Who is right who is wrong in my disagreement with JMD. I will leave it to the readers to decide. As I said many a times I never deny Tun's achievement. But for me let Pak Lah go with dignity. He made mistakes thus let him go, we need not go through the mudslinging. Enough is enough! JMD first statement contradict himself. I for once never go for labeling, Islam Hadhari or Islamization! As good Muslims we wear our faith in our action and ideas. We need not resort to labeling. When I was still in college I work for a circus as a handyman. It was tough work, so when the elephant trainer who was an American , complimented for my diligence and honesty, the word he uttered was it must be because of my faith. It make me proud as a Muslim, it was the greatest compliment. He was surprise I did not smoke or drink neither did I gamble, he remark it must be because of my faith, my religion. I say nay, I choose not to but I added my faith is my barometer and it help to strengthen my resolve. As I said we need not resort in labeling be it hadhari or otherwise. I leave it at that.

JMD : Actually, Tunku said this - ‘This country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia must continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion’. He did not say, this country is a secular state fullstop. A lot of difference there.

Nevertheless, is Islam Hadhari in itself not a label? I am sometimes confused. At one hand you criticise the ‘labelling’ of islam, but in the comment before this, you applaud Pak Lah for creating Islam Hadhari.

Do you know why Operasi Lalang took place? Polcie did not want another May 13 to happen. Do you know when extremists ran free on the streets inciting hatred among the races, Tunku was too weak to do anything. Why? Because he championed democratic freedom too much. He did not do anything to ones who had pushed the envelope too far. In the end, May 13 occured. Did you know how many people were detained under the ISA at that time? Double the amount of people detained in Operasi Lalang.

Fortunately, no bloodshed occured back in 1987. As the police stamped out extremism before it gets way out of hand. 4 papers were banned at that time, among them was Watan - a malay newspaper with huge following. Like the Star and another chinese daily, it was banned because, naturally, they fought fire with fire. If these papers were not banned, the situation at that time will exacerbate into a nightmare for the country.

Actually, your line of thought contradicts your own conviction. What is it do you want? Separating Islam from governance? Then I think you abhor PAS’ idealogy. But at the same time, you seem to be defensive when concerning the Taliban.

When you say “Let it be separate because moral guidance is subjective and i believe should remain private”, Islam Hadhari says this in its 10 fundamental principles -

• faith and piety in the Almighty;
• a just and trustworthy Government;
• a free and independent people;
• the vigorous pursuit and mastery of knowledge;
• balanced and comprehensive economic development;
• a good quality of life for the people;
• protection of the rights of minority groups and women;
• cultural and moral integrity;
• safeguarding natural resources and the environment; and,
• strong defence capabilities.

Basically, islam and governance cannot be separated. It is infused in our day to day guidance. It is a good guide anyway. Ironically, to me, Islam Hadhari is actually nothing new. Pak Lah just rebranded the whole tenets of good governance in Islam into a package he calls Islam Hadhari.

By the way, when Tunku said ‘This country has a multi-racial population with various beliefs. Malaysia must continue as a secular State with Islam as the official religion, nation can still be functional as a secular state with Islam as the official religion.”

What does that mean? Was he just stating the obvious?

Read this too - http://www.mushahidhussain.com/articles/MalaysianModel.htm

Thank you.

p.s. - I like your writing on the origins of Negaraku. By the way, too bad I can’t comment in your blog as I do not have a google account! Will make one soon.

wan zaharizan (16:25:55) :

mini cooper, tien chuah share a common friend. I knew Nadia Bamahdaj and Halinah Todd whose son Kamal Bamahdaj were killed in East Timor 1991. I never met him hanya did correspond by email once or twice. I am not a member of PKR or any other parties. During APCET meeting in Kuala Luympur which was held close door under the order of Anwar with the consent of Tun this meeting were disrupted. Syed Hussein was there too, I do not compromise on my principle and never will. Tien Chua knows I disagree with Anwar and drop it please.
Who is right who is wrong in my disagreement with JMD. I will leave it to the readers to decide. As I said many a times I never deny Tun’s achievement. But for me let Pak Lah go with dignity. He made mistakes thus let him go, we need not go through the mudslinging. Enough is enough! JMD first statement contradict himself. I for once never go for labeling, Islam Hadhari or Islamization! As good Muslims we wear our faith in our action and ideas. We need not resort to labeling. When I was still in college I work for a circus as a handyman. It was tough work, so when the elephant trainer who was an American , complimented for my diligence and honesty, the word he uttered was it must be because of my faith. It make me proud as a Muslim, it was the greatest compliment. He was surprise I did not smoke or drink neither did I gamble, he remark it must be because of my faith, my religion. I say nay, I choose not to but I added my faith is my barometer and it help to strengthen my resolve. As I said we need not resort in labeling be it hadhari or otherwise. I leave it at that. Cukup disini saja JMD kita komen atas benda lain.

JMD : Thank you for the comment. Regarding Pak Lah, yes he must be given some form of respect as he is about to leave the scene. I wrote the article that criticised Pak Lah’s loyalists, whom in order to glorify Pak Lah, had belittled Tun Mahathir. I find that disturbing. That is why, I said in this article ‘This pitiful act of glorifying Pak Lah is just an attempt to make him look favourable within the history books in years to come. I would understand or even forgive these attempts by Pak Lah’s lackeys if they did not demonise Tun Dr Mahathir in the process. But what they are doing is wrong.’

If Kalimullah and Zaid Ibrahim want to glorify Pak Lah, please do it based on Pak Lah’s own achievements. There are a few things that Pak Lah can be proud of. They can even promote him as Bapa Kemasyarakatan or whatever. K-ekonomi or modal insan etc. If they want to present him in a favourable light, then do so honourably. Why the need to compare and belittle his predecessor?

Hence the reason for this article in the first place.

As for the labelling of Islam etc, here’s my take of the whole issue;

You said;

- Tun labelled Islam through islamisation process in Malaysia since the 80’s.

- Pak Lah put stop to all these rhetorical labelisation of islam through his Islam Hadhari concept

- You advocate separation of politics and religion

- You think religion is important but it is only the barometer of one’s resolve.

- Malaysia must be secular because mixing religion into politics will only produce bigots in society

As for the APCET meeting. What a brouhaha back then huh?

Thank you.