Allow me to respond

Below are just some of the many comments in my article ‘So, teach me the ‘jalan yang betul’ then!’ I would like to respond to them as I feel further debate or clarification is required so that we can ‘clear the air’ on this matter that appears to be dividing us and threatens to break up the opposition like it did once before about a decade ago.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dear RPK

Recently your posts have become more convoluted with everything ending up in a paradox. Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset, If they weren’t they won’t even bother visiting. I’m afraid if this continues, such tedious yet complex arguments may deter the growing viewership might plummet to the depth of the ocean. Malaysia Today is the instrument of the third force as you claim so cater to the third force. Stop this nonsensical bashing and continue to direct people to the right path. I feel that Malaysia Today has entered another stage of in its struggle for freedom. I’m pretty much aware that most of the people that visit have realized the Injustice that they are living in yet we are still confused on what to do. Yes, we know the system is corrupt, so what do we do? Do we just quit our jobs and protest everyday on the street or just keep on and increasing our political bashing on the net. Therefore I hope you could focus your efforts on the next step, which is showing the people what to do next.

written by Almassy, October 07, 2011 05:39:22


MY RESPONSE: The fight for reforms or change is not a ‘single-focus’ job. It is ‘multi-prong’ job. We have to do, as what in the IT world they would say, multitasking. So we do not talk about just one issue. We take about many issues because there are so many things that ail Malaysia.

We continue to reveal the transgressions of those in the corridors of power — although due to the ‘selective prosecution’ policy that is being practiced in Malaysia (where those close to the powers-that-be are ‘immune’ from the long arm of the law) very little is going to come out of this effort other than merely ‘educating’ the Malaysian public so that at least they get to know their government better.

To you, getting to the bottom of the hudud matter may be nonsense. As you said: ‘Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset….’ I suppose this also means you.

However, judging by the quality of the comments that you read in Malaysia Today, does this give you the impression that ‘the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset’? The impression I get is that the reverse is true.

Anyway, we should not just focus on the comments to form our opinion. Can 100 readers who comment give you a good yardstick when more than a million others who read Malaysia Today do so quietly without commenting? What about the private e-mails and phone calls I receive from readers who express their opinion and their opinion is they are not sure yet whether they are going to vote for Pakatan Rakyat come the next election?

So we need to respond to what people say. This is because other people may get influenced by what is being said. For example, some are of the view that if hudud is implemented, pork, gambling, liquor, etc., will be banned. So we have to counter that.

Some are of the view that if they vote Pakatan Rakyat then for sure hudud is going to be implemented. Again, we have to counter that.

So we need to constantly rebut and reply to negative comments because, if we don’t, then people might believe these comments to be true and Pakatan Rakyat is going to suffer a serious erosion of support come the next election.

We are not talking religion here. We are talking about politics and reforms. But when religion is being dragged into politics, then we have no choice but to face it head on and address the issue.

And that is what I am doing: engaging the religionists who want to treat this matter as if it were a religious issue when in fact it is a political issue.



You are learned man and I sense that as you are getting old and perhaps been ‘exile’ for such a long time you are getting ‘religious’ in your posting. Also most of the posting are for argument.

When one gets older he tends to be closer to his God or his beliefs. But Pete, MT is getting too ‘religious’. Its time you go to Malaysian politics and as our election is looming you may have to use your MT to drive in some message of changes so that readers will be more updated about what is going on with our political parties. You have deep throat around and of course you always get the wind first.

written by neilahmad, October 07, 2011 08:10:55


MY RESPONSE:  I think I have covered most of the points in your comment in my response above. I just want to add one more point. Malaysia Today is not getting more religious. Religion is being used more now than before to gain political mileage. And this hudud issue has set the opposition back a wee bit and has given Umno a slight upper hand (which can escalate if we are not careful). So we avoid addressing this matter at our own peril.



I would like to say that even you are not in the position to comment about Hudud unless you know more than the others. Why not we let people know what hudud is all about. Its not merely chopping off people hands…

written by monty, October 07, 2011 09:29:10


MY RESPONSE: Hudud is not about religion. It is about the law and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. And people well versed in the law and the constitution ARE addressing this matter. (See here:Right to question hudud law’ and ‘At variance with the Constitution’)

But then the religionists (in this case the Islamists) are shouting them down and telling them that they should not talk about hudud and that only religionists should talk about it.

This is where we have to ‘out-shout’ them. Is hudud a religious issue or a legal cum constitutional issue? I say it is a legal/constitutional issue and it not only affects the constitution but democracy as well (if the minority pushes it down the throat of the majority).



I think you should stop wasting time in changing or bashing the Malay Muslim. They are not going to change since they are brought up in such narrow minded. Don’t talk about ordinary people even the educated Malays also sometimes act very funny when comes to religion.

You should continue write about Islam because I believe more non-Muslim are starting to understand the beautiful of Islam and how open is Islam is.

written by DR Politics, October 07, 2011 09:35:13


MY RESPONSE: Ah, this is my favourite topic. The non-Malays and non-Muslims lament that the ‘noisy minority’ is screaming their heads off while the ‘silent majority’ is keeping quiet. “Where is the silent majority Malays-Muslims?” they ask. “Why are they keeping quiet? They should speak up!”

Well, I am one of those in the ‘silent majority’ that you are talking about — only that I am not silent but I speak up. Do you want me to keep quiet and just let the noisy minority go on screaming? I can, if you wish. At least the Malays would not become so angry with me, like now.


Most of the Malays can’t even understand Arab language, what more to say understanding Hudud? They are depended to Ustaz, Imam and etc. Ask that particular Malay, does he fully understand Islamic law or the Quran?

written by Meh, October 07, 2011 10:49:02


MY RESPONSE: There is nothing complicated here. Hudud laws, as the name implies, are about the law. The question is: which laws do we want for Malaysia? My answer is: parliament makes the laws. That is why we call them lawmakers. So, can we let parliament do its job?

Now, if you are not happy with parliament, then vote the parliamentarians out of office. Install a new parliament. Just hope that the new parliament is better than the old parliament. And that is our job as voters.


Conclusion : All Muslims are taught to think that way, but some like Azmi dare to risk his life and question the religious teachers and the Quran. That is the argument about. If no one question Islam, then the nation will be like Somalia and the Islamic nations. Saudi and Brunei had the money and their countries are built by infidels or kafirs or using kafir’s technologies. What is there to be proud of?

And for the information, today a Nobel peace prize may be awarded to a Muslim, but a woman, for questioning the Islamic authorities. Are you going to say that the Nobel committee had intended to insult Islam?

In a democracy, we question all things and are free to think and follows our faith or believe in anything we want to believe. Sadly Malaysia is a false democracy – a semi theocratic and racist nation. How much longer are we going to lie to the world?

written by earthman, October 07, 2011 11:09:43


MY RESPONSE: And this is the crux to the whole matter. In a democracy, we have a right to question and to express our views. However, when it comes to hudud, suddenly we have lost that right. Why is that so? Because, according to the Islamists, hudud is God’s law so we cannot question it.

So, are you saying that we need to suspend democracy? PAS introduced the slogan ‘PAS for all’. ‘All’ would mean non-Muslims as well, right? Or is PAS going to change its slogan to ‘PAS for all-Muslims only’?

Malaysians have a right to defend their democratic right to question and to disagree. PAS should be the first to recognise this since it is accusing Barisan Nasional and Umno of being undemocratic.


There are highly intellectual Muslims who support Hudud. Not just narrow minded ones. Why we support? We have digested in our mind that Islam is the correct religion. Then it follows the Quran is the word of God. And since the Quran says Hudud is just as wajib as solat and fasting we support Hudud. A lot of people do not even understand Islam how do we expect them to understand Hudud. The least they could do is to follow Dr Tan the Catholic Archbishop and study the Quran. Dr Tan after studying the Quran supports Hudud. But these people think they are cleverer than Dr Tan, the Catholic Archbishop. He is a well read intellectual with a PhD! I rest my case.

written by johann, October 07, 2011 11:33:48


MY RESPONSE: I have already responded to this above. Hudud is about the law and the constitution, not about religion. You don’t need to understand Islam to understand that.


Generally it is true that an expert of any subject or skill is more knowledgeable than the non-expert. That is true for a Hudud expert when compared to the layman.

However, in this case and the main point of Azmi Haron’s contention is not about the contents of Hudud but rather ‘In a democracy, EVERYTHING can be questioned’.

If Hudud and its limits cannot be questioned because it is divine and God’s law, then it should not be proposed for implementation in a democratic nation like Malaysia.

Even if it is not democracy, normal human rights should grant permission to any human to question everything as a critical thinker.

To demand that one should not question Hudud because one is not a Hudud expert is beside the point, irrelevant and a ‘strawman’ to the point debated in that article.

As normal human beings with basic human rights, we need not be an expert on Hudud to question its effectiveness and impact on society. One need not be a professional engineer, theologian, drug scientist or gambler to raise questions when there are negative impacts arising from their activities. One can apply out-of-the-box critical thinking techniques besides employing other experts to handle the in-the-box questions.

It is very easy to tackle the Hudud question. If one must insist on God-commanded-Hudud, prove God exists first. If one cannot prove God exists, then one should keep God & Hudud private for psychological/emotional reasons and not bring it into public where it can effect (in grey cases) non-believers negatively. No immutable laws carved in stone tablets for 2011 onward pls

written by TMT, October 07, 2011 14:57:09


MY RESPONSE: I doubt I need to add anything more to the above. He/she took the words right out of my mouth.