith utopia" in the Middle Ages and blame the Jews and Zionism for destroying the traditional harmony between the two peoples.
In response, there is a new Jewish "counter-myth" that claims that Islam has persecuted Jews from its origins and that anti-Semitism is endemic in the religion. This counter-myth has been propagated by Jewish writers in the Diaspora especially since the 1970s. It parallels a similar conviction among some Oriental Jews in Israel. Seeking to find their place in a predominantly European Jewish world scarred by centuries of Christian persecutions culminating in the Holocaust, they claim that Islam has persecuted Jews from its origins. By implication, they have a past of suffering like the Ashkenazim, including dislocation from their ancient homelands, and are thus eligible for a larger piece of the Zionist pie than the mostly Ashkenazic founding fathers of Israel have granted them.
THE HISTORIC plight of Oriental Jewry falls somewhere between these two extremes. To discover it, one must move past the layers of propaganda and mutual recriminations that have obscured our view of history.
First of all, however, let us not make the mistake of thinking that Jews lived in the Middle Ages as the equals of Muslims. They were second class citizens, at best. They were classed along with other religious minorities as unbelievers who did not recognize the prophethood of Muhammad and the truth of the Koran. But this kind of unbelief was not as threatening to Islam as Jewish unbelief was to Christians, for unbelief in Christianity means rejection of Jesus as Messiah and as God, a greater affront to the dominant faith than Jewish unbelief was to Islam because it challenged the theological basis of the whole religion.
Moreover, restrictions on Jewish (and Christian) life - they were not to build new houses of worship and were required to wear distinctive garb, avoid Muslim honorific titles, and so forth - were intended not so much to exclude them from society as they were meant to reinforce the necessary hierarchical distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims within a single social order.
Non-Muslims were to remain "in their place," avoiding any act, particularly any religious act, that might challenge the superior rank of Muslims or of Islam. Non-Muslims, however, occupied a definite rank in Islamic society - a low rank, but a rank nevertheless. They managed to co-exist more or less harmoniously with the higher-ranking dominant Muslim group because both sides recognized and accepted the place of the other - whether superior or inferior - and this facilitated interaction with a minimum of conflict.
THE FLIP SIDE of the discriminatory regulations imposed upon Jews is that they (as well as Christians) were a "protected people," ahl al-dhimma or dhimmis in Arabic, who enjoyed security of life and property, religious freedom, freedom from forced conversion, communal autonomy, and equality in the marketplace. For all its religious exclusivity and hostility towards the Jews, expressed in the Koran and in other Islamic literature, Islam contains a nucleus of pluralism that gave the Jews in Muslim lands greater security than Jews had in Christian Europe. For other important reasons, too, Jews in the Islamic orbit were spared the damaging stigma of "otherness" and anti-Semitism suffered by Jews in Europe. They were indigenous to the Near East - not immigrants, as in many parts of the Christian West - and largely indistinguishable physically from their Arab-Muslim neighbors.
Moreover, Jews were one of two and in some place three non-Muslim minority religions, which also diffused the natural hostility towards the "other." The contrast with the Christian West is revealing. Although for a few centuries in the early Middle Ages (up to the 11th century) Jews enjoyed a more or less secure place in the natural hierarchical order of Christian society, as well as substantial economic rights, a combination of factors led to the expulsion of most of western Jewry by the end of the 15th century. These factors include the loss of the pluralism that had marked the Germanic, "barbarian" early Middle Ages; the spread of Christianity to the masses by the 11th century; the commercial revolution that relegated Jews to a few, despised economic activities like money lending; the erosion of the old doctrine of St. Augustine that Jews must be allowed to live in Christian society as witnesses to the triumph of Christianity; and, finally, the gradual political unification of European countries, especially England, France, and Spain, which left the Jew even more of an outsider than in the past.
ISLAM AND Judaism had (and continue to have) much more in common than Judaism has with Christianity. This mutual recognition of religious similarities includes monotheism, which made Islam more tolerant of Jews than of Christians, whose Trinity smacked of polytheism, the greatest sin in Islam, and made Jews more tolerant of Islam for much the same reason. Another well known commonality are laws concerning animal ritual slaughter and other kashrut/halal practices. Partly because of shared religious beliefs, Islamic polemics against Judaism and the Jews in the Middle Ages were minimal and banal compared to the large body of anti-Jewish polemics in the Christian world in the 13th century. This led to the burning of the Talmud in France - an act of aggression against Judaism that had no parallel in the Muslim world and which was accompanied by other violent excesses like the blood libel that wrought the anti-Semitism whose tragic outcome in the 20th century is all too well known.
In the Muslim world, Jews retained for centuries their substantial security as well as their recognized place in the natural hierarchical social order. They did so by acknowledging, at least by their behavior in public, the superiority of Islam, by adhering to the prescribed restrictions of Islamic law, by paying an annual head tax called jizya, and by refraining from serving in government offices, where they might be in a position of superiority over Muslims. To be sure, there were periodic outbursts of violence, though they were almost always directed against dhimmis as a category, and not against Jews per se. These excesses occurred when the dhimmis were seen to be violating the terms of the dhimma arrangement; or when a particular ruler was pressured by Muslim clerics - the ulama - to crack down on the violators; or when Islam as a polity came under attack from the outside, as happened from the late 11th century on during the Crusades (the Crusade against the Muslims in the Holy Land and the Crusade to reconquer Spain from the Muslims) and during the Mongol invasions of the 13th century.
Jews were, however, rarely forced to convert to Islam (the Koran forbids compulsion in religion) and, with two major exceptions proving the rule, they were not expelled from Muslim lands. One expulsion took place in the Hijaz, the holy sanctuary of Arabia that includes Mecca and Medina, shortly after the death of the Prophet, and the other, in Yemen in the 17th century.
AGAIN, TO understand the relatively decent Jewish-Muslim relations in the medieval period, one needs to contrast them with the Christian world, where, from about the 12th century on, Jews were subject to a shaky adherence to an older commitment to protect the Jews and to guarantee their freedom of religion, as well as their liberty to practice any economic walk of life they wished - all of these things, of course, a function of time and place and the policies of particular secular rulers or the Church.
In Christian society, moreover, hostility was focused on one, "evil" non-Christian group, the Jews, paving the way for what was to become - beginning in the 12th century - anti-Semitism, understood as a religiously-based complex of irrational, mythical, and stereotypical beliefs about the diabolical, malevolent, and all-powerful Jew, later on infused, in its modern, secular form, with racism and the belief that there is a Jewish conspiracy against mankind.
This kind of anti-Semitism did not exist in the medieval Muslim world. It did not make its appearance there until the 19th century, when it was fostered by European Christian missionaries living in the Middle East.
ALL THIS adds up to one thing: Jews and Muslims got along better in the Middle Ages than they do today. But the co-existence of Jews and Muslims in the Middle Ages could not easily be maintained in the modern era. Colonial disruption of Muslim society, conflicting nationalisms, Arab belief that Zionism is just another form of European colonialism robbing them of their own right to self-determination in a modern state, and Jewish fear that Arab and Muslim enmity - and more recently, terrorism - might lead to something akin to another Holocaust, have dramatically degraded Muslim-Jewish relations. This has manifested itself in a new Muslim anti-Semitism, which is not, however, indigenous. It represents an Islamized version of its Christian roots. Muslim anti-Semitism has also provoked amnesia in Jews from Arab countries.
They (or most of them) no longer remember the friendships with Muslims that Arab Jews knew in the "old country." They no longer remember the substantial exemption from Muslim violence that the Jews of the Islamic world enjoyed in most places until the events of the 20th century. And they have forgotten that until the 20th century, in some cases right up until the 1940s, many in the Arabic-speaking Jewish middle class were deeply embedded in Arab society and culture, much like their ancestors in the medieval world, who wholeheartedly embraced Arabic and the Islamic culture of philosophy, science, medicine, scriptural study, and poetry in what was not an interfaith utopia, but an era of co-existence that can stand as a distant mirror of what might yet be possible in our own time.
The writer is professor of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University. He is the author, among other works, of Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages, which has been translated into Hebrew.

So remember readers especially the non muslim in a 'Muslim' Country you are second class citizen and this is enshrined in their belief but not in their religion! Thus Anwar Ibrahim and his cohoots of friends who advocate Islam as Adeen must be frank and tell all malaysians in thier idea of islam as the country philisophy and ideas would result in Non muslim becoming second class citizen unlike now although marginalism occurs yet there is at least a chance to seek justice but not in an islamic state which enshrine divisive ideas!