What does Umno Islam value?There is something insidious and disconcerting when self-appointed men of godUMNO

WHAT DOES UMNO VALUE?

THE disproportionate response to the recent “slipper garland” proposal by an MIC delegate highlights once again what the Umno-led Barisan Nasional (BN) government really values above all else.It is so ironic that in a country which can trace a majority of its most persistent ills to periodic narrow, insular, non-secular and outright communal ranting of its various religious leaders, those carrying the torch on behalf of their respective flocks should come together on one platform to denounce . Had they been so united in talking about the real diseases that afflict our country – intolerance, nepotism, corruption, indiscipline, regionalism and even an indigenous brand of racism –MALAYSIA would have been a far better, and safer, place to be in.

Umno politicians have been falling over themselves in the rush to defend Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad against an MIC delegate’s suggestion to garland the former premier’s portrait with slippers.

Tan Sri Muhiyiddin Yassin, Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein and Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir were quick to express their disappointment, shock and hurt at M Sukumaran’s “insolent, rude and extreme” remarks made during the recent MIC general assembly. Cheras Umno division chief Datuk Syed Ali Alhabshee stated that insulting Mahathir was akin to insulting all Malay Malaysians, although how that is true was not established. The way the reverends are fretting and fuming about the great degree of damage can cause to the population, one would almost think that the most urgent and present dangers threatening humanity and the planet itself not global warming and terrorism.

Utusan Malaysia, which reported on these leaders’ responses, also made it clear its indignation. Jangan biadab, screamed its front page on 15 Sept 2009. MIC perlu minta maaf, blared another headline on their four-page coverage of the issue. Four-page? Yes, that’s right.

Amidst the clamour, Sukumaran was swiftlysuspended on 15 Sept 2009 by MIC president Datuk Seri S Samy Vellu, who himself had earlier criticised Dr Mahathir albeit without referring to any footwear. A heartfelt and humble apology was then given by the disgraced delegate, just two days after he was catapulted into the limelight by his offending statement.

“I regret having uttered those words (’slipper garland’). I regretted it very much. I sincerely hope Mahathir will accept my apology,” Malaysiakinireported him as saying. “I was carried away emotionally when I made the remark which had seriously hurt the feelings of Mahathir,” he added.

Slippers vs cow-head and threats

Now, let’s compare Hishammuddin’s response to the slipper suggestion with his response towards the cow-head protesters who threatened violence if a Hindu temple was relocated to their neighbourhood in Shah Alam.

“I view this suggestion as extreme and disrespectful. We must never forget our values and culture of respecting others. If we want others to respect us, then we must accord respect to others,” The Star quoted the home minister as saying on 15 Sept 2009.

One wishes Hishammuddin was referring to the cow-head protesters, but he wasn’t. He was chastising the MIC delegate for his slipper suggestion.

In fact, Hishammuddin had, several days earlier, welcomed the cow-head protesters into his office and defended them in a press conference, a video report of which the government now wants Malaysiakini to remove from its news site.

Embarrassing doesn’t even describe the value judgement that an Umno vice-president and cabinet member has displayed in his responses towards these two issues — one a merely rude suggestion, and the other a serious show of intolerance and threat of violence.Which brings us to two important questions: on what basis or empirical evidence are faith-based texts, and religion itself, being interpreted by the holies and, two, what exactly are the dangers of legalizing

The answers to both are not very difficult. The clerics do not have a hotline to God, even if He existed, and really don’t know His “will and design’’. They are, therefore, reading the texts in a manner that is arbitrary. This is not surprising, though, as clerics of all “mainline’’ religions have always behaved in one particular manner all through history – castigating and throwing out anyone whose behaviour they can’t fathom and tolerate, banishing all who don’t conform to strict laws of living made not by an unseen God but by them and their predecessors. The logic was simple, aimed at bulldozing all into falling in one line so that there is no scope for breaking away and thereby challenging their authority by setting up separate entities. It is as clear as day that the priests aren’t reading it right because the one essential principle of all faith – be it Hinduism, Islam, Sikhism, Christianity, Jainism – is love and acceptance, not rejection. So when did hatred slip into the holy discourse?

And even though Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin did condemn the protesters, no Umno leader has called for the cow-head protesters to apologise to all Malaysians for their threat of violence. Selangor Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo even explained, on behalf of the protesters, that the cow head was actually meant to show how “stupid”THE HINDUS WHO BELIEF IN MANY GODS INCLUDING THE STUPID COW

Slippers vs Penan

Umno leaders have also been alarmingly silent about the revelation by a government-appointed task force of the sexual abuse of Penanwomen and girls in Sarawak by timber company workers.

READMORE CLICKBELOW

UMNO are relentless in continuing with their conceit, their deceit and their arrogance towards the Rakyat instead of getting their house in order