At a time where it appears as though Najib is caught between a rock and a hard place to openly state his views on Perkasa, he has instead shown that there is more to the issue than just being forced by some parties to choose between 'endorsing' or 'opposing' the vocal Malay rights group. In a somewhat carefully delivered response, Najib made clear that extremists would not be tolerated, but fell short of naming any particular NGO or individual. To quote off TheMalaysianInsider ; “No, we do not want to be in conflict with any NGO,” he firmly said. Najib went further to play down Perkasa’s significance as a pressure group, pointing out that as far as Umno was concerned, Perkasa was just like any other NGO. “It is just like any other NGO. We have so many NGOs. There are times we can agree, and there are times we cannot agree,” he said. No doubt it's a political statement. But I think Najib has learnt something from Obama, or it could well just be a coincidence. Remembe

"So it is academic to keep talking about it. I don't know why other PAS leaders keep on talking about, it (sic) to find themselves getting bashed by others," he said. (Malaysiakini, Sept 16) I think that is by far the most strongest critic of the Islamic state agenda coming from a PAS national leader. And if I understand it well, Kuala Selangor MP and PAS Central Committee member Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad has basically trashed off his party's ultimate political agenda - or Utopia according to him - of establishing an Islamic state. Reading his statement made at a seminar at UCSI University is like imagining listening to some UMNO politician challenging the special position of Malays/Article 153 Federal Constitution or some DAP chap criticising its age-old political mantra of "Malaysian Malaysia". Dr Dzulkifli added that, "..it (Islamic state) may be our life-long aspiration. But by looking at our demographics, it is only academic to us... We cannot simply pus

“Shock the world into focus …get people to start asking hard questions …remind the world we still have freedom of speech … expose the truth … [and] force the world into action.” Showing no sign of backing down under growing pressure, the Florida church planning to burn copies of the Quran on the anniversary of 9/11 offered “five more reasons” for doing so on Tuesday. It also took a swipe at critics, including “U.S. generals,” over freedom of speech. An issue that has been simmering for two months sparked a fresh media frenzy following General David Petraeus’ warning Monday that the planned Quran-burning by the Gainesville-based Dove World Outreach Center could endanger American troops in Afghanistan and be used to incite violence around the world. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Tuesday evening commented to a mostly Muslim audience on Dove World pastor Terry Jones’ “plans to burn the Holy Quran on September 11.” [ Read more ] So there you have it.. When freedom of speech is bein

This, in my view, is one of the best responses on the 'Allah' issue. Taken from TheStar's Saturday Business section on Dr Chandra Muzaffar . The crux of the matter is to understand the underlying concerns of both Muslims and Christians, which sadly is very much lacking in our society today. Resolving the problem isn't just about taking sides. It is not just a matter of whether or not you agree with the term Allah. The problems and solutions are far more complicated and delicate than that. Read on.. How best can Malaysia resolve the “Allah” controversy and find a win-win solution? Suzannah Ayub, Raub It is important for both sides to be honest and truthful about the underlying issues that surround the controversy. Christians and other non-Muslims in Malaysia should acknowledge the simple truth that for the last 1,400 years, the term “Allah” has been shaped by Islamic theology. This is why in any dictionary or encyclopedia, Allah is defined as “the Islamic concept of God”