Judge: No jurisdiction to overrule Sharia court decision

"this Muslim-majority nation, which prides itself on religious tolerance.."
-- from the article above

Prides itself, that is, on being able to fool the outside world about the real nature of Malaysia, a country which only recently became "Muslim-majority" (to borrow the hideous adjective used above).

Despite this unearned reputation, Malaysian Muslims have made sure to impose the disguised jizyah of the "Bumiputra" (Sons of the Soil) system, which does not really favor the true "Sons of the Soil," which are the native tribes all of which are now Christian, but rather the Muslims who are as much immigrants as are the Hindus and the Chinese, and have no particular claim on Malaysia.

Ask Hindus and Chinese who have come from Malaysia, and who feel free to speak, if they would describe that country as rightly priding itself on "religious tolerance." That can only mean one thing: compared to other countries with a Muslim majority (about 51% Muslim), Malaysia is not nearly as bad.

But at the moment the Muslims constitute only about 51% of the country. Give them time. And as soon as they feel they no longer need the much more industrious and entrepreneurial Chinese and Hindus, they will squeeze them even further, to the point where emigration of non-Muslims will rise. It happened in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, everywhere that there remained significant numbers of non-Muslims, but where the system of treating the dhimmis with contumely, subjecting them to the status of humiliation and degradation and physical insecurity, could not quite be imposed as openly as it would be were there no powerful Western Infidels needing to be placated -- simply squeeze those non-Muslims, little by little, out. Or, if they prove useful, keep them around to be exploited within the country. That is the function of non-Muslims in Malaysia: to be exploited for the sake of Muslims, and to the extent that the Muslims feel they can get away with it without driving the engine of their prosperity away.

The term "religious tolerance" when applied to Muslim majority nations seems to carry with it a purely negative connotation: the mere absence of open, violent persecution of non-Muslims seems sufficient for qualification. Expectations appear so very low, perhaps on a subconscious level among journalists and pundits, that the lack of assorted body parts, blood in the streets, or fires ablaze is sufficient for 'tolerance'.

What better can one accept of savages. The biggest loud mouthed savage is ex PM of Malaysia, Marthair Mohamed who blamed all the problems of the world on the Jews.

As a former Malaysian Chinese Christian, I feel compelled to express my opinion. Although I pledge no allegiance whatsoever to my country of birth, I must insist that the dhimmitude of which I read daily at JW/DW has yet to take root in Malaysia.

First of all, on the issue of religious tolerance, the authorities since before independence has allowed street parades on Buddhist and Hindu festival days. Roads in the capital city are closed or diverted to allow the procession of the faithful. On the other hand, public rallies of political nature remain banned. Never has there occurred any intimidation by Malay Muslims or by the police. Now tell me, which other Muslim country allows such practices to take place?

Of course, in return, the non-Malays must accept Malay superiority and Malay affirmative action; the former is enshrined in the Constitution and the second, in the country's economic development plans. But neither are true impediments to the enterprising - as long as non-Malays get their chance to prosper and own property, you won't see them complaining. If one cannot accept this form of social contract, then one ups and leaves, as I have done. My friends and family remain in Malaysia and lead comfortable lives free from Muslim interference. There are virtually two different worlds in Malaysia, Muslim and non-Muslim, and rarely do they intersect except in stories like the above.

As well, Malaysia allows Chinese-language schools and univerisities, both of which are not even found in neighbouring Singapore.

To say, Hugh, that "Muslims (who) are as much immigrants as are the Hindus and the Chinese, and have no particular claim on Malaysia" is equivalent to saying that Israel has no claim on Palestine, both of which are fallacious. Malay Sultans have governed the states in Malaysia long before the British arrived.

As for your assertion that,

"the function of non-Muslims in Malaysia (is) to be exploited for the sake of Muslims, and to the extent that the Muslims feel they can get away with it without driving the engine of their prosperity away",

I am of the opinion that there is no emerging trend from which one can extrapolate to that (perhaps logical) conclusion.

For one thing, Malaysia's ruling party, the National Front (heh) comprises Malay, Chinese and Indian parties. Any sign of those two component party leaders appeasing Muslims at the expense of their constituency will be met with violent objection and defection to the non-Malay opposition. The opposition Islamic Party, however, struggles to maintain its tenuous grasp on the only state it controls in Malaysia, with no indication of its circle of influence widening significantly. That it isn't at all pro-business (them Malays sure do like mah-nay) may have a lot to do with that.

Further, although non-Malays are integrated into every socioeconomic stratum, they retain a strong sense of ethnic pride. Indeed, the ruling party remains dismayed that, almost 50 years after independence, the citizens by and large still do not identify themselves as Malaysians first and foremost but continue to see themselves along communitarian lines. This may be the only thing that stands against Muslim usurpation.

And here's something a Malay poet once wrote:

"As long as we hate pigs and pray
We will remain Muslim and Malay"

And no, he hasn't been stoned to death yet. Stoned on grass, more like.

I'm sorry if what I had written sounded too much like a ringing endorsement of that shithole country but, y'know, truth's truth.

Vincent Wong,

Hugh's assertions may seem blyth to you, but I assure you they only come after long and considered study of the history of Islam. You, on the other hand, seem to suffer from the old "can't see the forest for the trees"(ism) that affects so many trying to formulate our foreign policy.

Everything is at once more complex and more simple than it seems, don't you agree?

"the Sharia court handles religious cases involving Muslims"

Since there's no muslim involved, I don't see the problem.

What is so serious about this scenario is

1. All that is required is for two muslims to claim that they heard the person repeat the muslim claim of profession..

I have to check is it two or one + a document...

2. Then no matter what rights the spouse has in her own country its (sorry charlie) you dont have any rights..

3. But what really scares the HELL out of me is

Here in the USA there are OBvious attempts to get our courts to recognize that the Koran and muslim so called oaths are some how just as valid as swearing or affirming on the Bible...

This ignores one of the basic teachings of the Warmonger Mohammed...

To lie, cheat, steal decieve waylay is all ok

"Use every strategem of war"
"Until islam reigns supreme"
"Until the flag of islam flies over the world"

That's what Islam is all about. Shrinking jurisdictions; the creeping inability to escape its reach.

What a pack of pathetic pagan pigs, no decency, no honour - just bastardry and persecution of a widow. num7bat

Rebecca JW,

Please do not misunderstand. I am not portraying Malaysian Muslims as largely benign with no supremacist intentions. I'm saying that non-Muslims in Malaysia know exactly what kind of perfidy Muslims are capable of and the infidels aren't bending over in multi-culti dhimmitude. True, many elements of their social contract seem like dhimmitude to us but those non-Muslims are not exploited by the Muslims. If anything, it's the reverse that's true, as infidel businessmen exploit that jizyah system to secure sweet government contracts for themselves.

Hugh Mentioned the term “Bumiputra”, very interesting since it shows the Hindu influence which still exists in that region since Bumiputra is Sanskrit.

Singapore is close by, although gained economic importance with the British in 1819, it was originally an Indian outpost in the trade routes between India and China. Singh means Lion and Pur means City, thus SinghaPur, which the Brits mispronounced Singapore. Singapore also indicates the Hindu presence of a once vast empire.

Vincent Wong wrote:

“Malay Sultans have governed the states in Malaysia long before the British arrived.”

And for that matter, Hindu Rajas ruled Malay before the Islamic invasions. When Hugh refers to Hindus, he means Hindus of the present Republic of India”, however there are many regional rulers who still hold the title of Raja.

So VIncent be careful when you say there was an Islamic presence there before the Brits, since the original culture was subdued by the intolerant uncivilized Sultans.

The Hindu legacy can still be seen through Malaysia’s orders and decorations such as:

“Sri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa: instituted on 29th July 1960 as the supreme award for gallantry in the face of the enemy. Awarded in one class (SP), subsequent awards being denoted by the use of bars.”

Notice the “SRI” at the front, yes, a Hindu invocation of the Goddess.

Source: http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Malaysia/malaysia.htm

Darjah Utama Sri Mahkota Negara (the Most Exalted Order of the State Crown): founded by King 'Abdu'l Rahman on 16th August 1958. Awarded in once class (DMN) to Malaysian rulers and their wives, foreign Heads of State and other distinguished individuals.

Again you see “Sri”….and yes its Hindu, not a coincidence or Islamic toleration of the Hindu culture which once existed.

Darjah Kepahlawanan Angkatan Tentera (the Gallant Order of Military Service): founded by King 'Abu Bakar Ri'ayat ud - din Shah al - Musta'in Billah on 16th September 1983. Awarded for heroism or exceptional services in the armed forces in five classes (1. Panglima Gagah - PGAT; 2. Panglima Setia - PSAT, 3. Pahlawan - PAT, 4. Ksatriya - KAT, and 5. Bentara - BAT).

Notice KSATRIYA which refers to the Hindu warrior class.

And now for some of the original rulers of Malaysia:

The Royal House of Kedah is of great antiquity, originating in the Hindu age, and said to have been founded by a Prince from Sri Lanka. Eight generations of the family ruled over the state before the conversion to Islam in 1136. The state frequently fell to superior Siamese forces. Fearing another such invasion, Sultan Abdullah al-Mukarram Shah negotiated a Treaty of Friendship and Alliance with the HEIC in 1786, this entailed the cession of Pinang. The Siamese were forestalled for a time, but struck hard in 1821 and annexed the sultanate. After a severe financial crisis, Kedah was transferred to British sovereignty on 16th July 1909. The then Sultan, Ahmad Taj ud-din III al-Mukarram Shah, had already reigned for 27 years and was set to reign for a further 34. Without financial acumen of any kind, a series of Royal Regents ruled in his stead for much of his reign. During the Japanese invasion, the seventy-seven year old Sultan fled into the jungles on the back of one of his eighteen sons. One of these was to become the first Prime Minister of the Malaya and Commonwealth and world-famous statesman, Tunku 'Abdu'l Rahman. Others were distinguished diplomats, civil servants and military officers. Sultan Ahmad Taj ud-din's grandson, Sultan al-Mu'tasimu Billah Muhib ud-din Alhaj 'Abdu'l Halim Mu'azzam Shah, ascended the throne in 1958 and served as King of the Federation from 1970 to 1975.

SOURCE: http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Malaysia/kedah.htm

The ruling house of Malacca, and later Johor, was one that enjoyed the highest prestige throughout the Malay world. The claimed ancestry of the Royal House extends to Alexander the Great. However, they seem to have originated with the foundation of the ancient Hindu state of Tamasak on the island of Singapore. The Royal family fled to the area around Malacca after the destruction of the city by the ruler of Palembang in 1377. Raja Parameswara of Malacca embraced Islam during the early years of the fourteenth century, taking the name of Sultan Sri Iskander Shah. The new sultanate rose to world prominence as a trading empire during the rest of the century. Strategically located in the middle of the straits, between Malaya and Indonesia, it was well placed to earn enormous profits as the entréport to the Indies. Using this wealth, the sultanate was able to enforce its suzerainty over much of peninsular Malaya and the islands. Her wealth soon earned the jealousy of the European powers, the phrase "he who holds Malacca, holds the throat of Venice", encompassing those feelings, succinctly. The Portuguese were the first to act, seizing the city almost by accident during a wedding feast on 24th July 1511. The Sultan and Royal family fled first to Kopak, but was driven by the Portuguese from there to Kampar in Sumatra in 1526. The Sultan was driven from Kampar and after wandering from place to place, eventually established his capital on the banks of the Johor river, in the extreme South of peninsular Malaya. Thereafter, they were known as Sultans of Johor. Their wealth and power slowly diminished as the Portuguese and then the Dutch began to control the trade of the Indies. The male line of the ruling family died out in 1699. The Bendahara family then assumed the Johor sultanate. They had frequently intermarried with the Sultan's family and provided the holders of the powerful office of Bendahara (Prime Minister and Commander-in-Chief). However, the fame and pre-eminence of the old line of Sultan's remained a powerful force within the Malay world for centuries. Most of the Malay ruling houses in Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines proudly claim descent from them, however tenuous the link may be.

http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Malaysia/malacca.htm

Raja Kumar was Hindu:

Kelantan was once a powerful state with ancient trade links with China, Champa and India, but became tributary to the Majapahit Empire during the 13th and 14th centuries. It re-established its independence under Raja Kumar, ca. 1411. It became an important centre for trade and commerce during the fifteenth century, but fell to Malacca in 1499. Following the Portuguese conquest of Malacca in 1511, the state disintegrated into several petty principalities. These principalities were conquered again by the Siamese and made subject to Patani I 1603. In 1760, a certain Kubang Labu succeeded in unifying the disparate territories into a single state once more, but he was overthrown four years later. Long (Luang) Yunus seized the throne and proclaimed himself Raja of Kelantan in 1764 but the state fell under the control of Trengganu after his death. Long Muhammad, younger son of Yunus, declared himself Sultan in 1800. He was eventually accepted by the Siamese as ruler of a separate tributary, twelve years later. Kelantan was transferred to British protection by the terms of the Anglo-Siamese treaty of 1909. Britain paying Siam for all outstanding debts and assuming responsibility for them in Siam's stead. Negeri Kelantan Dar ul-Naim became one of the Unfederated Malay States in 1911.

http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Malaysia/kelantan.htm

Here is another Hindu/Buddhist Kingdom in Malaysia:

Negri Sembilan (nine states) is a federation of states on the West coast of peninsular Malaysia. Immigrants from Minangkabau in Sumatra peopled the state during the late seventeenth and early e ighteenth centuries. An ancient people, who once adhered strictly to Buddhist teachings, their laws of inheritance and government differ substantially from Muslim norms. Property, nobility and titles are all heritable through the female line. Government is decentralised, with rulers selected by the great nobles or regional magnates.

In the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the Minangkabau immigrants in Malaya petitioned their sovereign in Sumatra to send them a prince to establish government over them. The Minangkabau ruler, Sultan 'Abdu'l Jalil, obliged by delegating his relative near, Raja Melawar.

Arriving to find that a certain Raja Khatib had established himself as ruler, Melawar was forced to compromise with the lesser chiefs in order to secure his position. He defeated and killed or expelled Raja Khitab with their help, receiving the area around Sri Menanti as his personal domain. The Sultan of Johor, paramount sovereign of the peninsular, confirmed his position by granting the personal title of Sultan and recognising him as Yang di-Pertuan Besar Negri Sembilan (he who is the highest Lord of the nine states).

After Raja Melawar's death, a series of disputes arose over the succession. For a considerable period the local nobles applied to the Minangkabau ruler in Sumatra for their ruler. However, competing interests supported different candidates, often resulting in instability and civil war. This pattern continued until a convention of choosing the rulers from the family of Raja 'Ali [Raja Lenggang Laut], became established during the middle of the nineteenth century.

Although the number of states within Negri Sembilan has fluctuated over the years, the federation now consists of six states, Jelebu, Johol, Linggi, Rembau, Sri Menanti, Sungai Ujong and Tampin. The rulers are known collectively as the Undang Laut. All, save Sri Menanti and Tampin, are themselves, selected by the great nobles of their states. They all take part in the selection of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

The historic list of states of the federation, according to reputed date of foundation, together with the titles of their rulers are as follows:
• The Dato' Sri Maharaja of Naning (annexed to Malacca after the Naning Rice War. The title being revived in the 1930's as a hereditary title of nobility within Malacca). [4]
• The Dato' of Rembau. [3]
• The Dato' Klana Petra Sri Jaya of Sungai Ujong. [1]
• The Dato' Mendelika Mantri Akhir Zaman of Jelebu. [2]
• Klang (now defunct). [5]
• Segamat (now defunct). [6]
• The Dato' Johan Pahlawan Lela Perkasa Setiawan of Johol (previously Pasir Besar). [7]
• Jelai (became a vassal of Johol) [8]
• Ulu Pahang (now defunct). [9]
• The Tengku Besar of Tampin (previously the Yang di-Pertuan Muda of Rembau). The ruler is a delegate of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar).
• The Yang di-Pertuan Muda of Jelebu (now defunct). The ruler was a delegate of the Yang di-Pertuan Besar.

http://www.4dw.net/royalark/Malaysia/negri.htm

So now when you claim that the Sultans were there, well there was a Hindu-Buddhist presence of greater antiquity and that was annihilated through the intolerance of Islam.

And as you said Vincent: “I'm sorry if what I had written sounded too much like a ringing endorsement of that shithole country but, y'know, truth's truth.”

Yes Vincent, the truth is the truth but it seems many do not know of what really happened in Malaysia. There was and still is etreme intolerance to the original indigenous cultures and faiths of Malaysia, regardless of what Malaysia wants the world to believe.

-Ayo Gorkhali

Here Come the Gurkhas!!!

And one more thing Vincent......Hugh knows a lot, so don't go knocking him without doing your research.

-Cheers

-Ayo Gorkhali