The question of cowardice (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)

ARCHIVES 2013

By MT Webmaster On Apr 12, 2013

The problem is: they disparage me for refusing to return to Malaysia. However, if I do return to Malaysia and nothing happens, they will say I have made a deal with Umno. And if I return to Malaysia and I get arrested, they will say that it is merely wayang to stop people from saying I have made a deal with Umno.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

According to Haris Ibrahim’s blog, I am a coward for living in exile in the UK.

It is interesting that Haris came out with this anti-RPK campaign at the same time that I published my article ‘The consistency of change’. It looks like Haris, too, has changed his stance. He now feels I should be in jail rather than in Manchester.

I suppose he is of the opinion that if I support Pakatan Rakyat then I should be in Manchester but if I do not support Pakatan Rakyat then I should instead be in jail.

I thought justice was about getting a fair trial and about being spared selective prosecution cum political persecution and not about you should be free only if you are anti-government but behind bars if you are not anti-government.

Anyway, laws are always subject to one’s interpretation and most times people twist laws to conveniently suit their political agenda. The government does it and so does, it appears, the opposition as well.

I remember that Haris was one of those who disagreed with my plan to stay in Malaysia and risk a third detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA). He was also one of those who disagreed with my plan to refuse bail and instead serve time in the Sungai Buloh Prison while awaiting trial. He, together with my wife who was in tears, pleaded with me to accept bail because, according to Haris, I would be more useful as a free man running Malaysia Today rather than behind bars with no one to manage the website.

Haris was also the one who almost had a punch-up in Bangkok with the police officers from Malaysia because they wanted me to follow them to the Malaysian Embassy in Bangkok. Haris felt that it may be a trap to arrest me and smuggle me back to Malaysia and he was adamant that I stay in the hotel than risk getting trapped in the Malaysian Embassy where the Thai government would be powerless to help me.

I was prepared to take that risk but Haris told my wife to lock me in the hotel room and not allow me to leave while he and another lawyer, Amarjit Sidhu, follow the police officers to the Embassy to establish what was going on. Later that night they returned to the hotel and told me that they smelled a rat and that I should not go to the Embassy.

I am not blaming Haris for me being here in Manchester but he made it very clear, and even publicly stated so, that he was dead opposed to me spending my days in jail. Now he has changed his mind and feels that I am a coward for refusing to go to jail. So what I wrote in my article ‘The consistency of change’ that people do change has been proven right after all.

Anyway, I think it is an insult to Sun Yat-sen to say that those who choose exile over jail are cowards. Sun Yat-sen, too, spent time in exile in Japan and was financially supported by a democratic revolutionary named Miyazaki Toten. Sun Yat-sen also spent time in exile in Europe, the United States, and Canada where he raised money for his revolutionary party and to support uprisings in China.

Sun Yat-sen is definitely not considered a coward for refusing to go back to China to spend the rest of his days in jail. In fact, in 1896, Sun Yat-sen was detained at the Chinese Legation in London. He was released after 12 days through the efforts of James Cantlie, The Times, and the British Foreign Office, resulting in him becoming a hero (not a coward) in Britain.

Sayyid Ruhollah Mostafavi Musavi Khomeini, too, spent 14 years in exile and only returned to Iran in 1979 after the Shah had been toppled. Joseph Stalin was also in exile and only returned to Russia in 1917 when the Russian Revolution succeeded, as did Vladimir Lenin — both heroes, and not cowards, of the Russian Revolution.

I do not like to use Prophet Muhammad as another example lest people misinterpret this as me comparing myself to the Prophet but he too spent eight years in exile until he had a large enough army to return to Mekah unmolested in 630.

In fact, history is rife with political exiles — Englishmen exiled in France and Frenchmen exiled in England. Voltaire, Norodom Sihanouk, Bahadur Shah II, Alberto Fujimori, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Erich Honecker, Alan García, Jean-Bédel Bokassa, King Zog, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, Napoleon Bonaparte’s nephew Louis-Napoléon, and many, many more all spent time in exile — the list is just too long.

Anyway, what I had commented on was the call for Malaysians to kill and/or die to prevent phantom voters from casting their votes on 5th May 2013. My contention is that Malaysians would be the last one to put their life on the line when even getting them to register to post comments in Malaysia Today is impossible. Hardly 1% would dare do that because they fear that their identity may be known.

If they do not even dare reveal their identity how can we expect these people to kill and/or die to prevent phantom voters from casting their votes?

Do you know that many people do not even dare vote because they are worried that their vote is not secret and the government or police would know whom they voted for? There is even a protest because the ballot papers are marked with serial numbers. So what if people know who you vote for? What is wrong with that?

Whenever I vote I proudly hold up my ballot paper for all and sundry to see and to make sure that they can see that I voted for the opposition before I put it into the ballot box. And here people refuse to vote in case others get to know whom they voted for. And these same people call me a coward? If I am a coward for showing everyone my ballot paper then what do we call those who refuse to vote because they fear people will find out who they voted for?

Malaysians are real strange creatures indeed. And they don’t realise that when they insult me they also insult Prophet Muhammad, Sun Yat-sen, Khomeini and thousands of other people whom history has labelled as great people and heroes because they went into exile.

The problem is: they disparage me for refusing to return to Malaysia. However, if I do return to Malaysia and nothing happens, they will say I have made a deal with Umno. And if I return to Malaysia and I get arrested, they will say that it is merely wayang to stop people from saying I have made a deal with Umno.

And the question is: why do they now want me to return to Malaysia and go to jail whereas in the beginning they were adamant that I stay free and out of jail? Only an idiot would require me to answer that question.

***************************************

懦夫的問題

他們鄙視我，說我不敢回去。但如果我真的囘去了而沒有事情發生的話，他們會說我私底下早和巫統僑好了。即使我真的被捉，他們還是會講這只是場‘wayang’，演出的目的是要阻止所有人講説我私底下早就和巫統僑好的。

原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin
譯文：方宙

Haris Ibrahim的博客裏寫到，我是個流放英國的懦夫。

能夠看到在我發表‘不變的改變’（http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/no-holds-barred/55836-the-consistency-of-change ）這篇文章的同時Haris 也提出‘反RPK運動’，這真的是很有趣。看起來Haris也在改變中，他現在認爲我應該在監獄裏而不是曼徹斯特。

我想，他應該是這樣認爲的：如果我支持民聯那我可以待在曼徹斯特，反之我則應該在監牢裏度日。

我還以爲正義是你能夠得到公平的審訊，而不是得到含選擇性或政治性的檢控，也不是說你反政府就能自由而你贊同政府就得入獄。

無論如何，法律是很視乎個人詮釋的，很多時候很多人會扭曲法律來達到他們的政治議程。囯陣這麽做，現在看來民聯也是。

我記得Haris 是其中一個不贊同我留在馬來西亞而冒著第三次被政府用内安法令扣留的危險。他也不認同我不要交保釋金而要在Sungai Buloh扣留所等候發審的想法。他當時和我那淚流滿面的妻子一起哀求我交保釋金，他認爲我出來操作Malaysia Today會好過我在監獄裏一無所為。

Haris 也在曼谷因爲大馬警察要‘陪伴’我到大馬大使館而幾乎和他們拳腳相加。他認爲那是個圈套，儅我進了大使館以後他們就會扣留我再而把我遷囘大馬。他堅決要我留在酒店裏而不是被套在泰國警方無法保護我的大使館裏。

正當我準備要冒險時，Haris叫我妻子把我鎖在酒店内，然後他和另一個律師Amarjit Sidhu親自到大使館看個究竟。當晚他們回報說他們覺得有問題而勸我別去。

我並沒有因我現在身在曼徹斯特而怪罪Haris ，他之前也很清楚地表明他不想我在監牢内度日，他甚至還爲此寫了公開文。但現在他改了想法，認爲說我是個不敢進牢的懦夫。所以我寫的那篇‘不變的改變’的内容是很正確的。

我認爲那些發表‘不去監牢而選擇流放的是懦夫’言論的人是對孫中山先生大大不敬的。孫中山先生曾經流放日本，而在當地他也接受了宫崎滔天（http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C5%8Dten_Miyazaki ），一個民主革命士的金錢資助。孫中山先生也曾流放美國，歐洲，加拿大等地向當地華人籌資來推動他的革命。

沒有人會因爲孫中山先生拒絕回到當時清朝統治的中國的監獄而把他稱爲懦夫。事實上，孫中山先生1986年在倫敦被中華使館拘捕。在James Cantlie，泰晤時報，和英國外交辦事處的周旋下，他于12天后獲釋。當時他被稱爲是英雄而不是懦夫。

Sayyid Ruhollah Mostafavi Musavi Khomeini也一樣流放他國14年。他在1979年巴列维王朝
被推翻后才回到伊朗。史大林和列寧這兩名俄羅斯革命英雄也是在1917年革命成功后才結束流放的。

我不大喜歡用先知默罕默德舉例，因爲其他人可能認爲我把自己比喻成他。但是，先知也曾在外流放8年，直到630年，在他擁有強大的軍隊后他才回歸麥加。

事實上，人類歷史是充滿政治流放的。Voltaire, Norodom Sihanouk, Bahadur Shah II, Alberto Fujimori, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, Erich Honecker, Alan García, Jean-Bédel Bokassa, King Zog, Kurmanbek Bakiyev, Napoleon Bonaparte外甥Louis-Napoléon,還有很多很多人都曾在外流放過。

話説回來，我要提的是，我呼籲所有馬來西亞人要‘不惜一死’來防止幽靈選民在5月5號投票日投票。我此話的根據是，馬來西亞人是很‘怕死怕輸’的，不到最後一秒鐘他們都不會行動。看看MT的讀者就知道，要他們註冊留言也難。只有至多1%的讀者敢那麽做，因爲其他人都害怕暴露他們的身份。

如果他們連暴露身份都不敢，那你還奢望他們能‘不惜一死’來防止幽靈選民在5月5號投票日投票？

你知道嗎，很多人是連票都不敢投的，因爲他們擔心他們的選票並不保密，政府和警方都會知道他們投的人是誰。他們還因爲選票上有編號而投訴。如果真的有人知道你投誰，那到底有什麽問題？哪有什麽不對經呢？

儅我投票時，我會很自豪地高舉我的選票給四周圍的人看，我要他們看清楚我投的是反對黨。而在這裡他們就因爲擔心別人知道他們投給誰而連票也不敢投。這些就是把我叫成懦夫的人？如果我這個懦夫敢把我的選票公開給所有人看的話，那些不敢投票的人又是什麽？

馬來西亞人真的是個很奇怪的生物。儅他們侮辱我的時候他們並不知道他們也在侮辱著先知默罕默德，孫中山先生，和其他成千上萬曾經流放過的歷史偉人。

最後的問題是，爲什麽現在他們要我回去坐監，而之前他們堅決地認爲我應該保住自由之身不應該坐牢呢？只有白痴才需要我解釋吧！