The Malay Dilemma Ian Buruma's Version: A Rubbish!

Ian Buruma no doubt is a famous writer. But he is maybe famous just within PKR supporters. He is not Malay and not a Malaysian either. He was born in the The Hague, Netherlands. He is not majoring about Malaysia even South East Asia in his study and suddenly giving his comment about “Malays dilemma”? But he he comes, the beloved writer of Anwar Ibrahim, might be just because he write in favor of PKR and Anwar interest!
I just read a “rubbish” article by Ian Buruma. The title is “The Malays Dilemma”. Maybe he likes to take credit and “cheap publicity” by copying Tun Dr. Mahathir’s book “The Malay Dilemma”. You want to read the content? Just visit http://anwaribrahimblog.com/2009/05/15/the-malay-dilemma. It’s very long article to be write up here. But I did quote some of it to be published.
Ian said:
Anwar — who had rebounded from six years in prison on corruption and sodomy charges to become the best hope for a more democratic, less corrupt Malaysia — speaks softly. He is still under constant surveillance, he said.
I say:
How could Anwar be the “hope” of more democratic, less corrupt Malaysia? He is the ex-prisoner which convicted in corruption cases. Even court had made the decision conviting him legally. He is proven in court as a guilty person. Is Ian trying to insult the courts or legal systems? Even his ex-UMNO buddies talking how corrupt Anwar is. Some of them might call him as “the father of corruption”! Just ask Tan Sri Sanusi Junid how Anwar “bought” votes from Sabah in order to get the late Tun Ghafar Baba leave the Deputy President of UMNO seat. How could be Ian dares to claim Anwar to get “less” corruption? Anwar is not a fighter, he is a loser.
Ian wrote:
This was the same Anwar Ibrahim, one struggled to remember, who was once at the heart of the Malaysian establishment: the Minister of Culture in 1983, the Minister of Education in 1986, the Minister of Finance in 1991 and a Deputy Prime Minister in 1993. He was poised to succeed Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammed. And then he got overconfident. Starting in the summer of 1997, when the Malaysian currency and stock market lost more than half of their value in the Asian financial meltdown, Anwar did something that Dr Mahathir found unforgivable.
I say:
Is Anwar crazy to “sell” Malaysia to IMF? That is one of the reasons that made Tun M angry with him. If Ian wrote about the “unforgivable”, then he should ask the SB’s and Intelligent. They “know” well the “unforgivable” acts by Anwar. Even worlds are giving credits to Mohammad Nor Yaakob and Tun M to practiced capital control. The whole world says that it is a brave and brilliant way to “teach” the “rouge speculator”, but some PKR are “proudly claiming that “it was Anwar’s ideas”! Don’t they know that they are Mohammad Nor Yaakob and Tun M who struggled to safe Malaysia from Soros “The Culprit”, a good friend of Anwar himself. Then Anwar wanted to “mortgage” Malaysia to IMF? Is that the level of IQ that Anwar have to solve Malaysia economic problem? He could not even “reach” Tun’s mind!
Ian said:
Even as the prime minister was imposing capital controls and blaming “rogue speculators,” such as George Soros, for the crisis, Anwar launched an attack on “nepotism” and “cronyism” in his own party, UMNO, which had been in power since independence. The “cronies” included members of Dr Mahathir’s family. While Dr Mahathir tried to bail out banks and corporations run by his allies, Anwar talked about transparency and accepting some of the International Monetary Fund’s recommendations for liberalising the economy.
I say:
The nepotism and cronyism terms was promoted by Anwar to make Tun M looks bad among Malaysian. The question is, why does Anwar did not used the same terms on Pak Lah when he is the Prime Minister? There were KJ, the level 4 boys, Pak Lah cronies within media, Kamaludin and Patrick Badawi. Oh! Pak Lah acted on Anwar’s favor? Pak Lah released him and “satu kampung”? In facts, Tun M forbids his families to join “serious” political involvement. Many times that Tun was suggested by the UMNO’s veterans to make his sons as UMNO leaders, but he refused. No place for Mokhzani, Mirzan and Mukhriz when he is the Prime Minister. Does Ian know how Anwar “spread” the pink form within his cronies to secure his place as Deputy President of UMNO? Ian better as Ezam, he knows. Ian wrote:
Nobody was likely to miss the implication; Dr Mahathir has clearly stated his conviction that “Jews rule this world by proxy.” At the Hilton, Anwar, who started his career as the president of the Malaysian Muslim Students Union, and is a devout Muslim, shrugged. “They say I’m a Jewish agent, because of my friendship with Paul,” he said. “They also accuse me of being a lackey of the Chinese.” His eyebrows twitched in a gesture of disbelief, and he emitted a dry, barking laugh.
I say:
Does this PKR Imam does not recite Al-Quran? "Wa lan tardhau antumul yahudu wa lan nasara hatta tattabi'a millatahum". Which means "the Jews and Christians will not EVER be on your side unless you follow their way”. The PAS spiritual leader also said that “be careful when your enemies agreed with you”. We can see that almost every election or by-election, PKR will “meet” their “master”. The latest was the Bukit Selambau when Saifudin Nasution met “somebody” at Cinta Sayang Club. “They” help PKR a lot. Is there nothing in “return”? Yeah right!
Ian wrote:
To make sense of Anwar’s rise, fall, and rise, it helps to know something about the role of race and religion in Malaysia. The country’s population is more than half Malay, defined by ethnicity and the Muslim faith, but large numbers of Chinese (now about a quarter of the population) and Indians (seven per cent) arrived in the 19th century, when the British imported coolies from China and plantation workers from India. Tensions arising from this mélange — and, in particular, the fear held by Malays that they will always be bested by these minorities — have gripped Malaysian politics since the country achieved independence from the British, in 1957. In recent years, the situation has been further complicated by a surge in Islamic fervour among many Malays.
I say:
Is that how the way Ian Buruma judged the "role of race and religion in Malaysia"? Just the way how Anwar rise, fall and rise again and will be fall again? Why he took Anwar as his “model”? What is so “special” about Anwar? Why Ian did not take Tun M, Nik Aziz, Hadi Awang or Lim Kit Siang as his model? It’s not a fair judgement. He is so “bias” Is that what Ian and Anwar call “justice”?
Ian wrote:
Lim was one of several people I spoke to in Malaysia who used the word “apartheid” in describing his country. “The ethnic situation has become much worse,” he said, especially since Malay nationalism took a strong Islamic turn in the late 1980s, when UMNO was challenged by PAS. The Islamists got a boost from the Iranian Revolution, and actually took power in Kelantan in 1990. To preëmpt the Islamists, UMNO, ostensibly a secular party, wedded its ethnic nationalism (which was decidedly not a feature of PAS) to religion: Muslims were no longer supposed to drink alcohol; women were encouraged to wear head scarves (tudung); easygoing Malay Islam took on the harsher tone of Wahhabi purism.
I say:
Apartheid? The Islamic awareness is no doubt was aroused on late 1980s. It was the time when Tun M begins to be Malaysia’s Prime Minister. It was the era when the army cocktail party will no more serve alcoholic drinks. No PT short among armies and replace a long pants to maintain “aurat”. Wearing “tudung” is a must in Islam as to cover “aurat”. It’s not Wahabi who urges the act. Even Imam Shafie in his “mazhab” asked us to cover the “aurat” by wearing clothes. Why should he bother us to practice our religion by accusing us to be “apartheid”? What a bad call!
Ian wrote:
Meanwhile, in Lim’s view, educated Malays have been too timid to resist, whatever they might do or say in private. “I’ve seen it happening with my progressive university friends,” Lim said. “Wives take to wearing the tudung, the daughters cover up. Their passivity, their silence, is very bad for the community, because it allows the ultras to set the agenda. Islam has become more and more conservative. Muslims can no longer go to non-Malay restaurants or visit the houses of non-Malay friends. Tensions have grown. We’re reverting to the colonial situation, where the different races only meet in the marketplace.”
I say:
Oh God! These statements are insulting Islam and its practices! Passivity and silence becomes a threat to them? How could practicing “tudung” to cover “aurat” become a threat to community? Allows to the ultras to set agenda? What kind of agenda? What a bad call and bad thoughts by them again. We just obey our religion and practice the way it should be! "lakum dinukum wa liya din"! it is not conservative, it is Islamic fundamental! Who says the Malays can not go to non-Malays restaurants? Not all McDonalds are belong to Muslim? And who says Malays can not visit their non-Malays friends? Every Chinese New Year, Deepavali and Christmas, the Malays are actively visiting each others. Who is the one trying to be “apartheid”? It might be them who tried to grow the “apartheid” attitude within Malaysian!
Ian menulis lagi:
Kelantan has hardly any huge buildings. Everything in the state capital, Kota Bharu, near the border with Thailand, is built on a modest scale. I met the PAS vice-president, Husam Musa, at the party headquarters. Husam, an economist by training, is not an imam but one of the new breed of professionals in Islamist politics. He was polite, if a little defensive. On the question of an Islamic state, he said this goal was often misunderstood: “We don’t mean a state ruled by clerics but one guided by the holy books. Without the books, we’d be like UMNO and just grab the money. The difference between us and them is that we believe we will be judged in the afterlife.”
Saya kata:
Husam! You better be careful with your words! What did you meant by these statements? The Husam’s statements show that the UMNOs do not believe in the “judgement day”. It means that Husam tries to portray that we are not Muslim like he is. We believe in Pillar of Iman, including believe in judgement day. We are brothers in Islam, but we are not “Islam PAS” members! This is a statement of PAS Deputy President candidate?
Ian tulis lagi:
He said that Islam was “pro-progress,” and that American democracy was a good model. (“Unfriendly people will accuse me of being pro-American for making this statement.”) He also said that discriminating against ethnic minorities was “un-Islamic,” as was government corruption. “People should be treated the same, and that includes the freedom of religion,” he said.
Saya kata:
This is an example of "endorgan" nominees in PAS? He is might be one of the “fellow father’s assistants” whom Nik Abduh meant in his article. I can see some of them nodded! An American PAS...
This is just some of my answer of some paragraphs of so called “professor” who give his lectures to Oxford, Princeton and Harvard University. There are some paragraphs that I do not need to comment though I think it’s not relevant and out of facts. I had been informed that the article was published in The New Yorker magazine instead of “De Facto’s” blog. It is an article with full of rubbish which is better to be “garbaged”, but still published in it? J