Does DAP want to make everybody bumiputera?



DAP needs to come clean on whether it intends to grant all Malaysians the “special position” currently reserved for Malays as stipulated in Article 153 of the federal constitution.

Since its formation, DAP has insisted on the “principle that the separation of citizens into ‘Bumiputra’ and ‘non-Bumiputra’ is strongly opposed” − see below the party’s 1967 Setapak Declaration.

There is no indication that DAP has deviated from its demand for “equality” of the races.

‘No Malays, zero Chinese, no Indians too … all Malaysians’

Riding the 2008 and 2013 Chinese tsunami, DAP diligently peddled its Bangsa Malaysia kool-aid − a concept where everyone is ostensibly to be regarded as Malaysian … and there are supposedly “no Malays”, “zero Chinese” and “no Indians too”.

In other words, ethnic distinction is abolished − refer Hannah Yeoh’s tweet below as an illustration of the DAP’s “Anak Malaysia” indoctrination.

If the DAP is successful with its ‘Anak Malaysia’ brainwashing and Malays are eventually persuaded that they no longer wish to be identified as “racist’ Malays, then Article 153 will – by itself – slip into irrelevance.

From its Bangsa Malaysia propaganda onslaught, we can see how DAP is going a roundabout way to weaken Article 153 on the Malay special position.

Sub groups desiring to be bumiputera

The DAP has one self-styled “constitutional law expert” who today accused the prime minister of being ignorant about provisions contained in the federal constitution.

DAP’s Abdul Aziz Bari quibbled over a news report that Najib Razak was mulling the possibility of recognizing Indian Muslims as ‘bumiputera’.

According to the FMT report (below), Aziz Bari told the news portal that “the question of bumiputera status for Indian Muslims did not arise because it was clear in the constitution that they could qualify as Malays”.

Does DAP agree that mamak are Malay?

FMT quoted Aziz Bari as saying Indian Muslims are “by the definition of the constitution, Malays, and [as such] are entitled to Malay rights”.

According to Aziz Bari (touted by some quarters as DAP’s potential Selangor Menteri Besar designate), Indian Muslims fulfill the definition of ‘Malay’ spelled out in Article 160 of the constitution.

Aziz said this meant that anyone of any ethnic background should be accorded Malay rights as long as he fulfilled the Article 160 conditions of professing Islam, habitually speaking Malay language and practising Malay custom, FMT reported.

The portal reported Aziz Bari as adding, “A convert to Islam could also qualify”.

While correctly listing out the three constitutional criteria under Article 160’s definition of ‘Malay’, Aziz Bari neglected to mention that the Muslim or Muslim convert who habitually speaks Malay and conforms to Malay custom is still nonetheless required to meet a fourth criterion in order to be considered legally Malay.

In the context of Indian Muslim converts – as earlier interpreted by Aziz Bari above – what he omitted to explain is that Article 160 also requires this Malay-speaking Muslim individual to be born in Malaya before 1957, or if not then otherwise his (e.g. the Muslim convert’s) parents must also have been born or already staying in Malaya before Merdeka.

The full text of Article 160’s definition of ‘Malay’ is as follows:

‘Malay’ means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom and –

(a) was before Merdeka Day born in the Federation or in Singapore or born of parents one of whom was born in the Federation or in Singapore, or was on that day domiciled in the Federation or in Singapore; or
(b) is the issue of such a person;

Bangsa M’sia propaganda is DAP strategy to disenfranchise Malays 

DAP’s Aziz Bari in his interview today with FMT provided only a partial interpretation of Article 160.

As someone who has taught law before and is widely promoted by the liberal media as a “constitutional law expert”, you’d think Aziz Bari should know better.

Indeed he likely does.

Therefore we can only suspect that his apparent misdirection, i.e. lack of a complete reading of Article 160, was something done deliberately. Or else why leave out the essential part about any Malay-speaking Muslim individual needing to be born before Merdeka etc, etc, to qualify as a legal/constitutional Malay?

The Malay community must ask themselves if DAP leaders and DAP’s Bangsa Malaysia propaganda is actually a devious means to usurp genuine Malays of their rights under Article 153.

Download PDF

Despacito and desperados



The Despacito music video is undeniably steamy.

Now our Communications Ministry is additionally complaining that the lyrics of this hit song are sexually charged. As such, RTM has just banned its airplay.

There are further complaints that “Despacito is fast messing up our culture” (story linked in tweet below).

It is quite understandable why some conservative Malay groups find the song’s catchy but suggestive lyrics, as well as the explicit visuals of its official video clip, to be against the modest Muslim culture.

Some stills captured from the Despacito video on YouTube’s Vevo channel – refer below – are self-explanatory of the culture clash.

Insidiously infiltrating Muslim culture

This frame (screenshot below) appears in the introduction scene of the Despacito video. It juxtaposes the sacred and the profane.

A statue of holy Virgin Mary, with her hands piously clasped in prayer, is seen on the right. In the background, a woman is in the narrow alley and walking towards viewers.

As she approaches the camera, we can see that the sexy model is clad in very short denim cut-offs and a navel-baring cropped top.

Incidentally, the shapely eye candy is Zuleyka Rivera, a former Miss Universe who’s native Puerto Rican. The singers of Despacito are also Puerto Rican.

In the following close-up, we can see that the ex-Miss Puerto Rico is wearing a large crucifix lodged between her cleavage and another small cross on a chain.

Even when Zuleyka is in a sleazy bar, the cross that she’s wearing around her neck is still prominently visible.

Other cast extras in the Despacito music video are also wearing the Christian religious symbol.

Some are doing sexually suggestive moves while wearing the cross. Look, for example, at the dancer in the green T-shirt below grinding his hips against his scantily clad female partner. His cross can be seen swinging around his neck.

This sends out the wrong message that it is alright for decorum not to be preserved despite that the youth is wearing his/her religious identity on his sleeve.

On the other hand, it is definitely not alright in Malaysia for a Muslim girl wearing hijab to be behaving in public like those Christian girls in the Despacito video.

New hope and changed behaviour

Our government has taken action to restrict the song because the salacious imagery portrayed in its video and through its lyrics is a corrosive influence on Malaysian social (and religious) mores.

The way those permissive people in the Christian country of Puerto Rico expose their body in the video hints at a liberal culture that is incompatible with the tutup aurat standards of Malaysia.

Equally, the liberal culture contained in the DAP is incompatible with our broader Malaysian society that’s largely conservative. It is a cause for concern that the DAP is hell-bent on bringing ‘change’ and how they want to ubah everything to follow their template.

Only Malay desperados are willing to cooperate with the DAP to push the ‘new hope’ agenda which is incompatible with our Muslim social climate.

Oil and water cannot mix

When PAS and DAP hooked up through Pakatan Rakyat, the two parties were like chalk and cheese.

For parti Islam, its raison d’etre was achieving the Islamic state through political Islam while the evangelical party made its 2008 breakthrough on the back of political Christianity and succeeded in capturing the peninsular west coast.

Needless to say, the ‘love’ match between Muslim chalk and Christian cheese failed to last long. Today PAS and DAP are bitter enemies after their acrimonious fling.

Similarly, the hook-up between PBBM and DAP is like forcing oil and water to mix. In this case, Tun Mahathir’s new party is the snake oil while DAP is the holy water vessel.

Oil and water are always separate, you must remember.

PPBM is clearly desperate, so much so it is trying to hoodwink Malay voters that ex-Umno men can somehow be compatible with DAP when even opposition party PAS found a relationship with fellow opposition party DAP to be untenable.

⇓  ‘Hope’ or Harapan is the favourite word of the churches − exemplified by the venue where Hallelujah Hannah was preaching (below)

Political Islam vs political Christianity

PPBM does not have Chinese members. For instance, Mahathir loyalist Matthias Chang does not qualify to become a member of his ex-boss’ fledging party. Neither does PPBM have office bearers who are indigenous non-Muslims.

Hence, PPBM is essentially parti mamak/Melayu Islam. And akin to PAS’s painful experience with DAP earlier, again we see PPBM – a Muslim-driven political vehicle – choosing to collaborate with a temporary ally that’s turbo-charged on political Christianity.

The clash of cultures and civilization is inevitable if the DAP refuses to cease and desist, and should PPBM elect to empower DAP.

Nothing has changed in the group dynamics since the operational period of Pakatan Rakyat (PAS-DAP) evolved to its present iteration called Pakatan Harapan (PPBM-DAP). The same ideological fault lines that split Pakatan 1.0 is already dogging Pakatan 2.0.

DAP will certainly not allow Mahathir Mohamad to do a reverse takeover of the coalition as its “top dog”. Pakatan Harapan is after all a DAP creation. Hence it is the DAP that naturally sits at the top of the Harapan food chain with Apek Lim bestriding its apex.

⇓  DAP deep in denial … sad indeed

Harapan’s Malay faces in the presidential line-up are only a bunch of desperate Ali’s in an Ali-Baba arrangement where Kit Siang is the Baba puppet master − as incisively explained by the PM’s press secretary Tengku Sarifuddin Tengku Ahmad.

Pakatan Harapan is an Ali Baba arrangement … no more, no less.

PPBM’s Malays are real desperados to allow themselves to be puppets pulled on the DAP string, and allowing DAP a conduit so that the more conservative Malay community in the heartland is exposed to the insidious influence of an evangelical party.

Download PDF

Epic fail ! Rocket wannabe Star Trek, not


The newly unveiled Harapan logo (below) looks like a rip-off from Star Trek.

Unlike Star Trek however, the new hope coalition (gabungan harapan baru) does not offer any new adventure.

No new crews, no new villains, no new heroes, no new worlds.

And no Kadazans, no Ibans either.

Just the same old tired faces both familiar and familial − Tun Mahathir (Harapan chairman), his son Mukhriz (Harapan vice president), Anwar (ketum) and his wife Wan Azizah (Harapan president).

In fact, the Harapan line-up is nothing but a sham. The coalition’s three deputy presidents are Lim Guan Eng, Muhyiddin Yassin and Mat Sabu.

Does anyone believe that Mat Sabu has any say in anything? But he is placed as Guan Eng’s peer nonetheless.

Guan Eng is the sec-gen of DAP the party that has 36 MPs while Muhyiddin is the president of PPBM the party that has one MP.

Yet it is the party with the sole MP that gets to chair the opposition front.

What they call the opposition front today is headed by Dr Mahathir and Anwar who used to do a double act as Umno president and Umno deputy president in tandem with their roles as prime minister and deputy prime minister respectively.

The DAP promised its Chinese and Christian voters the hope of change (‘ubah’). What, pray tell, is changed when opposition supporters are asked to vote a coalition led by the very same ex-Umno leaders who created Umno money politics and patronage?


Coalition of Chaos among the Pakatan geriatrics — Here


Download PDF

The yin and yang of William and Andrew



A storm was stirred in a teacup when Malaysiakini mismatched its Najib Razak banner photo (snapped when the PM was on board a feeder bus) with its related article standfirst about the premier’s entourage apparently forcing MRT commuters to the back of the train.

Malaysiakini‘s picture showed Najib in a bus while its story concerned Najib’s ride on the train. Hence the photo-article mismatch.

The portal was reporting on Najib’s commute yesterday evening on the MRT. This mass rail service transits from originating station at Sg. Buloh and spanning 12 stations to its last stop — which is currently at Semantan. However when completed, the line will run all the way to Kajang.

Najib boarded the train at the Pusat Bandar Damansara MRT station (see route map below). He was checking out the soon-to-be operational second phase of the line that will link to the KL Sentral transport hub. 

Malaysiakini originally introduced its article saying “MRT commuters were apparently forced to the back of the train to make room for the premier and his entourage”. See its blurb below.

Subsequently, Malaysiakini modified the relevant paragraph by inserting the phrase “before Najib boarded” to update its sentence to read: “Lawyer Andrew Khoo posted on Facebook that passengers that were on the MRT before Najib boarded apparently forced to the back of the train to make room for the premier and his entourage”.

Earlier version of the article
Amended version of the article

Chicken and duck communicating

The portal was leading its story based on a complaint by lawyer Andrew Khoo who posted on his Facebook that “officials cleared the front of the carriage of the train [for Najib], and passengers were forced to move to the rear”.

According to what he told Malaysiakini, Khoo’s train journey on Wednesday overlapped the distance of one station with that of the PM.

Recounting a different and more pleasant experience of the event is Facebooker William Cheah.

William was one of the social media movers and shakers who were invited to join the PM’s trip. He reacted to the Malaysiakini story by disputing the portal’s account that anyone was forced to move at all.

Their discrepancy in details arises due to Andrew and William’s respective views from different perspectives.

Andrew was talking about the portion of the MRT ride from the Pusat Bandar Damansara to the Semantan station whereas William was talking about the ride on the feeder bus with Najib where he is pictured in the Malaysiakini photo − see red arrow below.

Andrew was referring to the Pusat Bandar Damansara-Semantan train experience while William was referring to the shuttle bus situation.

Screenshot shared by William Cheah

Other invited guests of the PM include fashionista Wak Doyok (real name Tengku Muhammad Azwan Mohd Nor), Faiz Dickie (real name Mohd Nasrul Faiz Abu Azal), Karl Shafek (Khairul Shafek Ibrahim), Mohd Ridwan Mustafa, Kyopropaganda, Akwa Arifin and Harvinth Skin(the guy with the green hair).

Their accounts of the VIP trip can be read from their social media.

The feeder bus was specially chartered for the group and there were no uninvited passengers on the bus as per the photo above.

⇓  Social media personalities with Najib on the MRT yesterday

Two tribes and no common ground

The contending narratives about Najib’s ‘road’ test yesterday created acrimony between netizens on either side of the political divide.

William is positive about the MRT and looks at it as an achievement to be proud of. He posted in his FB: “… why do we smear a grand achievement such as the MRT with really such a small matter of whether ‘passengers’ were pushed back for a tour by the PM?”

He looks at the big picture which is the improvement in our public transport system.

Andrew, on the other hand, focused on the slight inconvenience caused to some MRT passengers traveling from one station to the next stop.

Even if it’s true that some commuters were indeed asked to make way so that the prime minister and Rosmah could climb aboard the train, it is really such a big deal? Does this warrant all the really rude and nasty comments flung at the PM and his wife by Malaysiakini subscribers, and even some that were directed at William for his positive outlook?

Ordinary Malaysians are tired of the incessant and endless negativity displayed by the Dapsters, and their perpetual cursing and swearing at establishment figures.

What was Malaysiakini‘s intention in blowing up a minor detail that’s essentially a non-issue? Their niat is suspect. And they’re pandering to a readership that’s always bersangka buruk.

The left-wing media should stop bloviating about ‘muhibbah’ given their own propensity to foster disharmony (read: fanning hate for the government) and their audience’s entrenched animus for Umno.

Malaysian liberals have no moral standing to label their opponents as ‘haters’.



Download PDF

Alangkah baiknya kalau Cik Boo Su-Lyn sedar diri


Oleh Fatihah Jamhari

Walaupun Perkara 152 dan 161 Perlembagaan Persekutuan memperuntukkan bahawa Bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan haruslah digunakan dalam semua urusan rasmi negara, namun sehingga kini masih ramai rakyat Malaysia yang buta sejarah, tuli perundangan dan jahil naratif kebangsaan hinggakan mereka dengan tega menidakkan apa yang sudah jelas termaktub.

Antara mereka yang jahil ini adalaCik Boo Su-Lyn yang dengan riaknya bertanya “Jika orang luar boleh berbahasa Inggeris, mengapa tidak rakyat Malaysia?

Apa yang membuatkan Cik Boo (gambar atas) begitu meroyan sehinggakan dia tergamak mempersoalkan kebolehan rakyat Malaysia untuk berbahasa Inggeris dengan baik?

Mengikut penceritaan beliau sendiri, soalan yang diajukan adalah bertitik tolak daripada pengalaman peribadinya. Menurut Cik Boo, beliau terkesima apabila mendapati pegawai-pegawai polis yang ditugaskan di kawasan ‘elit’ kelas menengah atas, yakni dalam kawasan Taman Tun Dr Ismail, gagal untuk menggunakan bahasa Inggeris semasa mereka menerima aduan yang dilaporkannya.

Tentu saja kejutan yang dia alami adalah kerana pada pandangannya, amatlah tidak berpatutan apabila ada lagi rakyat Malaysia yang tidak mampu untuk berbahasa Inggeris. Kegagalan untuk berbahasa Inggeris dilihat sebagai ketidakupayaan yang menjelikkan dan mampu merendahkan martabat negara.

Jelik sekali rakyat Malaysia di mata Cik Boo sehinggakan mereka dilihat berdiri lebih rendah daripada bangsa asing yang berniaga di Malaysia.

Sepatutnya ada pendidik di negara ini yang bangkit untuk menegur sikap angkuh, biadap dan tak sedar diri yang tumbuh teguh dalam diri Cik Boo serta mereka yang seangkatan dengan Cik Boo.

Seharusnya ada pendidik yang mengajar agar Cik Boo sedar kedudukan bahasa Inggeris di negara ini tidak boleh sama tinggi dengan bahasa Melayu.

Seharusnya Cik Boo mula belajar untuk menghormati peruntukan perlembagaan dan perundangan yang jelas menyatakan bahawa bahasa Melayu hendaklah digunakan dalam kesemua urusan rasmi.

Adalah amat dangkal, cetek pemikiran dan jumud untuk mengatakan kononnya dasar pendidikan negara sudah gagal untuk mempersiapkan rakyat Malaysia sebagai bangsa global semata-mata kerana Cik Boo melihat interaksi urusan rasmi yang berjalan dalam bahasa Melayu sebagai tanda bahawa pegawai awam di negara ini tidak boleh berbahasa Inggeris.

Cik Boo langsung menidakkan bahawa pegawai awam berbuat sedemikian kerana mereka bijak menghormati peruntukan perlembagaan, bukan seperti Cik Boo yang jahil murakab.

Walaupun Cik Boo berdolak-dalik berlakon kononnya menghormati bahasa Melayu namun lakonan Cik Boo tidak mampu menutup sikap pemuja Inggeris yang kukuh dalam dirinya.

Pemujaan Cik Boo harus dihentikan dan dia kena disedarkan bahawa bumi yang dipijak adalah Malaysia. Apabila perlembagaan negara jelas mengangkat bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa rasmi, maka seharusnya rakyat tidak mempersoalkan dan merendahkan peruntukan ini dengan memperkecilkan mana-mana pegawai awam yang menghormati peruntukan.

Abdar Rahman Koya (duduk di kiri)


Pentutur bahasa Inggeris perasan diri hebat

Begitu juga dengan Abdar Rahman Koya yang merendahkan martabat bahasa Melayu apabila dia dengan sombong mengatakan bahawa bahasa Melayu tidak punya tempat untuk diangkat sebagai bahasa ekonomi, agama mahupun akademik. Hujahan penuh kekeliruan yang dimajukan Abdar Rahman hanya membuktikan bahawa dia, dan mereka seangkatan dengannya, hidup dalam kecelaruan.

Dalam satu perenggan Abdar Rahman mengakui penggunaan sesuatu bahasa haruslah secara semula jadi tanpa paksaan, namun dalam perenggan lain, dia dengan bongkak mengatakan bahawa tiada keperluan untuk menggunakan bahasa kebangsaan. Jadi apabila rakyat negara, tanpa paksaan, enggan menggunakan bahasa kebangsaan, apakah jalan lain yang ada untuk melaksanakan dasar penggunaan bahasa kebangsaan?

Malaysia disenaraikan di tangga ke-12 dalam EF English Proficiency Index. Sedangkan Singapura menduduki tangga ke-6 dan Filipina tersenarai di kedudukan ke-13. Namun, kecekapan rakyat Malaysia berbahasa Inggeris masih diragui Cik Boo.

Menteri Kesihatan S. Subramaniam (tengah) dari MIC

Sudah tentu Cik Boo girang apabila Ketua Pengarah Kesihatan Malaysia mengumumkan kelonggaran syarat lulus bahasa Melayu di peringkat Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) bagi tujuan lantikan secara kontrak pegawai perubatan UD41. Namun kegirangan ini tidak kekal lama apabila menteri kesihatan pula mengumumkan bahawa kesemua graduan perubatan masih perlu lulus bahasa Melayu untuk mendapatkan tempat di dalam hospital awam bagi menjalani latihan siswazah dan khidmat wajib.

Apakah salah untuk sesuatu kerajaan yang memerintah sesuatu negara bertindak menggunakan undang-undang, dasar, peruntukan dan peraturan untuk melaksanakan dasar membentuk identiti kebangsaan?

Jika salah, mengapa di United Kingdom Menteri Kesihatan mereka  boleh bertegas memperuntukkan bahawa doktor yang berkhidmat di UK haruslah mampu berbahasa Inggeris dengan baik?

Begitu juga halnya dengan sistem perubatan di Norway yang mengkehendakkan kebolehan berbahasa Norway atau mana-mana bahasa Scandinavia. Sama halnya dengan kelayakan untuk beramal sebagai pegawai perubatan di Sweden.

Hanya di Malaysia saja rakyatnya bongkak dengan identiti masyarakat minoriti mereka sehinggakan mereka akan menggunakan apa cara sekali pun untuk menolak segala peruntukan yang jelas bertujuan untuk menyatukan keseluruhan rakyat di bawah naratif kebangsaan yang seragam.

Mereka yang masih menggelarkan diri sebagai rakyat Malaysia wajib mengangkat setiap satu perkara yang termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Merendah-rendahkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa interaksi, komunikasi, pendidikan, perniagaan mahupun teknologi samalah dengan memperkecilkan peruntukan yang sedia ada. Jangan kerana sikap tidak sedar diuntung sesetengah pihak, naratif kebangsaan terhakis semata-mata dek kerana mereka merasakan diri mereka lebih hebat dengan fahaman naratif songsang mereka.

Fatihah Jamhari adalah seorang peguam dan aktivis

Download PDF

No ‘Hallelujahs’ please, we’re Malay Muslims


By Faidhur Rahman Abdul Hadi

Are we to maintain our silence and do nothing in the face of the evangelical onslaught?

First they attacked the then Selangor exco Hassan Ali. Then they went for ustaz Nasharuddin Mat Isa − the PAS deputy president at the material time.

More recently, they tried to gun down UUM senior lecturer cum Iksim fellow Dr Kamarul Zaman Yusoff. Now they’ve got a think-tank CEO, Centhra’s Azril Mohd Amin, in their crosshairs.

All of the men mentioned above have one major thing in common. They bravely exposed the sinister agenda of certain Christian individuals and evangelical groups to convert Malays out of Islam.

Why are the evangelicals so defensive if these bold revelations are untrue?

Hope or ‘Harapan’ springs eternal to harvest Malay souls

In September 2010, Utusan Malaysia reported that one Malay pastor, Benjamin Stephen, is a Muslim apostate from Johor.

A few days ago, news portal brought to light the actions of a Malay man ‘Vicotr’ in Johor who is an evangelical activist.

This ex-Muslim – now a pastor allegedly affiliated with the International Christian Association – spoke of his ‘joy’ in actively saving souls and bringing fellow Malays to the true faith of Jesus.

Before that, the same Menara investigative team also unearthed the case of a Malay family in Kedah who have been converted to Christianity more than four years.

Such missionary work flies in the face of our federal constitution and laws prohibiting Christians from preaching to Muslims.

Hence Centhra’s public policy advocate Azril urged that new anti-evangelicalism laws be enacted.

His suggestion was platformed by Utusan and managed to spook the usual suspects. The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) was quick to denounce the proposal.

⇓  ‘Hope’ … NECF ever defiant in making their clarion call

Christian religious freedom is not absolute

Previously those proselytizing the Christian faith to Muslims could be detained under ISA.

Although the preventive detention law has since been repealed, it is nevertheless permissible under Article 11(4) of the federal constitution for states to enact laws restricting propagation of Christianity among Muslims.

In Selangor, this law takes the form of the Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988.

Further, Article 11(5) allows for restriction on religious freedom in the name of public order, public health or morality.

Various laws prohibiting the conversion of Muslims in all states – save the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak – were spurred by the arrest of Pastor Joshua Jamaluddin.

Joshua, a Johorean Malay from Muar and former Muslim by his birth name of Jamaluddin Othman, became the catalyst for these prohibitive legislation when he was detained under Ops Lalang in 1987.

Oh, will Azrul please shut up already!

Needless to say, the evangelicals are now trying to tarnish Azril’s reputation in a way similar to their earlier all out verbal assault on Dr Kamarul.

Just like the “biggest hypocrite” Hannah Yeoh (whose party proclaims itself the champion of secularism), the same set of Malay liberals are being predictably hypocritical about this very serious issue.

As only to be expected, the ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ Azrul Mohd Khalib is once again insisting that Iksim, Centhra and Isma are basing their arguments on pure bigotry. He told off these Muslim NGOs, chiding that they “should stop shooting their mouths off”.

LGBT flagbearer Azrul is convinced that the insecure Isma, suspicious Iksim and scaredy cat Centhra always “see bogeymen and enemies everywhere”.

On top of implying that his bugbear Malay conservatives are arrogant and contemptuous of non-Muslims, Azrul accuses them moreover of feeding an “irrational fear and paranoia” among the ummah.

Chameleon preachers and their multiform camouflage

Meanwhile, self-proclaimed ‘Islamologist’ Farouk A. Peru wrote a characteristically insulting screed lambasting Centhra’s Azril.

For that matter, Farouk believes the Islamists do not possess the required intellectual capacity to provide counter arguments to the evangelicals.

He misses the point, however, that laws are meant to be adhered to, period. This is regardless of one’s IQ level.

“The evangelical traits have never by themselves yielded cohesive, institutionally compact, or clearly demarcated groups of Christians. Since its origins, evangelicalism has always been diverse, flexible, adaptable, and multiform,” — Pastor Joshua Woo (quoting historian Mark Noll)

NOTE: Joshua Woo is a Penang councillor with the Seberang Perai Municipal Council (MPSP)

⇓  “Adaptable”? “Multi-form”? Hmm, sounds like the Penang pastor is describing Hannah ‘Hallelujah’ Yeoh

China thwarts its Christians through legal means

The present laws are not enough. Who could forget, for example, how evangelicals thumbed their noses at the ban on use of the term ‘Allah’.

It is in this context that newer and more stringent laws have been enacted elsewhere around the world including in non-Muslim nations such as Russia with its Yarovaya Act and Singapore with its Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act − both cited by Azril in his Utusan essay.

Various other nations have had, at some point in their history, at least a prohibition in place against the often overzealous manner in which Christian evangelicalism operates.

One such instance is China. During the Ming dynasty period, Christian missionary activity was outlawed when the same was found to be incompatible with the dominant Confucian ideology.

This prohibition was continued by the succeeding Qing dynasty. The Jiaqing emperor (1814 CE) even added a clause referencing Christianity to the Qing legal code on ‘Wizards, Witches, and All Superstitions’ under which those caught evangelizing were to be strangled to death or disposed as slaves to Muslim leaders and beys in punishment.

Other countries besides Russia, Singapore and China have passed laws prohibiting unauthorised Christian evangelicalism. In Nigeria, its 12 Muslim-majority states prohibit evangelism to be conducted upon Muslims.

More examples include Belarus, Cuba and Mexico that are themselves Catholic-majority but fearful of the imported virulent evangelism.

Unlawful, unacceptable, is why they must be kept in check

Dapsters are demanding Azril’s head (pix above) for sedition because he dared to call out the evangelicals as a “dangerous movement” that needs to be checked.

In truth, he is merely suggesting laws that are already established in countries confronted by the threat of evangelism.

More often than not, evangelists tend to come into conflict with local cultures and practices of spiritual beliefs already ensconced. Hence they are indeed socially disruptive if not downright dangerous.

Even non-Muslims such as Parti Cinta Malaysia vice president Huan Cheng Guan and former Hindu Sangam president A. Subramaniam have indicated that Buddhists and Hindus are extremely uneasy at the unethnical as well as indecent manner in which these evangelicals operate.

We cannot permit Christian evangelicals to dictate the terms of our national narrative on their covert missionary activities.

They want to shut down public debate on their clearly unlawful and unacceptable proselytization. We mustn’t let them.

Faidhur Rahman Abdul Hadi is a lawyer and activist

Download PDF

Coalition of Chaos among the Pakatan geriatrics



In the UK, Conservatives had earlier taunted that its nemesis the Labour party could only come into power through a ‘Coalition of Chaos’ (see video snippets below).

Then last Thursday’s (June 8) shocking British election results saw the Tories losing 13 seats while arch rival Labour gained 30 and creating a hung parliament.

Labour chief Jeremy Corbyn thus got a taste of sweet revenge, mocking Theresa May’s Coalition of Chaos currently.

Ages 70 to 90-plus

Pakatan Harapan is yet another Coalition of Chaos.

Who is going to be leader of the opposition pact? Will Tun Mahathir – aged 92 – whose party has only one MP (Pagoh) become the Harapan chair?

And will PPBM’s Muhyiddin Yassin – aged 70 – become the Harapan president and anointed prime minister-in-waiting?

It looks like DAP – the biggest opposition party with 36 MPs – is neither going to be chairman nor president of the new Hope coalition because, as they’ve been so strenuously insisting, none of its (non-Malay) leaders actually have any ambition of becoming PM.

So will Anwar Ibrahim – aged 70 – be the ketum of Harapan and the country’s 8th PM wannabe?

Or will Lim Kit Siang – aged 76 – be the power behind the throne?

While the bosses of Harapan’s three parties PKR, PPBM, DAP (+PAN) play peek-a-boo with the Registrar of Societies, one thing they cannot hide from the public is how really truly old their party helmsmen are.

The Harapan people tout themselves as offering ‘Hope & Change’ to the electorate but they can’t even ubah their own leadership line-up. Where is the young blood and fresh ideas?

Can readers please like Tanjak on Facebook and push us over the 1000 mark by suggesting to your friends? or click

Download PDF

Methodist Church: “we have YB @hannahyeoh to speak with us on politics”


Hallelujah Hannah — perpetually preaching, preaching, preaching …

Hannah Yeoh, by her own admission, is always preaching here and there. By her own admission too, she l-o-v-e-s pastors and would have wanted to become one herself.

Given her well-documented hyper activity in church (missionary work), it’s even appropriate to call Hallelujah Hannah a ‘lay preacher’ — see series of tweets below.

Isn’t it correctly a “Christianizing” activity when one spreads the Gospel like Hannah does? Therefore, can’t it be fairly termed that YB Hallelujah has been advancing a Christianizing “agenda”?

What do evangelicals do? Well, they evangelize, naturally.

What does Hallelujah Hannah do in the mosques?

Some people on Twitter have also said that Hannah Yeoh uses her church platform to talk politics.

Indeed the ‘famous’ Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) has recorded her political sermon — see the church’s tweet “we have YB to speak with us on politics” below acknowledging her political talk.

One fella on Twitter reminded YB Hallelujah Hannah that “lots of [MPSJ council] decisions were made at church” — see @markvarughese’s tweet below.

Another fella alluded to YB Hallelujah Hannah officiating at a church event and using her ‘pulpit’ in August 2014 to talk about the Selangor MB crisis.

The Good Shepherd church in Sabah once asked YB Hallelujah Hannah whether it’s okay for her “to talk like a forum at church”.

Hallelujah Hannah’s fellow DAP Christian Yang Berhormats are also active evangelicals.

Perak evangelical warlord James Ngeh Koo Ham is another lay preacher.

Hallelujah Hannah’s colleague Ong Kian Ming – the Hon. Serdang MP – is involved in church activities that outreach to youths.

The current YB Bukit Gasing, DAP’s Adun Rajiv Rishyakaran – had carried out his voter registration drive prior to GE13 in Subang Jaya’s City Harvest Church.


Harapan …

Hannah banned from hallelujah-ing in Sarawak!

Too political?


What’s Hallelujah Hannah’s beef with Dr Kamarul?

Senang-senang jer Puan Speaker Selangor make police report.

Really … how many persons does it take to make a police report anyway? Look at YB Hannah’s huge entourage when the Puan Speaker sailed in yesterday into the Subang Jaya police station to lodge a report against UUM senior lecturer Dr Kamarul Zaman Yusoff.

Given Hallelujah Hannah’s track record we’ve traced above, just what is so inaccurate about Dr Kamarul saying she has a ‘Christianizing’ agenda? No, meh?

BELOW: Btw, what’s missing in Hannah’s costume in the group photo at the police station? Err, her tudung?

Download PDF

Liberals and conservatives can no longer share same country



Evil and dishonest rhetoric by the liberal left is bad for the country and could even potentially split apart the nation one day “because we won’t be able to continue to live with each other”, writes John Hawkins in Townhall.

⇓  American left-wing media constantly hating on Trump, his wife (and even their 10-year-old kid)
FAKE NEWS: Since when has the reclusive Melania Trump been a ‘Hollywood’ celebrity?

Hawkins, in his recent May 13 article ‘The liberal lie so big it may one day split the country’ is referring to Americans in the USA. Nonetheless, what he says perfectly describes Malaysians here too.

John Hawkins

Over in the States, the writer (right) is of the opinion they’ve “already reached the point where California’s threats to secede are being met with cries of ‘faster please, what can we do to help?’ from millions of conservatives”.

Hawkins believes there are large numbers of conservative Americans whom liberals have fanned an irrational public hatred towards via their deliberate falsehoods. Consequently, there is a large number of victims “who’ve grown to abhor liberals after being targeted by their lies”.

“Put another way, liberals are creating an America where it’s natural to HATE people of differing political views.” We can say the same about Malaysian liberals too.

Pretty much everyone who doesn’t toe the liberal line in America is accused of being a Nazi, notes Hawkins. In Malaysia, conservatives are perpetually accused of being racist by the likes of Wong Chun Wai, Hannah Yeoh and Azrul Mohd Khalib.

⇓  Unhinged liberal media are George Orwell’s dystopian ‘1984’ made flesh  

Observing that liberals don’t seem to accept nor respect the fact that conservatives find Barack Obama loathsome – similar to the way liberals feel about Donald Trump – Hawkins suggests that the left regards those who disagree with them as deplorables guilty of a variety of ‘-isms’ and ‘-phobias’.

Because liberals are convinced that conservatives are Nazis, they find it “acceptable” to concoct all kinds of lies about these fascists (Republicans), adds Hawkins.

He fears the political left will eventually split his country into two “because what brings us together as a nation is becoming smaller than the liberal hatred that is dividing us”.

⇓ CNN newsflashed its freakout over the president getting served two scoops of ice-cream compared to everybody else’s one

Liberal hysteria over the end of life as we know it

In a separate Townhall column yesterday (May 14), Derek Hunter points out just how “unhinged” and “irrational” President Trump’s opponents have become.

Even if Trump saved a puppy, the media and Democrats would still complain about it as they’re unable to discard their ‘the sky is falling-the sky is falling’ mantra.

Derek Hunter

Hunter’s article headlined ‘The Irrationals: Trump’s opponents are his greatest asset’ resonates with Malaysians who think the unhinged scenario is mirrored locally – Najib Razak’s opponents are similarly the PM’s greatest asset due to their irrationality.

Highlighting the lack of a sense of proportion among liberals, Hunter writes that every move, every tweet by Trump is regarded by them as “a threat to democracy, an affront to humanity”.

Slamming the de facto opposition party (i.e. the liberal mainstream press), Hunter says “no conspiracy, no anonymous source is too far-fetched to be believed about the president”.

Any outrageous lie against Trump is willingly credited as gospel truth by such can’t-care-less liberals in the media and their hardcore viewership because that’s actually the irrational extent to which they have plumbed.

⇓  Eight out of the Top 10 trending news items in the New York Times either bash or berate Trump; this is a daily occurrence in the NYT & WaPo

Citing how anonymous sources is “the order of the day”, Hunter counted, “One Washington Post story involved 30 of them; 30! That’s five more than a major league baseball roster”.

Context has gone out the window and been replaced with rage and lies, he laments.

“As if whispers from the shadows weren’t enough, many (anti-Trump liberal journos) have taken to simply lying. The truth is bad enough sometimes, but to be compelled to lie on top of it must be some sort of disorder,” adds Hunter.

Yup, those reporters have been afflicted with the Trump Derangement Syndrome alright. And some Malaysian reporters are just as equally deranged about Najib.

Dividend from provoking Dapsters to new heights of lunacy

Today’s column in the always interesting Townhall is an even more blunt-weapon article titled ‘Liberals are an inferno of flaming crazy and we should pour gasoline on the fire’.

Kurt Schlichter writes, “America has thoroughly rejected them (liberal Democrats) in every branch of the federal government plus out in the states, and on top of that they were utterly humiliated by the guy they all claimed was a complete moron”.

Kurt Schlichter

This is the electoral outcome despite the liberals’ firm belief that they’re morally, intellectually and politically superior. Yet regardless the liberal self-perceived superiority complex, Trump is rolling along just fine, Schlichter snickers.

Perhaps ordinary voters are simply smarter than the urban elites. “While [the liberals] are babbling about nonsense that means nothing outside of the coastal looney bins”, says Schlichter, “normal people are tuning into how the stock market and the job market just keep getting better …”.

⇓ Trump tweets his condolences on an American killed in the Westminster Bridge terrorist attack; a Trump hater responds off topic hoping that Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway will land in jail

In keeping with Trump’s successful trolling, Schlichter encourages his president to “keep tweeting those twerps into a sputtering rage!”

“It pays dividends every time he provokes them to new heights of lunacy.”

Calling on Trump to appoint more hardcore conservatives to his administration, Schlichter concludes that the “Democrats are being crazy and it’s a bad look. So let’s keep helping them do it”.

Likewise, Dapsters are being stir crazy and it’s best we just patiently wait for their own dementia to do them in.

Download PDF

Muslims needn’t be apologetic about religious stand on underage marriage


Marriage involving a minor is also about societal values in a particular place at a certain time

By Lukman Sheriff Alias

I’m not in favour of child marriage. Nonetheless, I find the law here requiring consent  from the state or court for underage marriage as something acceptable and in line with worldwide practices.

The argument by leftists against child marriage is, I find, quite devious and agenda driven. I will admit there are issues with the proposition but it’s nonetheless spun by them to be an attack on Muslim practices.

Meanwhile, those who defend our system are too prone to misinterpretation and don’t see marriage involving minor(s) as an international and acceptable norm.

Court allows an American to marry at 12

Let us have a look at the practice in the most advanced liberal country i.e. the United States.

“The age of marriage in the United States is 18, with two exceptions — Nebraska (19) and Mississippi (21). However, most states have exceptions allowing marriage at younger ages with parental consent, judicial approval, in cases of pregnancy, or in a combination of these situations. Most states allow parties aged 16 and 17 to marry with parental consent alone. In many states, children under 16 can be married too, in special circumstances. The absolute minimum age set by statute varies by state between 13 and 17, while in 27 states there is no statutory minimum age if the other legal conditions are met. Although in such states there is no set minimum age by statute, the traditional common law minimum age is 14 for boys and 12 for girls — ages which have been confirmed by case law in some states.” [Source: Wikipedia]

You can see, their marriageable age – at 18 (boys) and 16 (girls) – that is publicly acceptance is even below ours. The youngest bride allowed by an American court is 12 years old.

I need you to note that under Malaysian law, sex involving anyone less than 16 is statutory rape. Under American law, however, they have the sweetheart defence to permit this ‘child sex’.

Mom was 14 and dad 15 when this baby was born

Some teenagers today mature early

Note then that this issue is beyond the religion of Islam. It’s about values which vary from place to place.

At the crux of the issue is recognized consent. If you recognize the right of individuals to have sex, to have offspring and to bear children, why do you deny them the right to marry?

And if you deny permission to minors, what is the ground for objection?

This is where liberals and the left always promote the duplicitous idea that child marriage is not okay. But still, child sex is okay under their operational terms.

They want to recognize the fact our teenagers mature at an earlier age nowadays, and these teens proceed to have sex. But the liberal lefties somehow don’t want to recognize the right of minors to bring up a child together.

In the USA, teen marriages mostly end in divorce at around 25 years of age. However at least one third of these young marriages manage to endure beyond a decade.

Compare statistically that already 40-plus percent of adult marriages in the States end up in divorce anyway. American values are ever changing in the matter of marriage and divorce.

Teo Nie Ching just picking on Islam

One easily confused DAP member of parliament

For Muslims it’s simple – no premarital sex.

We note that the different mazhabs in Islam variously determine what is the allowable age for marriage.

We have also our own local values as expounded in Malaysian civil law.

There’s a maslahah of society we want to achieve by these laws. Any underage marriage at the moment requires consent of the state/court.

I think we need to look further at improving the implementation process of the law.

Regardless, Muslims don’t have to be apologetic nor ashamed of our position on the subject. It is not dissimilar with even the USA that has a different set of values.

We, in point of fact, don’t follow American values. They have sweetheart defence or laws permitting child sex per se. We don’t have to follow their way, as propounded by YB Teo Nie Ching.

Shame on those who promote that child marriage is not okay but child sex is.

Lukman Sheriff Alias is a lawyer and activist

Download PDF