Rudyard Kipling"
“When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier”
General Douglas MacArthur"
“We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.”
“It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.” “Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.
“The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.”
“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .” “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
“Nobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
“It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
'Innocent' and 'Tanda': Our season of fear by Commander (Rtd) S THAYAPARAN, formerly of the Royal Malaysian Navy
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Once again Colour, race, religion and language Become sharp blades To use in the carnage
- Said Zahari (Hidden Hands)
COMMENT I am of course breaking my self-imposed ban on not commenting on anything ‘Islam' but circumstances warrant it.
Here's
the thing. The anti-Islamic diatribe (how I loathe describing it as
such because I have read and seen far more provocative and intelligent
musings on the subject by Islamic scholars, Muslim and non-Muslim) ‘The
Innocence of Muslims' and the race-baiting ‘Tanda Putera' share
similarities that should make right-thinking Malaysians sit up and
question the status quo. Malaysians should also begin asking
their preferred political allegiances the tough questions instead of
making appropriate noises of compromise or appeasement when it comes to
the questions of race and religion.
Both films are
fear-mongering pieces designed as appeals to emotions to radicalise
majority communities to view the ‘other' as a threat to the status quo
and whatever ideals that are most often only paid lip service to.
Both
films conflate or distort or cherry pick (and not necessarily in that
order) in order to bolster a narrative to demonise the ‘other' and as a
way to redefine genuine complex tensions between diverse groups as a
simple conflict between good and evil or right and wrong, using ‘facts'
as a defence against legitimate criticism.
Understand now that I
am not equating the senseless deaths that have occurred because of the
over reaction of ‘Innocence' (and yes, I think the carnage that has
occurred is an overreaction orchestrated by groups whom would use any
excuse to pursue agendas that are anathema to right-thinking Muslims and
non-Muslims or as Salman Rushdie's puts it, "manufactured outrage") and
a piece of state-sanctioned propaganda (‘Tanda') meant to scare
minorities into embracing the devil they know (sic) but I believe that
the motives behind both movies are the same - that is to generate fear
and loathing of the other. State-sanctioned 'Tanda'
The difference (and depending on how you view Islam, of course) is that
here in Malaysia, ‘Tanda' is state-sanctioned, while abroad ‘Innocence'
has become the minefield which separates political correctness and
right-wing bluster with a good dose of hypocrisy thrown in with regards
to the free speech/expression angle. Here's a quote by Minister in
the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz "Malaysia is of
the opinion that freedom of expression must be practiced with tact and
responsibility. The freedom to condemn and slander must not be allowed
as it can destroy lives and international harmony," which is interesting
for a couple of reasons.
This quote of course does not apply to the way how the DAP's Lim Kit Siang was demonised with outright lies or the way how Utusan Malaysia and its ilk have been allowed to run riot in the mainstream discourse.
On
the flip side, the way how pro-opposition commenters routinely slander
and demonise their fellow Malaysians from the opposite side of the
political divide demonstrates that something has always been rotten in
those who always claim the moral high ground when the reality is that
compromise is the glue that binds the opposition together.
Muslim reaction in this country has been swift in the case of
‘Innocence' but muted when the numerous provocations that the minority
have had to endure at the hands of Islamic forces (most often
state-sanctioned) in this country. Be it the cow-head protest or
the spitting out the sacraments of the Holy Communion, the ‘others' and
the religions they adhere to have been mocked and vilified all the
while we are told that Islam is a religion of peace and warned against
questioning of Islam and of the Malay race less we poke the hornet's
nest that would lead to the ruin of Malaysia through the destruction of
the precious social contract.
PAS vice-president Salahuddin
Ayub's statement of "agreeing to disagree" seems to be in conflict with
that of Lim Guan Eng's, which is "DAP's co-operation with PAS under
Pakatan is principled in not just agreeing to disagree on hudud but also
that any future Pakatan federal government is not about implementing an
Islamic state or hudud," and this is something that should be of
concern to Pakatan partisans.
Conflicting statements Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim while speaking at the Royal Selangor Club's Fifth Presidential Luncheon Talk observed that many are concerned about the question of hudud when it is only part of the greater Islamic whole. Speaking
for me, my concern is not with hudud - I categorically oppose it - my
concern is with the way how Pakatan deals with issues concerning Islam
when it is supposed to be the so-called middle path political alliance.
The conflicting statements of Lim and Ayub is a case in point.
(Apropos nothing, I have seen Anwar speak in his various incarnations
throughout the years and the one constant is that he is a remarkably
persuasive politician. As an Anwar sceptic, I was impressed by the
candour on display at the talk. He didn't dodge the hard
questions and answered questions, especially those touching on his Umno
DNA, without resorting to lame mea culpas and his talk was grounded in
the real politik of race and religion, something almost unheard of here
in Malaysia.
And
yes, I think it's time to bury this whole "Anwar will say anything to
different crowds" accusation because he did not say anything that
deviated from his overall message that I have been following for some
time now walking amongst Anwar ceramahs far and wide in this country.
Readers may be interested in the fact that Anwar stated that he is not
interested in pursuing any vendettas against his former BN brethren, and
as long as monies are returned he is uninterested in seeking jail time
for any miscreants. He prefers a Mandela-like approach to BN
malfeasances, which is something I advocated in one of my pieces.
I don't doubt that he is ambitious and wants to sit on the Putrajaya
throne but I think his thirst for power is fuelled by the desire to
prove his Umno enemies wrong, that there is another way - his way - of
doing political business in Malaysia. For many, his way and the Umno way
are the same, but I don't think this is the case. However, this is a
topic for another piece.) To be fair to Anwar, he did say that
people should have sympathy for him because of the difference between
the way how Pakatan and BN do things. In his cabinet days, all he got
were "Saya setuju" but these days he has to thrash it out with the
various divergent expectations in his coalition.
I, of course,
don't sympathise because he (and the rest of the Pakatan leadership) is
merely carrying out the obligations that he claimed [they] would when
they asked for our votes. However, when it comes to the Islamic
issue "agreeing to disagree" is not an acceptable compromise especially
when you have an Islamic party in your alliance which is extremely
influential despite what the current regime claims.
Pakatan
kool-aid drinkers acknowledge that the Malays will decide the future of
this country but are quite willing to indulge PAS in its waffling
because they don't want to rock the boat to Putrajaya. Already there are
some naive enough to believe that hudud is an acceptable feature in
Malaysian life when nowhere in the world has an Islamic system of
jurisprudence delivered on the ‘egalitarian' promises its adherents
claim it would. Putting out the fire
The conventional wisdom is that we should not be side-tracked by this
issue but at the end of the day, I want to know how Pakatan will deal
with the Islamic indoctrination that separates Muslims from non-Muslims. I want to know what role the Pakatan state Islamic agencies will play
in governing the lives of fellow Malaysian Muslims and the impact on
non-Muslims. I want to know if the process of Arabisation will begin to
be reversed when Pakatan comes into power.
I
want to know if the Malay community through its elected Pakatan
representatives will begin the slow process of reverting back to a
bygone era were the Malay polity was not as cut off from the rest of
their fellow Malaysians because of the way how their religion is
promulgated.
Because once this issue is resolved, all others
will fall into place and once we are truly a cohesive society in
substance we could be a great power perhaps even more so than China and
India in South-East Asia, something which was denied us by Umno ...
okay, for years we voted BN in, so it was our fault but I truly believe
that our multi-ethnic/religious foundation so long used to divide us is
our greatest asset.
I am not concerned about the Islamic fire
that Umno continues to fuel, I am concerned about the way how Pakatan
intends to put out the fire and so far, all they seem to be doing is
blowing smoke our way. Malaysiakini
I
want to know if the Malay community through its elected Pakatan
representatives will begin the slow process of reverting back to a
bygone era were the Malay polity was not as cut off from the rest of
their fellow Malaysians because of the way how their religion is
promulgated.
