Easier to talk than to do

As far as you are concerned, Mat Sabu can have an opinion and he is allowed to state what his opinion is. But he has to make sure that his opinion does not differ from yours. If he says the same thing as what you say, then well and fine. But if he states the opposite of what you believe, then this is not acceptable.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

It is easy to talk. Walking the talk is another thing altogether. Malaysian politicians can talk. They can talk till the cows come home. But they don’t mean what they say. Bikin tak serupa cakap, cakap tak serupa bikin.

On Merdeka Day, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak was trying to impress Malaysians by saying that the country is very democratic. What is the basis of this hypothesis? Is it just because we hold elections?

As I said in an earlier article, even Adolf Hitler held elections in Germany. This does not mean Germany was a democracy. Elections are no yardstick for classifying a country as a democracy. 

Many other dictators hold elections as well. But whether they are fair, free and clean elections (like what we have in Malaysia…sic) or whether they are rigged elections is another thing. But they do hold elections. Does this mean they are democracies?

The opposition too claims it is fighting for democracy. Is that so? Or is this bullshit?

Okay, let us give the opposition the benefit of the doubt and assume that it is truly fighting for democracy. Let us also assume, as Najib said, that Malaysia is a true democracy. Now, let us put this to a test.

If the PAS Deputy President, Mat Sabu, makes a statement on the Bukit Kepong incident based on his belief and his understanding of the events, can both the opposition as well as the government allow this and accept it?

Currently, it appears like some in the opposition -- and many in the government -- will not allow Mat Sabu to have an opinion and to state his opinion. Why not? Why must his opinion and his statement be the same as yours? Why can’t it be different from yours?

Both the opposition as well as the government are the same. Both don’t allow and don’t tolerate different views. If you express a different view from them, then you are a pariah bastard.

Okay, forget about Bukit Kepong. Let’s instead go to the murder of JWW Birch on 2 November 1875 as he was having a berak (shit) along the Berak River…sorry, I meant Perak River.

Now, was his murderer, Dato’ Maharajalela, a criminal or a patriot?

Incidentally, just to digress a bit, when a person acts above the law and pushes his weight around with absolute disregard for everyone else, the Malays would say: dia bermaharajalela. So the name Maharajalela is synonymous with acting like the Mafia or like a gangster.

Anyway, back to the subject of the murder of JWW Birch. First of all, was he justly executed or was he martyred?

Did you know that they exiled Dato’ Maharajalela and his gang of conspirators to the Seychelles? So JWW Birch’s murderers must have been criminals. And they named many roads in Kuala Lumpur, Taping, Seremban, Penang, Ipoh, and Singapore after JWW Birch. So JWW Birch must have been a hero to have so many roads named after him.

But hold on, later they changed the name Jalan Birch in Taiping and Kuala Lumpur to Jalan Maharajalela. The excuse they gave was the Jalan Birch in Taiping and Kuala Lumpur were named after a different Birch, not the JWW Birch.

Whatever it is, there are a couple of roads named Jalan Maharajalela. So Dato’ Maharajalela must have been a hero then, not a criminal. Would they name roads after criminals like Botak Chin, Bentong Kali or Mona Fendi? Would Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman be renamed Jalan Chin Peng?

But JWW Birch was also a hero and there are many roads also named after him. That means both JWW Birch and Dato’ Maharajalela were heroes. But how can that be? They can’t have BOTH been heroes. Only one can be the hero. The other must be the criminal.

Now this is most interesting indeed. Was Dato’ Maharajalela a criminal or a hero? And was JWW Birch a martyr or someone biadap (insolent) towards the Sultan of Perak (as his murderers alleged) who deserved what happened to him?

Can I say that JWW Birch was a hero and that he was murdered because he was opposed to slavery and he tried to wipe out slavery in Perak? Will they allow me to have that opinion and to express this opinion?

But many would argue that the hero in this whole incident was Dato’ Maharajalela, not JWW Birch. But then, if you support what Dato’ Maharajalela did to JWW Birch, would that not make you a terrorist?

If you support the murder of JWW Birch because he was biadap towards the Sultan of Perak, then can I not also support the murder of many other people because they are also biadap towards the Sultan of Perak?

Nizar Jamaluddin, the ex-Menteri Besar of Perak, is also said to be biadap towards the Sultan of Perak (according to Umno, at least). Should we not also do to Nizar what they did to JWW Birch? Is it right for me to suggest the murder of Nizar (like what Umno would like to see)?

Hey, it is within my democratic right to have my own opinion and to openly state what my opinion is. If you can say that the murder of JWW Birch was right and that Dato’ Maharajalela was a hero, then I can also say that the murder of Nizar is right because he is just like JWW Birch -- as far as Umno’s opinion goes.

So you see, you don’t really care what my opinion is. You only want to make sure that my opinion is the same as yours. 

As far as you are concerned, Mat Sabu can have an opinion and he is allowed to state what his opinion is. But he has to make sure that his opinion does not differ from yours. If he says the same thing as what you say, then well and fine. But if he states the opposite of what you believe, then this is not acceptable.

And the Bukit Kepong issue is a good example. Even Karpal Singh said that Mat Sabu should retract his statement and apologise.

Why should Mat Sabu apologise?

If I say that Dato’ Maharajalela was a murderer and that JWW Birch was a hero who opposed slavery and was murdered for his righteousness, and if the Malays start foaming at the mouth and go berserk (like they always do), is Karpal going to ask me to retract my statement and apologise? Are they going to make a police report against me and are the police going to call me up for my statement to be recorded?

Democracy podah! I am allowed the freedom to believe what I want to believe and the freedom to express my opinion only as long as this does not run contra to your own beliefs and opinion.

And both the opposition and the government are the same. They both do not respect these freedoms although they shout and scream about democracy.

In fact, the opposition is worse.

If I were to say that Najib should resign because he is not qualified to remain as the Prime Minister, the opposition supporters would clap, cheer, applaud and would call me a true son of Malaysia and a patriot.

But if I were to say that Anwar Ibrahim should resign because he is not qualified to remain as the Opposition Leader, the opposition supporters would curse me and call me a turncoat who has been bought off by the government.

But then Khir Toyo also resigned as the Opposition Leader for Selangor after he was charged in court. That, you would say, is the correct thing to do. But if I say that Anwar should follow Khir Toyo’s example, you cannot agree to this.

Ah, that is because Anwar was unjustly charged, you will argue. Was Khir Toyo justly charged? If Khir Toyo was charged because he committed an act of corruption, then why only charge him? Thousands of others should also be charged -- the Prime Minister, IGP, AG, etc., included.

Khir Toyo was charged because his enemies within Umno wanted to get rid of him, not because he is corrupt (although I do admit he is corrupt). If it is because he is corrupt, then he should not be the only one facing trial. 

That is the reality of the situation. The opposition does not understand the meaning of democracy, freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of association, etc., just like the government. The opposition does not respect democracy, freedom of opinion, freedom of expression, freedom of association, etc., just like the government.

Same same lah!