Sunday, December 25, 2011

Let's Talk About "Rights" Rev Eu

Article 153 should be inclusive, otherwise it is ‘bullying’, says Christian leader
UPDATED @ 12:06:36 AM 25-12-2011 By Melissa Chi December 24, 2011 SUBANG JAYA, Dec 24 — The Federal Constitution’s Article 153 is akin to “bullying” if it only protects the rights of one group, top church leader Reverend Dr Eu Hong Seng said today. The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) chairman said the rights in any nation cannot be scrutinised in a vacuum.
“I think we need to talk about the rights of others as well under article 153. “When we talk of rights of only one group, if I may suggest, that is bullying,” he (picture) said at the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM) Christmas hi-tea here at the Full Gospel Tabernacle. The annual event was attended by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon, MCA’s Loh Seng Kok, DAP’s Hannah Yeoh, PKR’s Chua Tian Chang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.
 The reverend said nation building must be collective and for it to work, it has to be inclusive of everybody’s rights, including the East and West Malaysians, Indians, Chinese, Orang Aslis, Malays, the Sikhs and indigenous people. Eu pointed out that democracy used to mean elected representatives are there to serve the people. “Today, Malaysian democracy means elected representatives can threaten the people and get away with it. “This should not be so, and we, the people of the book, are not afraid to say so,” Eu said. The Christian leader had previously been outspoken about the controversy surrounding the raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) on August 3. He had repeatedly stressed that there has not been any concrete proof of proselytisation, as claimed by certain quarters. The contentious raid escalated religious conflict between Muslims and Christians in the country, with Malay newspapers highlighting allegations of Christians trying to convert Muslims through welfare work. Source here
Dear Rev Eu Hong Seng

Before you want to start talking about Article 153, I would suggest that you look into Article 12 (2) of the Federal Constitution, refer below

Could you please point out to us which part of the Constitution can the Federation or a State incur a Single Ringgit in a LAWFUL manner to establish/maintain or assist in maintaining/establishing Christian Institutions that provide or assist in providing instruction in the religion of Christianity?

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Misplaced Priorities: Najib's Myopic Advisors

Allow me to begin by quoting JMD's  open letter to Chedet (with some of my own adjustment...jangan marah brader!)

I wonder why the Chinese Opposition took up with great intensity some issues such as meritocracy, independent judiciary, equal rights, freedom of media and reforming oppresive laws. As we all know, these issues are less relevant to the majority of the citizens here in Malaysia(here)
He wrote that in 2008 just when he started blogging, folks did not know of JebatMustDie when that appeared as a comment on Che Det.

We are almost nearing the end of 2011..... I asked myself the same question last nite.

Why can't the Prime Minister focus on simpler reforms that tackles the underlying issues instead.

For instance why not look the fundamental reasons of why people want to go to the streets for a Demo?

What are they not happy about?

Could it be the rampant corruption that is reported Year in Year Out in the Auditor General Report?

If so why not fix the MACC Act and empower the institution to undertake its mandate. I wrote about it (here) a few weeks ago, where a simple addition of a clause to define corruption such as


Such power if vested with MACC would simplify their prosecution of all issues identified under the AG Report.

Is it really that difficult to have such clause in order to clean up all the whole system?

The Opposition will go to town with the Annual Observation of Leakages and Corruption under the current Government, what have you got to show?

Simple things like how could a company tasked to undertake a National Interest Project be allowed to direct funds drawn from the Government Loan which is financed from Government Revenues and Borrowings into an "investment" in 2 High End Apartments (while the major markets was suffering from a collapse in High End Real Estate market)?

Can you please explain to us?

Minds are like parachutes; they work best when open. -Lord Thomas Dewer