Dear Mr Yaacob,
It is most heartening to know that you disagreed with the remarks made by the Minister Mentor on the issue of Muslims and their integration in Singapore society. (“Muslims can be both religious and patriotic” – The Sunday Times, 30 Jan)
It is also very reassuring to hear you say: ”As far as government policy is concerned, we want to integrate everybody, irrespective of race or religion. Let’s focus on that.”
Actually I do not understand why you urged us to focus on “that”. I would have thought that it was precisely because the MM’s remarks were potentially divisive that resulted in “some unhappiness among Muslims”. On that note, you may be mistaken too. It wasn’t just some Muslims who were unhappy. I think non-Muslims were outraged too. So I agree with you that this is actually a very good sign. It shows that in general, Singaporeans as a whole are already “focussing on integrating everybody irrespective of race and religion.” I am glad that the government is also doing it’s part to focus on “that” by at least disagreeing with the MM’s view.
There is another thing you said that I find puzzling as well. You asked us to “look at this rationally, read the book and understand where he’s coming from.” You also said: “And don’t just read one book, see MM in his whole lifespan and the struggles he has gone through.” (I hope this is a not a sales pitch for his new book and his older memoirs. From what has been reported, the book is doing tremendously well.)
I do not understand why on one hand you expected the strong reaction, and on the other hand tell us to look at things rationally from a wider perspective. Are you saying that the unhappiness is irrational? Are you likewise suggesting that we only see things from a very narrow perspective – no matter how justified the anger is?
I beg your pardon if I had misunderstood you. You have to understand where we common folks are coming from, being frequently urged to see things from the government’s perspectives:
Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Vivian Balakrishnan said: “Now we all make mistakes. But let’s put things in perspective. This is a major embarrassment but this is not a disaster.” (Straits Times 24 Sep 2010)
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has asked Singaporeans to view problems such as overcrowding in trains and increasing property prices in perspective, and remember those who are less fortunate. (Channel NewsAsia, 4 sep 2010)
He (DPM Teo Chee Hean) had made his point: Singaporeans have to keep the discussion about immigration in perspective. (Straits Times 12 Sep 2010)
Rather than the constant reminders, shouldn’t addressing the unhappiness and taking it very seriously be the rational thing to do? Do you not see that it could be a sign of a growing chasm between the government and the people? So much so that it has become a habit for your colleagues to insist that they had been misrepresented everytime there was an uproar over some remarks they made. Now if they were truly connected to the ground, would there had been so many cases of miscommunications?
I am also very touched by your ability to look deeper into the MM’s remarks and offer an interpretation that he is describing a worst-case scenario, (which I have to disagree with – you can read this article “Lee Kuan Yew: Race, Culture and Genes” to understand why) and that his views were formed by the struggles he has gone through.
But don’t you agree that everyone’s perspectives are formed by what we go through in life?
Suppose someone was scarred by a cat at a very young age and grows up to become a cat-killer. Seen in the context of his past, his actions are understandable, but does it make them any more acceptable?
Furthermore, while in your own words, the MM’s views were relevant 40 years ago, but maybe not so now, we must not forget that his words are not the foolish utterance of a retired private citizen stuck in the past, but the words of a highly influential and respected person who is often seen as being synonymous with the PAP – even if he has professed to have taken only a forecaster role within the Cabinet.
Thus I would have to disagree with your call to put things in perspective.
Frankly, I’ve had quite enough of ‘perspectives’. I would very much prefer that the government own up to its boo-boos for a change. Now that’s a hard truth I hope you can swallow.
Yours sincerely,
Joshua Chiang
30 Jan 2011
The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own and is not representation of TOC as a whole.
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Sack Lee Kuan Yew!
That MM post is a farce, anyway. Better go play chess or fly kite. What forecasting?
Hi Joshua, thanks for the very well written letter putting things in the CORRECT perspective.
RED-man, 31 January 2011
what are S’poreans paying?
good point, remember MM said something about superstition, how irrational they are? MM claiming he is agnostic, its only logical to believe he does not believe in any superstition.
so if an agnostic claims to believe in any sort of forecasting he is in fact contradicting himself. afterall, his sense of hair-splitting pragmatism has permeated the subconciense of many S’poreans- i being 1 of them (i mean us).
Mr. LEE KUAN YEW , WHY YOU SEE ME LIKE THAT
Mr. Lee Kwan Yew is trapped in his unconscious prejudice and subtly bias . The Muslims are distinct and separate , they discourage integration in the Singaporean communities . All religions can be integrated but not Islam . Singaporean were progressing until the surge of Islam came the other communities have easier integration , he says . He calls for the Muslim community to “be less strict on Islamic observances.” In other words , the Muslim let it be less observance with the Islamic laws and practices . Islam is an hinderance for Singapore communities to integrate and progress .
Wow! he sounds like giving out a fatwa to the Muslims . Coming from the Senior wise-Pop Minister is really something . A mellow fatwa but mischievously religious with the spray of unconsciously prejudice . Perhaps , he meant to belittle his majority Muslim neighbors and not aware of his intentions . Or perhaps , he did something else to mitigate his city communities and still unaware of his intentions . Is this the brain of a ‘great’ statesman that everyone praises for ?
Like many leaders of his age , we expect more words of wisdom and articulation rather than making swift judgement of Muslim and Islam . At time , he does not know that influences have manipulated him . From his unconscious prejudice and bias have produced misunderstanding among the Muslim communities of the regions . To hear that we are also not aware that we have being manipulated too . It creates the conflict of minds among the ethnic groups and perhaps the Nations . For what ? .
The legacy of Mr. Lee Kwan Yew is mundane and in the making of his fatwa has shaken the heavenly minds and faith . As someone says , the earthly mind is devilish polluted and Mr. Lee Kwan Yew is not spare either . I bet you if you ask him , how you have to come out with all those swift judgement about the Muslim and Islam . He will tell you that it hinders for a just-utopian social fabric of Singapore where progress and integration to prevail . He will never tell you about his unconscious prejudice and bias come from that has led him to that answer .It is because he is not aware of it . When the ‘ poll results show that 90 percent of Singaporeans have no problem with having a non-Chinese PM .’ He says , it is all “utter rubbish .”
I have no doubt that he is a great husbandry leader of the city ‘ Nation’ Singapore but certainly a paranoia . To bear that his city-island ‘ Nation ‘ is surrounded by ‘ hostile’ Muslim population , is something unbearable to him and his manipulated groupies . With his unconscious prejudices and biases at birth , I can hardly imagine what has became of his thinking as a Mentor Minister of the Republic . He scares the hell of me by his thinking . And by being his neighbor just across the strait of Johor , I fear he could perceive and manipulate me to turn into a suicide bomber . I hope I am the only one who feels so .
Mr. Lee Kwan Yew , WHY YOU MAKE ME THINK LIKE THAT OF YOU .
One perspective for the leaders, another for common folks.
If someone else were to write something like this, “hard truths” so as to be “of value”, they would be hauled up and put behind bars, possibly without trial.
What was Mas Selamat’s perspective and that of his niece when she harboured him as any loving family would? In the Govt’s eyes, these are dangerous actions not to be condone, and here is a seasoned politician telling people of a certain faith to loosen up, indirectly saying that they are falling out of line compared with others. How much does MM Lee know about other faiths to be able to make a sweeping statement like that? Or is he merely using them to whip Muslims into shape? Is it not the superficial and obvious things that form the most inaccurate perspectives? A little knowledge is definitely worse than no knowledge in this case.
I noted he used the term “Arab nations”. I would urge the govt to be more discerning in what they say. Just because Singapore has seen a certain amount of glitz doesn’t mean we should go around make our perspectives known, or putting them as best practices for others. Everyone has unique experience, and every nation their own history, circumstances and challenges. There is a time to let results speak for themselves, instead of harping or wagging the finger over and over again. We have enough challenges of our own. There is real work to be done to remake this mess of a nation where people are not trusted to be able to manage their monies even after having worked a lifetime, where people are imported under the guise of economic needs without consideration for the sweeping job displacements and changing social landscape, where growth at all costs has only benefited the rich and enslaved the average Joe. Do some real work instead of forecasting, lecturing and writing books.
Logicalman
I noted he used the term “Arab nations”. I would urge the govt to be more discerning in what they say.
…………
you wanna know why he xipei tulan the Arabs nations?
he the 1st 1 to visit Qatar for almost a month(you thin he goe there to ride a camel nia mey? he went there durin the WORLD pigflu virus) to sell investments
his kaki 2ndincommand the peanut senileminister went to Iran to sell thread & needles for weavin flyin carpets
his son our royale prince went to saudi to sell machineries
all 3 come back with a few dried dates and none of them even brought back 1 bloomin camel
during the iraqi war we supported by sendin in troops and after the war? we cannot even closed 1 contract sellin recycled jumbuan paper from the Termasick inc factories in ayer rajah
worst of all..we kanna prayed out by Dubai when they compete against our Temasick Inc and won contracts in europe
I’m getting my whole lot of extended family to not vote for PAP this time if LKY is not reprimanded appropriately.
We are still waiting for MM Lee to apologise, in the meantime, a FB group has been set up to elicit enough support with hope that the government will see that there is sufficient support against MM Lee’s views.
Do join, ‘Islam isn’t a hindrance to national integration. MM Lee, apologise’
This group believes in ‘Religious Understanding and Mutual Respect’ is the key to a more cohesive society rather than the government’s call for tolerance.
let me relate an incident recently at a food centre. a chinese man sat at a table near a muslim stall eating his filipino bbq pork. a few moments later the owner of the stall told him it was a muslim table n he cannot eat thre. the man was shocked n was nt happy. a young malay sitting nearby immediately took offence at the man’s words n wanted to pick a fight. tempers were flared n the owner moved to restrained the young man.
here’s my question. will all muslims react this way?
while the chinese man could not be condoned for his actions, he did say it was the only seat he could find but the owner said it was the stall’s table n stated that the pork made him sick.
question again. if muslims are ‘sick’ when they see pork doesn’t this mean there will b eventually segregation and exclusive muslim coffee shops in singapore?
finally if a young man can butt in for such an incident what will happen in a more serious scenario?
so is the old man right in his assessments?
Halal, 6 February 2011
interesting scenerio, highly probable too. but is there such a thing as a muslim table? or a Hindu, a Christian table? how about an agnostic one? vegetarian leh?
i know of a Muslim stall wholely run by a Muslim family. they occupy the whole shop, only in that instant i would deem the stall do not encourage non Halal food of any kind to be consumed in the premises. & yes, the tables can be deemed “Muslim Table”, for want of a better term.
does the owner of the Muslim stall have the right to deny non-Halal food from being consumed at the table? depends on context, like the above i stated?
~ makes me sick is a slippery slope that is best avoided. this line of reasoning can be easily abused by anyone who just wants to have it his/her way. can’t be good for society.
All bank notes are non halal because they have been handled by so many infidels…so Muslims should not handle money.
Bank notes is haram…
Wow!!! All this issue about halal non halal coffee shop tables and chairs sitting and all of this… Is that all what it means of Mr LKY Hard Truths? On my my… If this is what Mr LKY meant to state, yes truly enough, LKY is dividing the people from the tiny issue of sitting together and holding the bank notes. Great LKY, isn’t he? So ladies and gentlemen, this is a great man who can divide and rule. So who can stop him now? Let us watch and see.
So let us go on and argue and quarrel over the smallest trivial matter day in day out. So LKY shall be happy to impose the greatest policy ever told. The PAP POLICY. Even Yaacob is under LKY remote control. Who dares? We shall see.
Every people have their sensitivities and sensibilities.Some Chinese dont like the oily smell of Indians whom they meet in the lifts. They should not show annoyance of any kind and be patient. Some Muslims dont like the smell of pork. They could move away .Dont show annoyance. Chinese funeral and wayang can be noisy. Be tolerant and dont show annoyance.In the MRT a lot of irregular things happen upseting conservative people. They should handle it diplomatically without encouraging vulgar behaviour right smack in the train.
A Cambodian priest asked why Muslims dont bow down before Buddha statue. Muslims are not allowed to bow down before any statue or image even if there was an image of Muhammad the Prophet. In any case images of Muhammad are not allowed.
“Dont revile what they worship lest they in ignorance revile God.”
btw there were several instances when LKY spoke well of Islam. For example he said that the Malay community faced less danger from Westernization because of Islam. He said that the good values and behaviour of his colleague Haji Yaacob Mohd in contrast to some UMNO people was becasue he followed his Islamic religion unlike the others.On a state visit to Pakistan he said that “Muslims carried the torch of science…….from 8th century to 12 century”
The more learned a Muslim is the more tolerant he becomes.Unfortunately mediocrity is the image of Muslim teachers here unlike those who are especially invited to Singapore to talk about Islam.And LKY’s book is the price we pay for the mediocrity. Still too Bapak LKY, i say there are many books that he could have read which should have influenced his views for the better.Let me name a few seminal books
Karen Armstrong” A Prophet For Our Times”
Weeramantry one time Vice President of International Court of Justice “Islamic Jurisprudence”
“Diplomacy in Early Islam” by Afzal Iqbal
a person who was also trained in English law like LKY
“Preaching of Islam” by Sir Thomas Arnold
” Ideoology of the Future” Dr Rafiuddin .This book was considered an original contribution to learning by Dr Radakrishnan.
“Cultural Side of Islam” by Marmaduke Pickthall
“Autobiography of Malcolm X”
And as the immutable Constitution of Islam is the Quran, he should get an English translation in modern English
I recommend “The Message of Quran” by Muhammad Asad a Jewish Christian convert to Islam who also wrote “Journey to Mecca”
But LKY may be thinking of the distortions of Muslims of Family Law and I recommend Dr Tanzilur Rahman’s Muslim Personal Code, Dr Hamudah Abdalati’s Muslim Family Structure and with regard to criminal punishments “Punishment for Apostasy in Islam” which proofs that there is no death sentence in Islam for apostasy, for blasphemy , treason etc etc Indeed there are no mandatory death sentences in Islam for any offence not even amputation of the hand for theft as argued by a young descendant of Prophet Muhammad in the court of Siraj Ad Daula a thousand years ago.Dont take the metaphor for the literal like in the Quranic “Hell is his Mother”
Our own asatiza may find all these incredulous.
Sorry for the obvious mistakes from speed typing.
There is so much ignorance of what the Quran teaches that I can only blame our teachers and the English media which our leaders read. Any good issue about Islam is sent to the Malay media , the Berita Harian as if all Muslims are Malays. In any case more Malays are reading and communicating in English these days and one does not masuk Melayu when one becomes a Muslim
The English media should start correcting their attitude rather than sensationalising negative things. In the British times it was much better but after Iranian Revolution and Sept 11 which was done by the Mossad according to Mahathir and many others, it was Islam bashing even though MUIS wrote to the Straits Times to stop doing so.
I would agree with Badalabdal.. It is also sad and disappointed that the Darul Arqam of Singapore, which has multi races of Muslims, did not even commented neither argued.
When Americans sent their boys to Vietnam and they started killing and torturing on a Satanic scale they already assured serious problems for American society, because these soldiers became deranged when they returned home,at least a strong percentage of them. This is what Malcolm X said when he retorted”The chickens have come home to roost” when Kennedy was assasinated.
Likewise when Straits Times projects an distorted image of Islam, there will be people believing in it and accepting it . This poses problems for Muslims in Singapore. Non Muslims will look askance at Muslims and always be suspicious. We have to move away from Leslie Fong’s style despite his possibly good intentions for Singapore. Check it up at http://www.nl.sg
At last a forum where I can write freely and rationally.
To some extent I dont blame Bapak Lee Kuan Yew for his misinterpretations of Islam. He obviously did not learn from Dr Zaki Badawi who taught at the University of Singapore in the 60s nor Dr Ahmad Ibrahim who was sent to Cairo as Ambassador by LKY. He had a horrible experience as a lawyer during Mari Hertogh. It left a horrible taste in his mouth for defending some criminals. That was what I understood.
Unfortunately some rascals were not charged . I believe that the Indian National Army which completely disagreed with Gandhi’s non violence or ahimsa had a hand in it but this was not properly looked into although one of the top lieutenants was involved directly not for the killing which he did not believe in but for unnecessarily heightening the feelings of anti British nationalistic elements including the communists.
When Bapak LKY was in Malaysia the ultras also treated him badly. He was called Hantu Raya although calling people names is forbidden by Islam explicitly. They probably did not know Islam at all. And of course LKY was right about the Sultans but the Sedition Act wont allow talking about Sultans and this itself this Sedition Act is an unIslamic, patently unIslamic legislation. How could they be Guardians of Religion in some Malaysian states? The Quran does not favour Sultanate system nor theocracy but for want of a better word “Theo-Democracy’
Salam
“When you judge, be fair , even if it be against yourself.” Quran
@mice is nice
agreed if the the whole row or section is being occupied by muslim stalls than obviously it wd b insensitive to eat non-halal. than back again to my question,will this then lead to further segregation n exclusiveness?
Fr my observation, the stall owner was just upset that someone ‘took’ his table n seat w/o asking but to plead religious sensitivity right off the bat makes people rather uncomfortable isn’t it?
the ‘sick’ comment was prob just antr justification to deny the man the table bec I’m quite sure this is not how my other muslim friends feel. i’ve heard of friends who travel to far flung countries whr halal food might not be easily available but have no prob w the food.
Dear Halal,
The Muslim law about food and drinks is that these must be Lawful (Halal) and Pure.
Many people misunderstand about the lawful requirements of Muslim diet. The Quran commands the Muslims to eat what is lawful and pure but the halal joints may provide lawful or halal foods but they are mostly not pure foods. Now as we know fowl and cattle are kept in cruel conditons in farms. The chicken is cooped up , fed a lot but not allowed to move. This is haram. The cattle too are cooped up and not grazing freely. This is against nature and thus Haram Furthermore they are highly chemicalised. Accordingly there are no genuine lawful and pure foods and the Muslims will be forced to go vegetarian provided they do not have the insidious chemicals that slowly kills people.
So here we can promote vegetarian and fruitarian food and thus have a common platform with Buddhists, Hindus etc .
And one more thing which I learned from reading Berita Harian regularly is that if the toilets in restaurants are not clean and food handlers use them , then how come we can say that the foods and drinks are lawful and pure.
halal, 12 February 2011
in a food court setting where stalls have foods of different religions. the table/s infront of Muslim, Buddhist, Vegetarian, etc stalls does not automatically mean that the stall owns the table. this is where your “observation” is flawed. if so, it is pointless to continue with it unless a better scenerio is presented.
its not any convincing to say that the “Muslim” table was taken. care to explain how you conclued the table belong solely to the stall owner?
one man’s food, may be another man’s poison. but this isn’t like smoking, where health issues affect all, regardless or race, religion, gender & age.
may i point out 2 examples that i find subjective?
1) “someone ‘took’ his table n seat…”
2) “the ’sick’ comment was prob just antr justification to deny the man the table”
i have raised what i have for point (1). as for point (2), this is a form of discrimination…
Rationalist, 11 February 2011
i was replying in response to what i deem an unfair scenerio. it is a diversion from the main topic but IMPO worth expanding on.
i will try my best to keep it relevent to the main topic.
:)
@mice is nice
I shld clarify that this was nt at a food court or hawker centre whre the tables are fixed. the concept is similar to what we have at lau pa sat n in this case a single table was put next to the stall w a few chairs. Hence the owner perhaps has rightful claim to this table.
My main point here is whether our common space has shrunk or expanded. if we follow the owner’s point of view, it has shrunk and the ‘hard truth’ may be right.
The second issue relates to the first. if pork makes a muslim ‘sick’(alt i think the owner just said that to get ‘his’ table back)does that mean we need to ensure that there is always a muslim section in an eating area wherefore only mulim food is allowed to be consumed even in peak hours? I’ve also noticed this happens in army camps where there is direct segregation including utensils.
This imho is exactly what the old man has concluded n which yacob is trying to defend.
Halal, 12 February 2011
there are times when “perhaps” isn’t good enough. this is 1 example where the answer has to be definitive. either the owner has the rightful claim or he/she does not, there can be no room for perhaps.
yet again an “if”, as in “if pork makes a Muslim sick”. if not, how? this alone answers the question on the need to segregate Muslim food being consumed at certain tables- there is no need to go to that extent.
as for army camps, a possible reason why its done in the way you describe is likely due to economy of scale. in army camps there is only Halal & non-Halal. there is not Buddhist or vegetarian, etc food. such practise could also have been influenced by someone from the (very) top. the power of influence, no need to give order at all, use EQ!
the old man should go live like the man on the street more often. S’pore is not a Muslim country, & local Muslims do not make a fuss about racy advertisements hawking underwear on the streets, in print or on TV. the only intolerant chap is an old man who’s party lead gahmen that only allows him to transgress all OB markers, but deals harshly with anyone else who does likewise.
A Singaporean Muslim’s response to LKY’s statements about Islam and Muslims in his book ” Lee Kuan Yew : Some Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going ”
http://asingaporeanmuslim.blogspot.com/2011/03/real-hard-truths-open-letter-to-mm-lee.html
This response was sent as an Open Letter via email to LKY, Members of Parliament, other individuals in the Singapore Government & members of the Singaporean Muslim community.