Here’s Sdr Badrol Hisham’s latest email to me on Islam and the freedom of expression:

Dear Mr. Jonson,

I’m quite surprised to note that you still respect Dato’ Ahmad Ismail rights to say that non-Malays in Malaysia are “kaum pendatang”. I’m just wonders if somebody insulting your mother, will you respect their rights to say or express it? Don’t you have any dignity to defend of?

If the Malays are free to insult the non-Malays and vice versa, there will be no harmonious relation among different races in our country and similarly if the Muslims are free to insult other religions and vice versa, there will be no better understanding between different religions in our country. Freedom must be come with responsibility.

The main topic of our discussions is freedom of speech and expression. I don’t know why you keep harping on the issue of qualified people. Anyway, I’d like to recap what Y.B. Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang had said recently, “When talking about aerospace, you ask somebody from NASA, not someone in Somalia”. If you still don’t understand, I’ve no idea how else can I explain to you.

You should not compare Islam with Christianity or any other philosophy. Islam is a complete and perfect religion which was revealed by God Almighty to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) 1,400 years ago for all mankind. In Islam, we are encouraged to read the holy book Koran, understand and practised it with the guidance from Hadis, Ijtimak Ulamak and Qias. The question is whether we (the Muslims) follow it or not.

Some Muslims have deviant from Islamic teaching either by their act, view, thinking, approach, etc. So, I don’t see any need to comment to the so called progressive Islamic thinker that you mentioned in your blog.

I’ve told you clearly that the reason I asked you to remove my emails from your blog is because I’m afraid that some party will only use it to attack and degrade Islam. My afraid seems to be correct.

Anyway, I hope that one day you will be able to find the TRUTH in your life.

For Ms. Alice, I’ve full confidence in my belief and can take any amount of criticism. However, I can’t tolerate anybody who insult or discredit my religion.

Thank you for your understanding.

Regards,
Badrol Hisham
Kuala Lumpur

P/S: Mr Jonson, you can post this last email from me in your blog.

By the way, when I said justice for the Chinese and the Muslims, it is only as reference to the Dato’ Ahmad Ismail and Sisters In Islam cases. Sorry to confuse you. Justice is for all. So does Islam. God bless you.

Res ipsa loquitur.

P.S. Please read this post in the context of the previous postings: Engaging a Muslim on Islam & the Freedom of Expression and Engaging a Muslim on Islam & the Freedom of Expression 2

Here’s Sdr BH’s [author's name removed] reply to my email response to him:

[Email removed upon the request of the author. My reply remains below.]

Well, instead of just sending emails back and forth, I think it’s better for us to discuss openly about this concept of qualified freedom of speech.

I may not agree with Dato’ Ahmad Ismail calling non-Malays “kaum pendatang”, but I respect his right to say it. Similarly, he ought to respect my right to call him a bigot and a racist.

No matter how difficult it is to accept what others have to say, we must always respect their right to say it. We don’t have to respect the person, the organisation or even their point of view, we just have to respect their right to express it. As Voltaire, a French philosopher, once said, “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”

Similarly, Sdr BH [author's name removed], I do not agree with what you’re saying but I’m more than happy to publish what you’ve got to say on my blog.

On another point, I think we should really question the restrictions on who “qualifies” to study, analyse and discuss principles of religions, or philosophies for that matter. Are religious principles sacrosanct and “lay people” should be prohibited from espousing their views about them? If that is so, then philosophical principles ought not be discussed by any “lay people” except so-called qualified philosophers, too.

I’m sorry but this reminds me too much of the Roman Catholic Church that had a monopoly on God in the middle ages. In those days, lay people were not able to read the scriptures and think for themselves what those scriptures meant. Indeed, they had to literally buy penance from priests. Thankfully, there were reformists like Martin Luther that reformed Christianity.

Similarly, there was a progressive Islamic thinker by the name of Mahmoud Mohamed Taha that took a different approach towards Islam. Unfortunately, he was executed by the Sudanese government for heresy. For a living example of a progressive Islamic thinker, google Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im (or just click on his name to read the entry on Wikipedia).

By the way, justice is for all, and I don’t think there’s a need to specify any race or religion.

I received the following email in response to my statement on PAS’ resolution on Sisters In Islam:

[Email removed upon the request of the author.]

This was my response:

Dear Sdr BH [author's name removed],

Salam,
Jonson

Your comments are most welcome…

Yesterday I was pleasantly surprised to read the comments of former Perlis mufti Mohamad Asri Zainul Abidin, in a Malaysian Insider article.

I’ve known him to be what some people might call a “progressive” or “liberal” Muslim. Indeed, I’ve referred to him indirectly in a comment on one of my own previous posts. However, I wouldn’t call him a progressive or liberal Muslim. He’s just a Muslim that submits to the will of God, as all Muslims should.

In particular, this line in the Malaysian Insider article blew me away:

Speaking at his home in Lampeter, he disagreed with the conventional understanding that Malays have been Islamised but instead that they have “meMelayukan (to influence with Malay) Islam.”

Actually, the article is about Rulers and citizens. Even on that issue, his views are a breath of fresh air. Go check it out.

If not for the fact that the writer that I am about to quote is an Arabic Muslim of some international repute, I would probably be charged with sedition for insulting Islam. I have previously quoted Abd al-Rahman Azzam in one of my earlier postings.

The book that I am reading was found in a bargain bin and the title is “The Eternal Message of Muhammad”. I was reluctant to buy it because it was still not cheap despite the hefty discount. However, the benefit of hindsight tells me that my instinct was right.

Anyway, I am sharing the following passage with my fellow Malaysians because:

1. most Malaysian non-Muslims far too often have a misguided impression of what Islam is; and
2. the political stand of many Malaysian Muslims, especially in regard to racial equality, is contradictory to the faith they profess.
Read the rest of this entry »

I don’t know if there is such a thing as magazine reviews but I really want to recommend Off The Edge to all Malaysians who want to read something different, i.e. not FHM, Women’s Weekly or even Malaysia Today.

Just ask my friend Ja’a — I’ve been meaning to subscribe to this magazine but I keep putting it off and I end up buying it from the stands every month…

Anyway, I felt the urge to recommend this magazine on my blog after reading two letters in the current issue of the magazine. Look out for the above magazine cover at your local mamak newsstand.
Read the rest of this entry »

I found a definition of fascism at PublicEye.org, which says, amongst other things, “fascism is a form of extreme right-wing ideology that celebrates the nation or the race as an organic community transcending all other loyalties… It seeks to forcibly subordinate all spheres of society to its ideological vision of organic community, usually through a totalitarian state. Both as a movement and a regime, fascism uses mass organizations as a system of integration and control, and uses organized violence to suppress opposition…”

And according to Wikipedia, “fascism is also typified by totalitarian attempts to impose state control over all aspects of life: political, social, cultural, and economic, by way of a strong, single-party government for enacting laws and a strong, sometimes brutal militia or police force for enforcing them. Fascism exalts the nation, state, or group of people as superior to the individuals composing it. Fascism uses explicit populist rhetoric; calls for a heroic mass effort to restore past greatness; and demands loyalty to a single leader, leading to a cult of personality and unquestioned obedience to orders.”

The above descriptions sound eerily like what’s happening in Malaysia. And, mind you, the Abdullah regime is not the first in Malaysia to be compared to the fascists. An ex-colleague of mine created a clever photoshop image of a Hitler-like Mahathir about ten years ago.
Read the rest of this entry »

This morning, on a whim, I checked out our Opposition Leader’s website, and chanced upon a hot-off-the-press posting by Dr. Chen Man Hin. In his posting, Dr. Chen suggested that the Prime Minister invite Raja Nazrin Shah, the Crown Prince of Perak, to be his personal adviser, in light of the latter’s speech at the first Malaysian Student Leaders Summit 2007.

For what it’s worth, I must say that that’s an ingenius and interesting idea from Dr. Chen. I wonder what Raja Nazrin thinks. (By the way, Raja Nazrin’s credentials are quite impressive. Check out the link to his entry in Wikipedia above.)
Read the rest of this entry »

Once again, I’d like to comment on Dr. Chandra Muzaffar’s article, but this time, I agree with what he’s saying.

Basically, I agree that “when we go beyond labels such as ‘secular’ and ‘Islamic’ and connect with the substance of our three principal documents we will discover that there is a degree of congruence between the two positions.” And the three documents that Dr. Chandra is talking about are the Federal Constitution, the Rukunegara and Vision 2020.

Now, my question is, how do we move forward from this apparent impasse? It’s very obvious that the current hooha is created by the Deputy Prime Minister for political reasons. Indeed, it’s so idiotic for him to make such a statement that I won’t even go into the so-called debate.
Read the rest of this entry »

I was just at a DAP forum on the Lina Joy case. I must say that I am both disappointed and encouraged by what I saw and heard.

On the one hand, some of the speakers were terribly disappointing. To be fair, I shall not point them out. On the other hand, the turn out, which could have been anywhere between 700 to 1,000 people, shows that many Malaysians still care and dare to speak their minds.

Well, considering there were so many lawyers, politicians and Islamic scholars at the “dialogue”, I just had to say my two sens’ worth and ask the panel a few questions.
Read the rest of this entry »