Does MCA dare accuse Kit Siang of being anti-Islam?

“Today, the MCA’s Publicity Bureau Chairman is adamant that Kit Siang had “no qualms selling out the interests of the non-Muslim community.” Did it not occur to him that his own boss had sold out the pride, dignity and self-respect of the Chinese community by assisting an anti-Islamist pull wool over their eyes?”


Who is MCA with – Barisan Nasional or the DAP?

That’s the million-dollar question we need to ask the ruling coalition’s component partner, now prodding the DAP with claims that its dictator for life, Lim Kit Siang, is willing to work with PAS to “seize federal and state power.” According to MCA’s Dato’ Chai Kim Sen on Monday, Kit Siang’s endorsement for Amanah’s Dato’ Husam Musa was testimony that the senior Lim had “no qualms selling out the interests of the non-Muslim community.”

“Kit Siang can churn out all sorts of excuses for Husam Musa, that he has transformed, and that the establishment of Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) aims to safeguard non-Muslim rights,” Chai said.

“But no matter how much DAP repackages and emphasises on Amanah, there is no ideological distinction between PAS and its splinter party Amanah,” he added.

At first glance, it seems that not only is MCA dead against the DAP, leaders from the BN component party are waging a vendetta of sorts against Kit Siang, stopping short only of labelling him anti-Islam. But that’s just the problem – neither Chai nor his president, Dato’ Seri Liow Tiong Lai, have ever come out in support of UMNO by making their stand on the senior Lim’s anti-Islamic slant known.

But echo the senior Lim they did.

On the 27th of May 2016, Liow became the first president in MCA’s 68-year history to issue a caveat against a sitting Prime Minister (READ HERE). In rebuking a Syariah amendment Bill tabled by PAS president Dato’ Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, Liow blackmailed Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak by threatening to resign if the Prime Minister supported the Bill.

“I’m trying to stop it. I’m trying to get all the component parties to stop it. I am urging both sides of the political divide to come together and stop this Bill,’’ he said, adding, “If we cannot do it, we will have to sacrifice. I will resign.”

By doing so, Liow more or less echoed a call by Kit Siang for UMNO to come clean on its ‘pact’ with PAS to bulldoze the Bill through Parliament. Put differently, the MCA president made it clear that his party had no qualms standing alongside Kit Siang while hurling contempt against UMNO, particularly when it concerned the Islamic Syaria. In every other sense, he was firmly with UMNO.

Makes sense?

Did it not occur to Liow that he sought patronage from the very Kit Siang, who, back in the eighties, depicted Dr Mahathir Mohamad as a “closet fundamentalist whose sole mission was to Islamise Malaysia?”Was Liow not aware that the senior Lim undertook in a cloak-and-dagger styled crusade to turn the Chinese against Mahathir, and ultimately, Islam (READ HERE)?

Kit Siang has been against the right of Muslims to embrace the full scope of the Islamic Syaria for decades. Over the years, he made countless attempts to turn the Chinese against the Islamic Syaria,impressing upon them that UMNO was bent on Islamizing every faculty within its span of control. There are several instances in history to help me drive this point through.

One in particular is the Private Member’s Bill Kit Siang introduced to Parliament on the 20th of June 1980. On that day, the senior Lim moved that the Dewan Rakyat grant him leave to introduce the Education (Amendment) Act 1980, providing for the repeal of Clause 21(2) of the Education Act 1961.

The clause reads:

Where at any time the Minister is satisfied that a National-type primary school may suitably be converted into a National primary school, he may direct that the school shall become a National primary school.

The senior Lim insisted that by repealing the clause, the government would prove its sincerity in accepting Chinese and Tamil primary schools as “an integral and eternal part of the national education system.”