`




THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!

Tuesday, July 4, 2017

MIC’s role as apologist for Umno-BN



YOURSAY | ‘MIC is in no position to criticise their masters for the injustices Indians suffer.’
Vijay47: Penang MIC Youth chief M Pirakash announced that the Politeknik Seberang Perai (PSP) management team has denied telling former canteen operator Gopi Krishnan Gopal to convert to Islam so that he could continue operating his stall at the school.
Whenever an Indian is subjected to racial or religious abuse or discrimination, the one thing we can be unfailingly assured of is that MIC will take on the role of apologist for the aggressor and criticise the victim.
The heroes of MIC, like treasurer-general Vell Paari, can be expected to surface only when they have something offensive to say about the opposition. Party president Dr S Subramaniam would again be struck dumb.
MIC's pitiful and contemptible stand can be attributed to their awareness that they are in no position to condemn the Malays or Umno for the injustices Indians suffer.
So the better response is to bury their common heads in the mud and assume a Mahatma Gandhi posture, hence we have deputy education minister P Kamalanathan forgiving Malay thugs who assault him.
Forgiveness isn’t wrong, but to MIC, the alternative is unthinkable. Therefore, that party of beggars will continue to be subservient to their lords and political masters, hoping and praying in vain that this will earn them some merit. MCA is hardly better.
Aries46: The issue is, why was Gopi's contract terminated, and how does PSP resolve this matter amicably?
Both Pirakash and Kamalanathan claim that the termination was an “administrative matter”. That is clearly a cop-out by MIC to protect the PSP management.
As to your claim that PSP director Zulkifli Ariffin has conceded to assist Gopi in obtaining a halal certificate, why didn't he do it at the outset if it was a contract requirement? Why only now? Is he also withdrawing Gopi’s termination?
And MIC has no business politicising Penang deputy chief minister P Ramasamy’s role. If not for him, MIC leaders would have conveniently sided with PSP, dumped Gopi, washed their hands off the matter.
Anonymous 2415891461978791: Is getting a halal certificate the same thing as serving only halal food?
If the requirement is that Gopi serves only halal food to his largely non-Muslim customers, that seems quite silly, pointless, and discriminatory.
There are non-halal eateries all over the country, and Muslims manage to navigate around them without much difficulty. This management seems intent on creating a hostile environment for a non-Muslim business.
Fairperson: Pirakash, it is no point asking the PSP director about the conversion issue. No fool will admit that. It was a one-on-one conversation, where both could be right and wrong.
The way we look at what is happening around us, I will lean in favour of believing what Gopi said. Just because you have to support your MIC minister, you are defending him.
Come to your senses. In the first place, halal certification should not be forced upon non-Muslims. If the Muslims do not want to eat in a non-Muslim eatery, they have a choice to go to halal-certified stalls. But do not deny the rights of non-Muslims to choose the food they want.
6th Generation Immigrant: Does this mean or indicate that one day soon, all foods served in Malaysia by Muslims and non-Muslims must be halal-certified?
Malaysia should let things develop in their own time, instead of blindly enforcing rules and regulations.
Look at how nasi lemak, roti canai, murukku, kueh nyonya, Hainanese chicken rice, and other dishes have all developed through time, harmoniously supported or frequented by all races and cultures living in Malaysia.
This is the real melting pot, not a divisive halal rule.
SusahKes: MIC has downplayed allegations that it received funding directly from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's personal accounts, as well as claims that the money consisted of misappropriated public funds.
MIC president Subramaniam was quoted as saying, "As far as we are concerned, the money came from BN".
But I thought, under the Anti-Money Laundering Act 1997 (AMLA), a recipient must take the necessary precautions to determine the source of funding, and whether if it is from legal sources. Just ask anyone investigated or questioned by the authorities on AMLA, and they would tell you so.
But then again, this is Bolehland; one rule for them, and another for the rest of us.
Bluemountains: How can the good doctor not know whether the cheque is from BN or Najib?
It's so simple. If it's from BN, it must have more than one signature; BN being a registered organisation under the Societies Act 1966. If it's from Najib, it will only have one signature.
So, how many signatures were there on the cheques? In case you are not sure, you can always apply to the bank for a copy.
Oscar Kilo: They're all a bunch of alleged thieves taking the gullible folks for a ride. The rest of us knowledgeable folks can only hope for other countries to indirectly punish the 1MDB criminals.
It's extra painful to pay taxes knowing that our hard-earned money is allegedly being embezzled and laundered for the private benefit of corrupt politicians.
Gaji Buta: By opening his mouth, Subramaniam has only confirmed he is not interested in the truth and is proud to be known as an ignorant fool.
Cocomomo: Pretending not to know, or not wanting to know, where the money came from does not mean you are not guilty.

If it came from stolen money, like it is allegedly in this case, or from the proceeds of corruption, you as the recipient pretending not to know are just as guilty.- Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment