Tibet celebrates 50 years of liberation and its founding in Lhasa

 http://english.cntv.cn/2015/09/08/VIDE1441677723249238.shtml 

Celebrations, parade to mark 50 years of Tibet’s development

http://t.cn/RyUoi8T 

Tibetan people's livelihood greatly improved in 50 years

The Chinese central government has over the years instituted many polices to help Tibet's development, in order to enable Tibetans to enjoy better education, higher incomes, better health care and social security. CCTV reporter Liu Yang is in the Tibet Autonomous Region's capital Lhasa. She talked earlier about the region's transformations, as regional autonomy of ethnic minorities has been implemented in Tibet for 50 years.

 http://english.cntv.cn/2015/09/07/VIDE1441606442024166.shtml  http://t.cn/RyUKUft

Potala Palace bathed in the morning light in Lhasa, June 1, 2013. [Photo by Li Zhongmin/All rights reserved by chinadaily.com.cn]

Autonomy and assistance drive Tibet to prosperity

The now-50-year-old Tibet autonomous region has every reason to rejoice: The national regional autonomy mechanism is working well and benefiting ordinary Tibetans.

Yet the 14th Dalai Lama and those in Dharamsala of India will not be sharing the festive mood, for this is not what the Dalai Lama wants. The "high degree of autonomy" he advocates is de facto independence. He wants the central government to forsake any military presence in the region and for the region to conduct its own diplomacy. This would mean the region becoming an independent sovereignty entity.

But for that to happen, he would first have to overturn the established jurisprudential truth that Tibet is a part of China. Which is impossible.

The Dalai Lama knows that the autonomous region was an outcome of negotiations between the central government and the local authorities of Tibet, and was written into the famous 17-Article Agreement for Tibet's peaceful liberation. Until the armed rebellion in 1959, the Dalai Lama himself chaired the preparatory committee for the Tibet autonomous region.

And the design drawn up then has served Tibet well, no matter how unwilling he is to acknowledge it.

There is but little exaggeration in local administrators' familiar claims that Tibet is enjoying its golden days, because it keeps changing for the better with each passing day.

Few of these changes would have been possible without the very special autonomy bestowed on Tibet.

Such autonomy facilitates local administration, because, in addition to making laws and regulations on its own like all other local governments, the regional government is authorized to tailor national laws to local conditions in their implementation.

Even among the country's autonomous regions, Tibet has been the subject of envy for the policy favors it has received. Financial subsidies from the central government accounted for almost 93 percent of financial expenditures of Tibet from 1952 to 2014, not to mention the endless aid programs provided by dozens of central government offices, provinces and major State companies. And the sixth central conference on Tibet has just promised further efforts to improve local living standards.

More importantly, the traditional culture of Tibet, from Tibetan Buddhism to the Tibetan language and way of life, which the Dalai Lama says is a target of "cultural genocide", remains alive and well.

Compared with the Dalai Lama's pipe dream "autonomy", what the Tibetan people enjoy now is genuine and practical freedom to build better lives. - China Daily/Asia News Network

Real Tibet can’t be concealed by Dalai’s lies

A grand ceremony marking the 50th anniversary of the founding of the Tibet Autonomous Region is held at the square of the Potala Palace in Lhasa, capital of southwest China's Tibet Autonomous Region, Sept. 8, 2015. (Xinhua/Ding Lin

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Tibet Autonomous Region. People of all ethnicities have held celebrations for this anniversary.

For all these years, there have been two Tibets in public opinion. One is the real Tibet. The other is an imaginary one hyped by the Dalai Lama clique and Western opinion who often denounced that Tibet is not what it used to be under the rule of the CPC.

The imaginary Tibet does not exist, but with the instigation of Western media and the Dalai Lama, this Tibet has a certain influence in the international opinion sphere. This is perhaps the longest-lasting lie in the modern world.

This lie even forms moral and political correctness in the Western world, which blocks Westerners from knowing about the real Tibet. Some people believe only changes in the power structure and political relations between China and the West can break the lie.

The 14th Dalai Lama is lauded as a "saint" and his image was made into a smiling and wise old man. But his record when he ruled Tibet will thwart the Western public's notions. The Dalai Lama never dares to talk about his past. This cruel ruler in exile once received the Nobel Peace Prize plotted by Western forces. He also enjoyed the spotlight as a guest of Western leaders. But once the Western opinion reveals his shadowy past, he will be exposed as a cheater.

What should Tibet be like? Western opinion articulates it into an original ecological community with no association with the modern world. They view Tibetan people as aborigines and see all modern facilities in Tibet as destruction.

This is an unfair and unreasonable mentality. It is for the Tibetan public and Chinese people as a whole to assess the social achievements of Tibet. They know what Tibet most needs and care more about Tibet's development than any external forces.

Tibet has achieved remarkable political progress and undergone unprecedented modern infrastructure construction. Besides, this was all done with Tibet's culture and ecology protected. Compared to Native Americans in the US, the Tibetans have kept their originality more.

The lies told by the West will not last long. As China gradually moves to the center of the world stage, people across the world will have the chance to see the real Tibet. Tibet will help improve China's image. The Dalai Lama clique that has become an appendage to external forces to destabilize Tibet is bound to be the loser as time goes by. - Global Times

Why is the Dalai Lama Lying?



Related posts:

• 

  WW2 Eastern frontier main battle: China's V-day parade 2015

  Xi takes group photos with foreign guests ahead of V-Day parade Chinese President Xi Jinping took group photos with foreign leaders, gover...
• 

  Great contribution from the Chinese: UN Chief Praises WW2 parade, 回憶麻坡 (Muar)人支援抗戰

  UN chief praises parade, China's great contribution The world has been saying about Beijing's grand military parade 

Great contribution from the Chinese: UN Chief Praises WW2 parade, 回憶麻坡 (Muar)人支援抗戰

UN chief praises parade, China's great contribution

The world has been saying about Beijing's grand military parade on Thursday, held to mark the 70th anniversary of China's victory in the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the end of World War Two. Here's what many world leaders who attended the commemorations thought.http://t.cn/RyyvmLn

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has spoken to CCTV about his feelings regarding China's V-Day parade. He said he was deeply impressed by the celebration, and has fully recognized China's contribution during the World War Two.

The world has been saying about Beijing's grand military parade on Thursday, held to mark the 70th anniversary of China's victory in the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the end of World War Two. Here's what many world leaders who attended the commemorations thought.

"The V-Day parade was very grand. I felt that not only Chinese leaders, but also ordinary Chinese, could cherish the memory of the victory in the war against Japanese aggression, as well as the memory of the martyrs who made contributions."

回憶麻坡 (Muar)人支援抗戰

《血脉长城——华侨华人与抗日战争》 20150822 第一集 海外赤子 情系中华_新闻频道_央视网(cctv.com)

分享视频  http://t.cn/RLFHIhj
http://player.cntv.cn/flashplayer/players/htmls/smallwindow.html?pid=59618b21f97244b59b5fc4cf55d7d68b&time=0&tai=news

（吉隆坡5日訊）為紀念抗戰勝利70週年，中國中央電視台CCTV-13播放電視紀錄片《血脈長城》，反映海外華人不怕犧牲，支援中國抗戰的歷史事跡。

• （圖：星洲日報）

在紀錄片中，星洲日報前國際新聞組主任鄭昭賢介紹了麻坡抗日先烈張開川和南僑機工領袖劉貝錦的事跡。

麻坡人因組織峇株巴轄石原鐵山的工潮，不讓日本人獲得源源的鐵礦石供應，以製造軍火，送到中國戰場殺害中國人，結果他們遭到日軍秋後算帳，付出流血的代價。

紀錄片播出麻坡人當購買的愛國公債，明知不可能償還，還是踴躍認購。

當年在陳嘉庚的領導下，南洋籌賑總會於3年多時間共籌得4億多國幣，而麻坡的籌款成績特佳，成為籌賑模範區。

紀錄片第二集介紹南僑機工和飛虎隊。

馬來亞機工，101歲的許海星上鏡頭和講話，同時紀錄片《血脈長城》也介紹檳城女機工，花木蘭李月美和白雪嬌的感人事跡。

第三集介紹馬來亞抗日烈士林謀盛的生平事跡和參與法國諾曼地登陸的華人戰士。

紀錄片播麻坡歷史建築

中國中央電視台的抗日紀錄片除了介紹麻坡抗日義烈張開川、顏迥華事跡和早年麻坡抗日核心，麻坡漳泉公會。

紀錄片播映麻坡漳泉公會大廈雄偉畫面，配上飄動的白雲藍天，徐悲鴻為鼓勵麻坡人抗日，贈送漳泉公會的名畫〈神駒圖〉，加上漳泉公會會長拿督黃國華的講解。

紀錄片播映麻坡歷史性建築物，位於三馬路〈新民舞台〉。

這是武漢合唱團到麻坡演出的地點，也是麻坡抗敵後援會成立大會的地點，戰後改為麗士戲院。

麻坡殉難義烈顏迥華的兒子顏其仁老師在戲院內，面對中央電視台攝制隊的鏡頭，回憶當年武漢合唱團在該處演出時激動人心的場面。

他的父親顏迥華為抗日日夜奔波演說，購買抗日公債，即使錢不夠，還向人借錢買公債。最後他與麻坡籌賑會其他領導人遭日軍殺害。

登中國僑網可看《血脈長城》

登上中國僑網，可以觀看北京CCTV-13新聞頻道的《血脈長城》紀錄片，網址是：http://news.cntv.cn/2015/08/22/VIDE1440250079837485.shtml

- See more at: http://news.sinchew.com.my/node/441982#sthash.WRuBaR9C.dpuf

Related:

UN chief stresses UN′s impartiality after Japan protests China parade trip 반기문



Related posts:

WW2 Eastern frontier main battle: China's V-day parade 2015

Xi takes group photos with foreign guests ahead of V-Day parade Chinese President Xi Jinping took group photos with foreign leaders, gover...

A region evolves with rising China

South-East Asia’s complex big power relations demand careful and considered understanding, where frequent complications and familiar gut...

WW2 Eastern frontier main battle: China's V-day parade 2015

Xi takes group photos with foreign guests ahead of V-Day parade Chinese President Xi Jinping took group photos with foreign leaders, government representatives and leading officials of international and regional organizations ahead of a V-Day parade on Thursday morning.

>

China holds parade, vows peace on war anniversary

Staged a grand parade on Thursday in Tian'anmen Square to mark the 70th anniversary of victory in the Chinese People's War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression (1937-45) and the end of World War II, China attracted the world's attention by showing the aspiration for peace and its determination to safeguard post-war international order.

President Xi Jinping delivered a speech before the parade to call people to commemorate the hard-won peace after years of bloody war that had inflicted heavy losses on China and other countries.

Scan the code and check China Daily's up-to-date full coverage of China's V-Day parade.

In honoring all the Chinese who perished in the war and those who have contributed to the victory in the deadly conflicts with Japan, the parade is a tribute to history and a call for peace, Xi said.

But he warned that the world is far from tranquil although peace and development have become the prevailing trend.

War is the sword of Damocles that still hangs over mankind. We must learn the lessons of history and dedicate ourselves to peace, he said.

Ravaging through Asia, Europe, Africa and Oceania, that war inflicted over 100 million military and civilian casualties. China suffered over 35 million casualties and the Soviet Union lost more than 27 million lives, Xi said.

The victory of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression is the first complete victory won by China in its resistance against foreign aggression in modern times.

This great triumph re-established China as a major country in the world and opened up bright prospects for the great renewal of the Chinese nation, Xi said.

Xi vowed that China will never seek hegemony or expansion no matter how much stronger it may become. He said the country will never inflict its past suffering on any other nation.

Xi, also general secretary of the Communist Party of China Central Committee and chairman of the Central Military Commission, inspected the troops after the speech.

On the Tian'anmen Square, Xi and the first lady Peng Liyuan welcomed honored guests, including 30 national leaders, to watch the parade which involved more than 12,000 military personel as well as veterans and their descendants. Seventeen foreign military teams also took part.

Leaders including Russian President Vladimir Putin, President of the Republic of Korea Park Geun-hye, Pakistani President Mamnoon Hussain and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moom witnessed the historical event.

1779 overseas Chinese from more than 120 countries and regions were invited, 5 of them were invited to watch the parade from the Tian'anmen Rostrum, including Chinese American physicist Paul Chu, and business tycoon Lucio Tan.

Opened with a helicopter flying by parading the national flag, the march past lasted for about 50 minutes. 20 military helicopters flew overhead forming the figure 70 to mark the 70th anniversary commemorations. Seven fighter jets flew past, making the world's longest colored vapor trail.

After more than 300 veterans, including Kuomingtang veterans, and their descendants passed by in two vehicle formations, eleven formations of Chinese troops marched past, including 51 female honor guards. It was the first time female honor guards have joined a parade. More than 50 generals, with an average age of 53, leaded parade units.

Seventeen formations of foreign troops from 17 countries including Russia and Pakistan, marched past, before twenty-seven formations of armaments paraded. This was the first time foreign military teams join in a Chinese military parade.

Studio interview: China to showcase never-before-seen military hardware http://t.cn/RyAuPdo

More than 500 pieces of China's latest equipment were displayed, 84 percent of which have never been viewed by the public, many of which are among the world's most advanced.

The navy displayed its latest anti-ship missiles, ship-to-air missiles and carrier-based aircraft, while the air force brought long-range bombers, fighters and airborne early warning and control (AEWC) aircraft.

The armaments on display also included the army's newest helicopter gunships and battle tanks as well as intermediate-range conventional and strategic ballistic missiles from the Second Artillery Force.

The events ended with 10 air force formations flying over the square and doves and balloons being released.

China has held 15 military parades since the establishment of the People's Republic of China. In 1999 and 2009, grand military parades were held to celebrate the country's 50th and 60th founding anniversary. This was the first parade not held on China's National Day.

As it is an international convention to hold a parade to mark the victory day, China held the grand event with a theme of "remember history, cherish the memory of China's revolutionary martyrs, uphold peace and create the future".

By PENG YINING in Tian'anmen square (chinadaily.com.cn)



Obama's absence at parade costs US chance to display leadership

Tomorrow, China will be holding a military parade to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the victory in the World Anti-Fascist War. Dozens of global leaders or their special envoys have arrived in Beijing, save for US President Barack Obama or his high-level representative, who could have been a guest of honor at the ceremony.

The absence of the US president at such an important event is a pity. Washington’s move has also affected most Western European leaders, who decided to follow the US' lead.

But Washington compromised, and will send US Ambassador to China Max Baucus to the parade, a gesture to show that the US will be present at the event. Washington clearly doesn’t want the absence of Obama or his high-level envoy to turn into media fodder.

While it is a pity, Obama’s absence will hardly affect Sino-US relations. Still, as former allies, China and the US have lost a chance to celebrate the victory they achieved together. How they fought side by side 70 years ago continues to be cherished by the Chinese, and the memory of that time has helped nurture a favorable impression of the US.

Geopolitics remains central to Washington’s decision-making process, and weighs heavily on US diplomatic policy. However, calculated moves do not always lead to a better decision. Washington’s ambivalence to Beijing’s invitation has cost itself a chance to display leadership across the Pacific Ocean, regardless of trivial gamesmanship and bickering in the region. The US seems unable to look at the big picture: The parade in Beijing is a righteous cause.

It is not hard to figure out why Obama or a special envoy will be absent. To some extent, the reasons are understandable. First, the US simply wants to show its support to Japan, which strongly opposes the parade and imagines itself as the target of the event. Second, the US dislikes such large parades in a non-Western country, considering it “muscle-flexing.” Third, as the US election approaches, presidential candidates try to earn brownie points with the electorate through China-bashing. The political climate in the US might have made Obama think twice.

To be honest, China never expected Obama to attend. But his “remedial work,” by asking Baucus to attend on his behalf, is weak.

Many China watchers have differing takes on the US’ attitude toward China’s parade. Some believe Baucus’ presence reaffirms an agreement between China and the US that both countries have no animosity towards each other. But some think Obama’s absence is much more complicated.

The Chinese have learned how to deal with narrow-mindedness, so they don’t actually mind whether Obama or a high-level official from Washington will attend. China’s open mind will help steer both countries away from unnecessary disputes

Source:Globaltimes.cn Published: 2015-9-2 21:11:50

Related post:

• 

  A region evolves with rising China

  South-East Asia’s complex big power relations demand careful and considered understanding, where frequent complications and familiar gut...

Are they terrorists or militants?

LATELY, the use of the words militants and terrorists has become very common and people are sometimes confused as to whether an act of violence has been committed by terrorists or militants.

In Malaysia, the two words are often used interchangeably whereas in strict media practice and proper nomenclature, there is a difference between the two.

It was reported that one foreign media had warned their employees to be extra careful on the terms extremist, militant and terrorist in their news coverage to avoid characterising people.

It is good for our local media to follow these footsteps and avoid using wrong words which can be very sensitive and inappropriate.

In this regard, naturally those who are familiar with the subject of “Organised Crime and Terrorism” would able be to differentiate between the two terms.

Militants and terrorists both have their own agendas and mostly, these agendas have political, religious or ideological goals. The difference lies in the means with which they seek to achieve their desired goals.

Either way it is clear that usually both the terrorists and militants are extremists (in the sense of holding a view at the extreme end of a spectrum on a particular subject matter) who indulge in unlawful activities and therefore become a threat to the nation.

Some of the differences between militants and terrorists are:

• All terrorists are militants, but not all militants are terrorists;
• Terrorism is carried out by non-governmental groups that do not wear uniforms. However, members of militants usually wear uniforms, identifying insignia or militia – coloured clothes;
• Terrorists resort to physical violence. They utilise terror as a means of coercion and use violence as a necessary means of attaining their political, religious or ideological goals, thereby causing harm and death to innocent people and maximum damage to property. Militants may or may not actively engage in physical violence, but they are certainly very aggressive verbally or use verbal violence to achieve their desired goals, as undoubtedly, they feel themselves in “war mode”;
• Terrorists have no regard for humankind and, usually target civilians, instil fear and psychological effect on them in order to gain the attention of the authorities. As terrorist organisations, they will commit violent acts by murdering civilians, scholars, religious leaders and sanctioning of extortion and demanding ransom.

On the contrary, militants usually do not resort to harming civilians to champion their cause but instead use confrontational or violent methods against the establishment in support of a political or social cause. For example militants may choose to rebel and use armed aggression for a country’s liberation; and

• Where both terms converge is when militants find they have no recourse to achieve their goals and then they resort to terrorism if their needs are not met, thereby transforming themselves into a terrorist group. 

By DATUK AKHBAR SATAR Director, Institute of Crime & Criminology HELP University

Related post:

Al-Shabaah terrorist members enter Malaysia as students and tourists 

Yes, right to comment on Perkasa Chief Ibrahim Ali, selective non-prosecution by A-G!

The Star CEO Wong: I have right to comment on bible-burning issue

PETALING JAYA: Star Publications Bhd chief executive officer Datuk Seri Wong Chun Wai has hit out at detractors who criticised him for questioning the decision not to prosecute Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali over the Bible-burning remark.

Wong said he was entitled to comment on the decision made by the Attorney-General’s Chambers “just like other Malaysians who have the right to comment on contemporary issues”.

“It is not the monopoly of politicians and non-governmental organisations,” he said in a statement yesterday.

Wong said he was not the only one who had commented on the issue.

“Many other Malaysians, including Cabinet ministers, have expressed their sentiments. We have the right to comment on the decision of the A-G.

“As responsible and moderate Malaysians, we should focus our energy on bringing people together, not making statements that cause disunity,” he said.

Negri Sembilan Perkasa chief Ruslan Kassim. in a statement on Monday, urged Wong to stop “all the provocations” against Ibrahim and said that Wong need not teach the Attorney-General how to do his work.

Global Movement of Moderates chief executive officer Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah defended Wong, saying that Malaysians have the right to comment on the decision by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

“The Attorney-General is not immune. One can always criticise people who commented on the Attorney-General’s decision, but the criticism should be on their statement.

“You can criticise a comment but to stop a person from commenting only shows that you do not understand democracy.

“Ruslan Kassim should argue against Wong’s reasoning, not stop him from commenting,” said Saifuddin.

Similar views were shared by unity advocate and author Anas Zubedy, who said Malaysians should be encouraged to speak up and comment when something was not right.

“We must not forget a very popular tradition by the first Caliph of Islam, Sayyidina Abu Bakar.

“He said that when he is right, follow him, but when he is wrong, correct him.

“If Malaysians feel that someone did wrong, we should be able to speak up and correct him,” said Anas.

In his On The Beat column on Sunday (see below: A mind-bloggling spin), Wong said the Attorney-General would set a dangerous precedent with his decision not to file charges against Ibrahim based on “context” and “intention”, which are matters that should be decided by the court.

“In future, any extremist, of whatever faith, can call for the burning of any holy book and then cite the same pathetic reason that he or she is merely defending the sanctity of his or her religion,” Wong said.

Last week, the Attorney-General’s Chambers said that no legal action was taken against Ibrahim because he was “defending the sanctity of Islam” and had no intention to create religious disharmony when he called for the burning of Bibles containing the word “Allah”.

Politicians from both sides of the divide have urged the Attorney-General to review the case against Ibrahim.

The Star/Asia News Network Nov 5 2014

A mind-boggling spin 

Perkasa Chief Ibrahim Ali

IT smacks of double standards and no one can fault moderate-minded Malaysians, who have some sense of justice and fairness, to feel that the statement from the Attorney-General’s Chambers lacks any conviction.

The ordinary Malaysians are finding it difficult to be convinced by the legal arguments put up by the Attorney-General on why Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali, who had called for the burning of the Bahasa Malaysia Bible, has not breached sedition laws.

We are now told that Ibrahim was merely defending the sanctity of Islam. No one can accept this mind-boggling spin, more so when it comes from the principal legal adviser to the government.

It is appropriate that former Court of Appeal judge Datuk K.C. Vohrah and the former head of the prosecution division of the AGC, Datuk Stanley Isaacs, have put forth their views (The Star, Oct 23, Oct 31 and Nov 1) on why the A-G’s legal reasoning cannot stand. Vohrah had also served in the AGC and is fully aware of how the system works.

The A-G’s decision not to file charges against Ibrahim based on “context” and “intention”, which are actually matters for the court to decide under the Sedition Act, is a dangerous precedent.

In future, any extremist, of whatever faith, can call for the burning of any holy book, and then cite the same pathetic reason that he or she was merely defending the sanctity of his or her religion.

It is simply unacceptable for anyone to belittle another religion, and worse still, in this particular case, even calling for the burning of a holy book.

We were already shocked by the reply from the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nancy Shukri in Parliament and the A-G’s statement justifying Ibrahim’s action certainly made matters worse.

We are now told that we must read Ibrahim’s remarks “in the entire context”. Going by the same argument, how then does the A-G justify the other recent sedition cases?

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has also weighed in with a comment that Ibrahim “was giving an opinion that could be accepted by Muslims as it was not seditious”.

Those of us who have followed closely the political career of the former prime minister would know that he has always stood by his supporters, in this case, Ibrahim. But with due respect to Dr Mahathir, we believe he should and would also stand by the side of justice and fairness, as we are sure he would oppose any form of extremism.

But the statements from the A-G and Dr Mahathir are unacceptable because what they are saying, in short and simple layman’s language, is that Ibrahim has done no wrong and they wonder what the fuss is all about.

Ibrahim can actually now say that he can carry on with what he has said. After all, the A-G, who is the sole authority in deciding who to prosecute, has not only let him off, but given us reasons that basically open the door for similar actions in the future. And it certainly does not help that Dr Mahathir, with his own way of reasoning over the burning of holy books, has stood by him.

The A-G’s argument on “context” and “intention” sounds more like what the defence counsel for Ibrahim would say if he had been charged. And even then, going by the provisions of the Sedition Act, such a defence would probably be struck down.

So we are to believe that Ibrahim is merely expressing an opinion which is not seditious. How convenient.

My fellow columnist in The Star and Universiti Malaya law professor Azmi Sharom has been charged with sedition for expressing an opinion which is not even about religion or race.

Many Malaysians are still wondering how Azmi’s opinion could have caused offence or threatened national security, while a number of high-profile and consistently recalcitrant extremists continue to get away with their offensive statements.

Who can blame Malaysians if they deem that the authorities are being selective in who they haul up for sedition.

If anyone dares to call for the burning of the Quran, I am confident that all rational-minded Malaysians will rise up and ask for the person to be arrested immediately and be charged with sedition.

If there is any non-Muslim stupid enough to make such a call, then all the non-Muslims in this country must speak out. No non-Muslim should remain silent if such an offensive remark is made to cause offence to their fellow citizens who are Muslims.

Likewise, I think Malaysians expect the same response from non-Christians when someone calls for the destruction of the Bible.

And the ordinary people’s response must be supported by the politicians and the leaders. It is very sad for Malaysia when politicians keep a deafening silence when gross injustice is done.

We expect our politicians to be the leaders of all Malaysians, regardless of their race and faith, and not to merely represent the interests of their own race.

No one should have the suspicion or perception that only the feelings of one race matters in Malaysia.

All it takes is for one individual or one NGO to express a negative view on the activities of another community, be it with regard to Oktoberfest, Halloween, Valentine’s Day, a concert or whatever, and suddenly the whole nation is engulfed in a major debate which takes up so much valuable time and resources, especially from the authorities who have more serious matters to deal with.

In a maturing democracy, we cannot prevent anyone from articulating their views and beliefs, even those that we find most objectionable.

Our challenge is to remind ourselves that while they do not represent the majority view, they must not be allowed to gain ground because the majority has chosen to remain silent. The voices of moderation must ring out loud and clear, all the time.

In a plural society like ours, everyone has the right to practise and celebrate any occasion. It is certainly far-fetched and even laughable to suggest that there are atheists and non-Muslims who want to weaken the faith of their fellow Malaysians.

Events like Halloween and Valentine’s Day do not even have any religious significance. In fact, they are nothing more than commercially driven opportunities for the entertainment and food outlets.

We should be thankful that we are a nation where religion is paramount. The first principle of our Rukunegara espouses our “Belief in God”.

But our faith is not just about religious rulings and paraphernalia. It is in the way we live our lives – how we exhibit compassion, mercy, justice for fellow human beings, and in our concerns over what is wrong and unjustifiable in our country, be it with regard to corruption, intolerance, violence, and the growing divide between the rich and the poor.

These should be the concerns of all religious leaders in their sermons and statements, instead of dwelling on petty issues. They should focus on common values shared by all Malaysians instead of dividing us further.

The Kelantan PAS state government is now determined to go ahead with the implementation of hudud law and again, non-Muslims are expected to believe that they would not be affected by these Islamic laws.

Whatever our faith, we are all closely linked in our daily lives. The laws peculiar to one faith, if implemented in a plural society, will have implications for everyone. To even suggest non-Muslims are not affected is laughable but there will be non-Muslims, because of their anger towards the federal government, who would actually want to believe so and even vote for PAS, which has never hidden its Islamist plans and ambition.

Let’s get our priorities and bearings right.

Malaysia is at the crossroads. We can, as a united people, go straight and take the middle path, and be sure we are on the correct track where we support one another.

Or we can allow ourselves to be divided and take different roads, which will mean we no longer believe in a common destiny.

Our choice is simple – we must all fight to keep Malaysia moderate and inclusive, and fully embrace the vision of our founding fathers.

On The Beat by Wong Chun Wai The Star/Asia News Network Sun Nov 2, 2014

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.

A case of selective non-prosecution

Untouchable?: Many felt that the A-G's decision not to prosecute Ibrahim was faulty and untenable.

The case of Datuk Ibrahim Ali not being charged with sedition over his Bible-burning remarks remains a perplexing one for Malaysians seeking an answer to what they feel is an example of ‘selective non-prosecution’.

THE Attorney-General decided last week not to charge Perkasa chief Datuk Ibrahim Ali with sedition for uttering words to the effect that Malay Bibles should be burned.

It is the same law under which nearly a dozen activists had been charged.

Although the Federal Constitution gives the A-G sole discretion whether to charge a person or not, that decision not to charge Ibrahim has invited considerable criticisms not only from retired judges and prosecutors but also from former and serving political leaders, priests and laymen.

They felt that the A-G’s decision was faulty, untenable and even smacks of double standards.

The legal arguments notwithstanding, the damage to inter-ethnic relations and to inter-religious harmony is incalculable.

Christians are upset because they felt there is a clear case of sedition but Ibrahim “escaped” being charged because the A-G stated that “he had no intention to create religious disharmony” when he called for the burning of those Bibles.

While judges and lawyers will argue over intention and context, the A-G decided that he would not lay charges because he thinks the “intention” was absent.

The A-G has usurped the powers of the courts.

“It is for the courts to decide “intention”, not him.

His decision means that Ibrahim got away scot-free.

And that is unacceptable to those who feel that Ibrahim has crossed the line and deserves to be punished.

They find it difficult to buy the A-G’s reasoning.

“It smacks of double standards,” said a well-known lawyer who declined to be named. “You can’t fault ordinary Malaysians for thinking otherwise.”

“This decision by the A-G is simply mind-blowing.

“His decision not to charge Ibrahim Ali is not only bad in law but he also walks a political minefield,” he said.

“His job is to lay the charges as he had on a dozen other activists who were charged with sedition.

“Let the court decide whether any of them had any ill-intention,” he said.

“Is Ibrahim Ali so influential that he is untouchable?” he asked.

There has been all sorts of speculation in the aftermath of the A-G’s decision, which was perceived to be bending backwards to accommodate right wing forces.

Another lawyer pointed out former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s support for Ibrahim.

Dr Mahathir made a big mistake by standing by Ibrahim and supporting him with his convoluted thoughts, the lawyer said.

“He should have stood behind moderate Malaysians in the country who are aghast at the way things are becoming,” she said.

Who can blame Malaysians for thinking that the authorities are being selective in deciding who to haul up in court when it comes to laying sedition charges?

Ordinary Malaysians are speaking up in the ways they know, in social media, on Twitter and Facebook.

These critics posted nasty comments on how Ibrahim is walking free and how the A-G, instead of laying charges, is acting like a defence lawyer.

Why is the reaction to “burning Malay Bibles” as uttered by Ibrahim so muted?

Why is it so defensive? Why is Dr Mahathir defending Ibrahim? Why is the A-G giving excuses for Ibrahim?

These are questions which ordinary Malaysians find perplexing.

The A-G should also use wisely the discretions allowed to him.

He should always have an ear on the ground on what the public feels is the right thing to do.

You can’t go wrong because this is a participatory democracy and not a dictatorship of a few over many.

>The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own.

By Baradan Kuppusamy The Star/Asia News Network Nov 4 2014

Related post:
 

Stupid fellow ! Dr Ling, former Transport Minister slams Attorney-General

Stupid fellow ! Dr Ling, former Malaysian Transport Minister slams Attorney-General. UTAR Council Chairman Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik speaking to the media regarding UTAR Initiatives and Developments at the Sg Long Campus, Kajang on Tuesday. KAJANG: There was nothing wrong in the land purchase for the Port Klang ... It's only the A-G (attorney-general who) thinks it's a wrong decision. Stupid fellow,” he said at a press conference here yesterday to announce ...

Karpal Singh: Bye-bye, Jangan main-main/Don't fool around !

Standing his ground:Karpal telling the Speaker: “I have a right to be here” as the police wait to escort him out in May 1981.  Images for Karpal Singh images

Tributes for Karpal Singh's Quotes:

“Jangan main-main” – a catchphrase of sorts for the statesman, Karpal Singh said this on many occasions – to the Registrar of Societies when his beloved party was faced with the threat of deregistration, after being sent live bullets by thugs.

“The tiger is still alive and ... a wounded tiger is even more dangerous.” – Karpal in April 1995 after DAP was defeated in Penang. The then-state chairman said the defeat did not mean the end of the opposition in Penang.

“I know what it is like to lose your liberties. So I want to go on being in Parliament as long as I can.” – Karpal in 1995, when asked about his determination during the general elections campaign period.

“For there to be integration in essence and spirit, I hope all restrictions in the way of uniting the people are removed.” – Karpal in June 1995, welcoming the move to integrate the legal systems of Sabah, Sarawak and West Malaysia.

“Offences perpetrated upon children, particularly infants, are the most heinous of offences because children are defenceless against such attacks.” Despite his dislike of capital punishment, Karpal felt that those who committed crimes against children deserved harsh sentences.

“Singh is King.” A reference to a popular Bollywood movie with the same catchphrase, Karpal used the line several times including after he received live bullets in the mail (prefaced with “jangan main-main”).

“I do not intend to give up. The Opposition has a big role to play in this country.” – Karpal after his accident in 2005 which left him in a wheelchair.

“There are always people who are insensitive, we just have to take it. There is nothing you can do about it. We cannot be discouraged, as that’s exactly what our enemies would want.” – Karpal in a Sept 2006 interview with The Star.

“Once you are in this situation, you realise how little the disabled have in this country. Governments in many countries make lots of allowances to include them in society. We haven’t reached that stage. I will do what I can to make sure the disabled are given all opportunities in line with other countries.” – Karpal in 2006, commenting on the lack of disabled-friendly infrastructure and legislation in Malaysia.

“We may have our differences with PAS but it is a solid, principled party and an important ally.” – Karpal in 2012. “My parents wanted me to be a doctor but I would have been a lousy doctor!” – Karpal in a 2010 interview with The Star.

“I am not questioning the privileges. I am asking how long they will be implemented.” – Karpal in 2010, asking the Government for a time frame for the gradual removal of special privileges accorded to Malays and other bumiputras, in the spirit of 1Malaysia.

“As long as I am alive, I will continue to struggle to see a non-Malay become prime minister.” – Karpal in 2012, saying the Federal Constitution did not provide that only Malays could be prime minister.



Sources: The Star/Asia News Network

• For more stories click here.

Infographics:
Tiger, tiger who burned bright
Karpal the politician
Karpal the lawyer

Photo Gallery:
Old days of Karpal
About Karpal
From hospital to his home

Related posts:

 Karpal Singh: 1940 – 2014 | BJ Thoughts...

 DAP's Tiger roars, Malaysian election fevers! 

 Disturbing legal implications on sedition and 'fatwa in Malaysia.

It's not about rights or peace

There are many reasons why crimes happen, but let us not get befuddled by the view that we have to sacrifice our rights in order to live in peace.

Murder victims: Police personnel bringing out the bodies of the five men who were gunned down at an apartment in Sungai Nibong.

It is quite nice to hear the Prime Minister declare that any future development in criminal laws will not infringe upon human rights. Well, let’s hope that is true.

The thing is, by this statement there is an unsaid implication that human rights and crime are something that are somehow related. One retiree for example said that the price for more freedom is higher crime.

I wondered if this is true. After all, in our country, we respect the old, so perhaps there is some wisdom in this octogenarian’s statement.

So, I decided to poke around the information superhighway (Hah! Bet you haven’t hear that term for a while), and I chanced upon a study done by the United Nations office on drugs and crime in 2012. The study was a comprehensive survey of homicides around the world.

If greater freedom equates with greater crime (here the crime in question is murder), then we should see countries with the greatest civil liberties leading the pack. Crickey, a place like Denmark should, theoretically, be littered with dead bodies everywhere. You shouldn’t be able to walk to your corner shop to buy your poached cod or whatever is eaten in those parts, without having to step over cadavers riddled with bullet holes.

After all, they have ratified about thirty human rights treaties (including one against the death penalty); their criminals must be running around high on Carlsberg and whacking every Thor, Dag and Hagen that they come across.

But, this is not the case. They have one of the lowest murder rates in the world. 0.9 per every 100,000 people. To give that some sense of perspective, our murder rate is 2.3 per every 100,000 people. In fact, looking at the study, we see that there is simply no correlation between civil liberties and crime. The regions with the highest homicide rate tend to be those which are desperately poor.

Now this is of course a cursory amble of the Internet on my part and not some serious academic study, but it seems to me that it is very clear that to equate more human rights to more crime is simply not supported by the facts.

The reason I raise this is that we are often faced with the argument that it is one or the other. Rights or peace. This is simply not the case.

In the light of the recent spate of high profile and horrific crimes that we have faced and the police force’s “war” on gangsters, let us not get befuddled by the view that we have to sacrifice our rights in order to live in peace.

There are a myriad of reasons why crimes happen and these must be examined and studied so that any “war” on crime has to be fought on the correct “battlefield”.

For example, poverty and the vast disparity of wealth between the haves and the have not’s seem to be one of the things that the world’s most murder ridden nations have in common.

It sure as heck is not their observance of human rights principles.

So, yes, let us make all efforts to ensure that this country of ours has the least crime possible, but leave our rights (what little of them we have) well enough alone.

 Brave New World by AZMI SHAROM
Azmi Sharom (azmisharom@yahoo.co.uk) is a law teacher. The views expressed here are entirely his own.

Related stories

 Five gang members shot dead by police
 Grand send-off for five killed in shootout
 Cops hunt for more suspects
 Families request second post-mortem on dead gang members
 Gunman shoots teenager dead in Bagan Dalam
 Five gang members shot dead by police (Updated) 
 Gang 04 sends public message to police
Police looking for remaining "Gang 08 Vinod" members  
Penang police have lead on 11 other shooting cases'
Waytha: They were shot point blank
Police followed SOP in shooting incident'
Politicians want AG to hold inquest into fatal shooting 

Related posts:
Crime is very real in everyday situations - cop ro...
Fears of gangland wars 
Bad guys, gangster contractors exploit home owners for renovation works
Crime Watcher shot, banker killed; are Malaysia slidng to a state of lawlessness?

No privacy on the Net !

Revelations about PRISM, a US government program that harvests data on the Internet, has sparked concerns about privacy and civil rights violations. But has there ever been real privacy and security on the WWW?

 Demonstrators hold posters during a demonstration against the US Internet surveillance program of the NSA, PRISM, at Checkpoint Charlie in Berlin, Germany, ahead of US President Barack Obama’s visit to the German capital.

IMAGINE a time before email, when all your correspondence was sent through the post. How would you feel if you knew that somebody at the post office was recording the details of all the people you were corresponding with, “just in case” you did something wrong?

I think quite a few of you would be upset about it.

Similarly, some Americans are furious over revelations made about a system called PRISM. In the last few weeks, an allegation has been made that the US government is harvesting data on the Internet by copying what travels through some of its Internet Service Providers.

The US Director of National Intelligence has said that PRISM “is not an undisclosed collection or data mining program”, but its detractors are not convinced that this doesn’t mean no such program exists.

I think there are mainly two kinds of responses to this revelation: “Oh my God!” and “What took them so long?”.

The Internet has never really been secure. Because your data usually has to travel via systems owned by other people, you are at their mercy as to what they do with it. The indications are that this is already being done elsewhere.

Countries such as China, India, Russia, Sweden and the United Kingdom allegedly already run similar tracking projects on telecommunications and the Internet, mostly modelled on the US National Security Agency’s (unconfirmed) call monitoring programme. For discussion, I’ll limit myself for the moment to just emails – something that most people would recognise as being private and personal.

I find many people are surprised when I tell them that sending email over the Internet is a little bit like sending your message on a postcard. Just because you need a password to access it, doesn’t mean it’s secure during transmission.

The analogy would be that your mailbox is locked so only you can open it, but those carrying the postcard can read it before it reaches its final destination. Of course, there are ways to mitigate this. One has to be careful about what one put in emails in the first place. Don’t send anything that would be disastrous if it were forwarded to someone else without your permission.

You could also encrypt your email, so only the receiver with the correct password or key could read it, but this is difficult for most end users to do. (For those interested in encrypting emails, I would recommend looking at a product called PGP.)

The analogy holds up for other Internet traffic. It’s easy to monitor, given enough money and time. And as easy as it is for the Good Guys to try to monitor the Bad Guys, it’s just as easy for the Bad Guys to monitor us hapless members of the public.

But who do we mean by the Bad Guys? Specifically, should the government and law-enforcement agencies be categorised as ‘Bad Guys’ for purposes of privacy? Generally, the line oft quoted is “if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to worry about”.

Yet, I think we all accept that there should be a fundamental right to privacy, for everybody from anybody. An interesting corollary to being able to express your thoughts freely is that you should also be able to decide when and how you make them public.

The fault in relying on organisations that say “trust us” isn’t in the spirit of their objectives, but in how the humans in them are flawed in character and action.

An example quoted regularly at the moment is how the FBI collected information about Martin Luther King because they considered him the “most dangerous and effective Negro leader in the country”.

One way of defining the boundaries are by codifying them in laws. For example, the Malaysian Personal Data Protection Act prohibits companies from sharing personal data with third parties without the original owner’s consent.

However, this law explicitly does not apply to the federal and state governments of Malaysia. Another clause indicates that consent is not necessary if it is for the purpose of “administration of justice”, or for the “exercise of any functions conferred on any person by or under any law”.

In relation to the revelations of PRISM, several questions come to mind: Can Internet traffic (or a subset of it) be considered “personal data”? Is it possible for government agencies to collect and store such data without your consent?

And if so, what safeguards are there to ensure that this personal data is accurate, is used correctly and is relevant for storage in the first place?

This should be a sharp point of debate, not just in terms of which of our secrets the government can be privy to, but also of which of the government’s information should be readily accessible by us.

True, there is so much data out there that analysing it is not a trivial task. However, companies such as Google are doing exactly that kind of work on large volumes of unstructured data so that you can search for cute kittens. The technology is already on its way.

Perhaps I am being over-cautious, but it seems a bit fantastical that people can know your deepest and darkest secrets by just monitoring a sequence of 1’s and 0’s. But, to quote science fiction author Phillip K. Dick, “It’s strange how paranoia can link up with reality now and then”.

Contradictheory
By DZOF AZMI

> Logic is the antithesis of emotion but mathematician-turned-scriptwriter Dzof Azmi’s theory is that people need both to make sense of life’s vagaries and contradictions. Speak to him at star2@thestar.com.my.

Related post:

US Spy Snowden Says U.S. Hacking China Since 2009