Of DAP’s contradictions and ‘potong’
Mathias Chang claims that the MCA president offended the Malays and Muslims when he asked if Guan Eng is willing to ‘potong’ instead of ‘menyunat’ and that he also betrayed BN.
By Shen Yee Aun, Free Malaysia Today
One must first understand why MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek questioned if DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng could become the prime minister of Malaysia.
1: DAP leaders are contradicting themselves where Guan Eng claimed that the political reality in Malaysia was that only a Muslim and Malay could be prime minister whereas DAP national chairman Karpal Singh claimed that a non-Malay could assume the post.
2: Has DAP’s stand regarding a non-Malay PM changed? In the past DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang was vocal that a non-Malay could be the prime minister of Malaysia (DAP’s Malaysian Malaysia). But why was it that now Kit Siang chooses to remain silent? Is DAP not consistent with its party struggle and ideology?
3: So now the public demands to know from DAP which is their real stand? Is it Karpal or Guan Eng’s?
4: Since DAP is one of the component parties in Pakatan Rakyat. What are PKR and PAS’ stand regarding Karpal and Guan Eng’s respective views? Which is Pakatan’s stand regarding this issue?
MB post in Perak
Forget the PM post, let’s just concentrate on the menteri besar position.
In March 2008, Perak DAP won 18 out of 18 seats, PKR seven out of 20 and PAS six out of 21.
This simple mathematics would tell you which party’s representative should hold the MB post, but in reality, it went to PAS, which got the lowest number of seats in the state compared to its Pakatan partners.
On this note, why was the MCA president’s claim that Guan Eng could never become the prime minister of Malaysia wrong?
Why didn’t Karpal go all out to fight for DAP to get the MB post in Perak when his party won the most seats? Why did he accept a PAS menteri besar?
Is it because he was willing to set his struggle and beliefs aside just to ensure that Pakatan was in power? If he couldn’t fight for the MB post then, why deceive the non-Malays with false claims that Malaysia could have a non-Malay PM?
Perhaps he did voice out and that is why he hurt the feelings of the Sultan of Perak.
As for Matthias Chiang, the former special aide of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, he claimed that the MCA president insulted the Malay/Muslim community by using the word “potong” instead of “menyunat” to describe circumsision.
He was responding to Chua’s statement, which was reported in the Chinese press, that even if Guang Eng was willing to “potong”, he would not be able to become PM as he was not a true Muslim.
Then what is Chang’s stand regarding Karpal versus the Sultan of Perak back then? Didn’t he as the chairman of DAP insult and behave disrespectfully towards the Malay/Muslim Sultan?
Language issue
I want to have sex with my wife or I want to make love with my wife. The proper word in English according to the dictionary is that I want to have sex with my wife. But what wrong is there when a man says I want to make love to my wife. Doesn’t it mean the same?
So just because people do not use the word you want or belief in, does that mean it is an insult or being disrespectful?
So perhaps P1 Wimax should sue Chang. P1 Wimax uses the word “potong” in their advertisement. Are they also insulting the Malays and Muslims in the country?
No doubt, the word “potong” has been used loosely, indeed irresponsibly by many including the Malays/Muslims in Malaysia to describe circumcision, said Chang.
He claimed that the MCA president used the word “potong” instead of “menyunat” and therefore he was insulting and being disrespectful to the religion.
At the same time, he also claimed that many irresponsible people, including Malays and Muslims, used the same word to describe circumcision.
So is Chang trying to say that all those Malays and Muslims in Malaysia who use the word “potong” instead of “ menyunat” are also insulting their own religion.
How much does he know about Islam? I would advise him not to come out with his own fatwa regarding this matter.
It was never a teaching of Prophet Muhammad or was it mentioned in the Quran regarding what was the correct word to describe circumcision. The religion only stressed on the need for circumsision.
If the word “potong” was wrong, then why did Mathias use words like “stupid” and “idiot” to attack the MCA president over this issue? Why does he think that the words others used were improper but the words he used were proper?
As for the MCA president’s statement that Guan Eng could not become PM even if he circumcised, the former was merely highlighting the political reality in this country.
