The Hindraff issue is getting complicated for Hindu and Malaysia Govt Options

[galvatron]

The HINDRAF issue is getting complicated for the ethnic Hindus and the Malayasia Govt (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_neutral.gif)
http://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=1491

This letter was written to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown by Hindu Rights Action force (HINDRAF) Legal Advisor Mr. P. Uthayakumar. One may wonder why this letter was written to British Prime Minister. The answer is because the ethnic minority Indians in Malaysia was brought into Malaysia by the British some 200 over years ago. Since independence in 1957, the Malaysian Indians have been a part of Malaysian community. But we must not forget that Malaysia is an Islamic nation.

The issue of the arrest of 24 HINDRAF members and the consequent developments can’t be viewed as a simple issue. On the one hand, the Malaysian Government’s inadequacy of not only the absence of appropriate laws to deal with such a situation but also of the power that it should have had resting with the police under the Police Act rendering it helpless and the underlying fear of the Ethnic Indians’ movement gathering momentum over a period of time following the impressive and unprecedented demonstration of a gathering comprising 20,000 people. On the other hand the genuine concern of the ethnic Indians suffering on account of indifference shown to them over a long period have complicated matters so much that no solution can be visualized in the near future.


Right now the Malaysian Government is in a jam. It finds itself unprepared to deal with the situation not only to the satisfaction of the Malaysian Ethnic Indians but also to the India and other Common Wealth countries so much so that the courts in Malaysia too would find it difficult to untangle the issue. From the prevailing circumstances even the lawyers fighting the case of HINDRAF members will have to scratch their heads a bit. Matters extending over a longer period are not easy to tackle. There are facts that have changed and re-changed umpteen times.

The Babari Masjid or the Ram Setu issues in back in India similar in nature too are not open to easy solutions. A lot of patience and the spirit of give and take are essential. Bertrand Russel has said, “For countries to enjoy liberty some liberty will have to be sacrificed.” But then there are always people who are seldom inclined to make sacrifice and budge from their stand. The matter of ethnic Indians in Malaysia is not one with a recent history. The mere reference to compensation from the British for the Indians being taken to Malaysia over 150 years ago adds to the complexity of the issue.

The demolition of a temple claimed by HINDRAF to have existed over 100 years would need a genuine verification of facts with reference to old records which may or may not be available. The government too will not be in a position to right away reject this claim and so too the courts. But whatever the circumstances, to a great extent the helplessness of the Malaysian Government are apparent. The people who are in the Government right now are in a pathetic predicament, caught up in a dilemma and would very much like to extricate themselves unscathed in the end. The members of HINDRAF too, it is hoped, know this fact and should not let any opportunity to slip away for finding a mutually agreed solution without either party having to lose face.

This is expected of all concerned with this ticklish issue. Overall the situation must not come to a point where this peace loving Indian community of Tamil origin may be forced to into terrorism as what has happened to the Sri Lankan Tamils. Let us hope for the best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gx3VRW_2-k...feature=related



This post has been edited by galvatron: Dec 20 2007, 10:25 PM

[Betong]

Hindoos always like to make unrealistic demand. They the one who not ready for change because we live in Malaysia not Indian. Legal demolation of hindoo temple nothing like illegal demolation of Babri mosque. First of all, Hindoos like to built their temple on the land that not belong to theirs.

[intelligentbliss]

...

This post has been edited by Jaimu-Jaimu: Dec 29 2007, 01:58 AM

[swingdoctor]

Hindoos always like to make unrealistic demand. They the one who not ready for change because we live in Malaysia not Indian. Legal demolation of hindoo temple nothing like illegal demolation of Babri mosque. First of all, Hindoos like to built their temple on the land that not belong to theirs.

I don't know if this applies to Malaysian law but according to Australian law, which is similar to Malaysian law, there is such a thing as squatters rights, besides the land isn't owned privately but is crown land.

The govnt often talks about each race having an equitable share of the riches in Malaysia, the basis of the NEP. Well what share of the wealth do the ethnic Indians in Malaysia posses?

The govnt makes it law that all new housing developments must provide land for mosques, well what about land for a Hindu temple? The govnt provides public funds for the building of mosques, how much would it cost to relocate a hindu temple?

[renzokuken]

sad that such a religionous group asking for money as a compensation

[renzokuken]

I don't know if this applies to Malaysian law but according to Australian law, which is similar to Malaysian law, there is such a thing as squatters rights, besides the land isn't owned privately but is crown land.

The govnt often talks about each race having an equitable share of the riches in Malaysia, the basis of the NEP. Well what share of the wealth do the ethnic Indians in Malaysia posses?

The govnt makes it law that all new housing developments must provide land for mosques, well what about land for a Hindu temple? The govnt provides public funds for the building of mosques, how much would it cost to relocate a hindu temple?

the gov is the one who build most of the temple in malaysia...does hindraf ever build any temple?

[swingdoctor]

sad that such a religionous group asking for money as a compensation

Why is it sad? The govnt provides funds to build mosques everyday, why is this any different? The sad thing is that they the Hindu's actually have to ask. Personally I feel that generally the govnt shouldn't provide funds for anybody, except in exceptional circumstances, this being one of them.

[swingdoctor]

the gov is the one who build most of the temple in malaysia...does hindraf ever build any temple?

As far as I understand the govnt provides no funds for any religious buildings except mosques. Instead, the govnt makes it difficult giving permission to build any religious houses besides mosques. I know personally of Christians waiting more then 10 years to obtain permission to build churches.

[fadlee]

i think all of them should be forced to migrate to india.. just let them suffer with the living condition there.. that would be a lesson to ungrateful citizen.

This post has been edited by fadlee: Dec 25 2007, 11:19 AM

[Shirui]

i think all of them should be forced to migrate to india.. just let them suffer with the living condition there.. that would be a lesson to ungrateful citizen.

Was that the best reply u could think of? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) What's next?Are u going to threaten to put us Chinese in concentration camps or ask us to get the fu-k back to China? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_rolleyes.gif)

This post has been edited by Shirui: Dec 25 2007, 07:46 PM

[fadlee]

Was that the best reply u could think of?

well at least im not that stupid like you to criticise people personally when i dont have anything brilliant to say regarding on the topic.. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

What's next?Are u going to threaten to put us Chinese in concentration camps or ask us to get the fu-k back to China? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_rolleyes.gif)

wtf? that would be awesome!! but i wont do that to my own kin.. lol
what i meant was hindraf u fukin bigot not indians..

This post has been edited by fadlee: Dec 25 2007, 08:53 PM

[polisrichard]

Was that the best reply u could think of? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) What's next?Are u going to threaten to put us Chinese in concentration camps or ask us to get the fu-k back to China? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/icon_rolleyes.gif)

whut da hell
r u stupid or what??
tiba2 je..
i'm agree with fadlee, send all HINDRAF members back to India,
they should learn, which life they prefer
India or Malaysia

[polisrichard]

As far as I understand the govnt provides no funds for any religious buildings except mosques. Instead, the govnt makes it difficult giving permission to build any religious houses besides mosques. I know personally of Christians waiting more then 10 years to obtain permission to build churches.

do you think non muslim country like UK or China funding the mosque,
mosque there were built by kindhearted businessmen or money from Muslim NGO,
and muslim pray 5 time everyday and every Friday, those are compulsory,
so we need place to do our prayer
do Christians, Hindus or Buddhas need to pray 5 time everyday??

[etano]

Yes, temples built on illegal lands should be demolished but in the case of Hindu temples, they just have no other alternative than to built temples on illegal land because the authorities do not allocate land to them and even on private land, permit for building temples is just so so difficult to obtain. The authorities should provide proper place for the temples before demolishing them.

This temples thing also draw my attention to the famous Zakaria mansion. I remember one of the head of the local authority said that since that guy has spent so much on the mansion, they can't just go and demolish the building, a compound is suffice.

Double standard here ?

[hailer]

Do the Secular, Christian, Hindu, Buddha country provide fund and free land to build a mosque? Most of the mosques in the AU, US, UK, EU, China, India are from private funds. If they want to build a new mosque, they have to buy a land first. Even using the existing building as a small mosque is not that easy. Just have a look the giant golden Hindu Lord at Batu Cave, the tallest in the world. Who has provided the fund for this Hindu lord , the land and the cave of the temple?

The fact that there are hundreds of illegal temples which are classified as permanent structure, at the corner, near the KTM land, inside the road reserve, or on TOL status land that run by family or individual as the guardian of the temple. Is it appropriate to legalize this temple and surrender the land ownership to the guardian? Whereas the Muslim Surau which is considered temporary structure can be anytime given up by the Muslim. While building of surau need legal permision from local authority.


This post has been edited by hailer: Dec 26 2007, 11:01 AM

[swingdoctor]

do you think non muslim country like UK or China funding the mosque,
mosque there were built by kindhearted businessmen or money from Muslim NGO,
and muslim pray 5 time everyday and every Friday, those are compulsory,
so we need place to do our prayer
do Christians, Hindus or Buddhas need to pray 5 time everyday??

What have a Muslims need to pray 5 times a day got anything to do with mosques? Firstly do all or even most Muslims pray 5 times a day? Certainly not the Muslims I've been in contact with. Furthermore, of those that do, how many of them actually go to the mosques to pray? Hardly any I'd say. All the Muslims that I know do not go to the mosque anyday except Friday.

You're right the countries you mentioned do not provide funds to build mosques, but neither do they provide funds to build churches or temples. As I've said, I personally don't believe that the govnt which is supposed to be secular should get involved in religion, but if its going to provide funds to build mosques then it should also provide funds to build temples and churches. Every person irrespective of religion, gets taxed equally, so why aren't their religion treated equally. If the govnt sees a need to only provide funds for mosques, fine introduce a special tax for muslims with all of the proceeds going towards the building mosques. If, as the practitioners of Islam on this forum like to suggest, that Muslims take their religion more seriously then practitioners of other religions, then Muslims should have little to complain about this.

[swingdoctor]

Do the Secular, Christian, Hindu, Buddha country provide fund and free land to build a mosque? Most of the mosques in the AU, US, UK, EU, China, India are from private funds. If they want to build a new mosque, they have to buy a land first. Even using the existing building as a small mosque is not that easy. Just have a look the giant golden Hindu Lord at Batu Cave, the tallest in the world. Who has provided the fund for this Hindu lord , the land and the cave of the temple?

The fact that there are hundreds of illegal temples which are classified as permanent structure, at the corner, near the KTM land, inside the road reserve, or on TOL status land that run by family or individual as the guardian of the temple. Is it appropriate to legalize this temple and surrender the land ownership to the guardian? Whereas the Muslim Surau which is considered temporary structure can be anytime given up by the Muslim. While building of surau need legal permision from local authority.

We all need a place to worship. If the govnt sees fit to provide funds to build mosques and make it necessary for all new housing developments to provide the land for free to build these mosques, then it should also do the same for temples and churches. As it is, it takes more then 10 years to obtain permissio to build a church, if it is granted at all.

[hailer]

What have a Muslims need to pray 5 times a day got anything to do with mosques? Firstly do all or even most Muslims pray 5 times a day? Certainly not the Muslims I've been in contact with. Furthermore, of those that do, how many of them actually go to the mosques to pray? Hardly any I'd say. All the Muslims that I know do not go to the mosque anyday except Friday.

You're right the countries you mentioned do not provide funds to build mosques, but neither do they provide funds to build churches or temples. As I've said, I personally don't believe that the govnt which is supposed to be secular should get involved in religion, but if its going to provide funds to build mosques then it should also provide funds to build temples and churches. Every person irrespective of religion, gets taxed equally, so why aren't their religion treated equally. If the govnt sees a need to only provide funds for mosques, fine introduce a special tax for muslims with all of the proceeds going towards the building mosques. If, as the practitioners of Islam on this forum like to suggest, that Muslims take their religion more seriously then practitioners of other religions, then Muslims should have little to complain about this.

I never thought that I can agree with you, yes the secular countries do not provide funds to build mosques, churches or temples. Most of secular and non-muslim country never fund to built the mosques. So same to non-muslim in muslim country.

But Malaysia is not a secular country, not a theocratic islamic country like Iran, and also not a wholly place for muslim like Saudi Arabia. Malaysia is predominantly Muslim country where the official religion is Islam. The rakyat has to accept this, and all what they want cannot be always 100% fulfilled. Same as to muslim in non-muslim countries.

Even thought the secular countries seem to be ignorance of religion, but they still give the main concern to dominant religion, for example US, UK, AU, EU etc recognize Christmas as national festive and declared as public holiday. So where is the fare and square no matter what the Secular, Democratic, Communists, Islamic, Hindu, Buddha, Jewish and Theocratic countries are. All are same with double standard.

[swingdoctor]

[size=1][/size]

I never thought that I can agree with you, yes the secular countries do not provide funds to build mosques, churches or temples. Most of secular and non-muslim country never fund to built the mosques. So same to non-muslim in muslim country.

But Malaysia is not a secular country, not a theocratic islamic country like Iran, and also not a wholly place for muslim like Saudi Arabia. Malaysia is predominantly Muslim country where the official religion is Islam. The rakyat has to accept this, and all what they want cannot be always 100% fulfilled. Same as to muslim in non-muslim countries.

Even thought the secular countries seem to be ignorance of religion, but they still give the main concern to dominant religion, for example US, UK, AU, EU etc recognize Christmas as national festive and declared as public holiday. So where is the fare and square no matter what the Secular, Democratic, Communists, Islamic, Hindu, Buddha, Jewish and Theocratic countries are. All are same with double standard.

The official religion in Malaysia is Islam and according to the constitution its the govents responsibility to help the Agong(as the protector of Islam) regulate Islam but it does not say that by definition this includes providing funds for the building of mosques. Being a predominatly Muslim country has nothing to do with it. Look at Indonesia as an example.

Weather a country celebrates a religious holiday or not has nothing to do with discrimination against any religion but to do with specific numbers of practitioners of that religion and history. It has been decided that Muslims in Malaysia cannot participate in other religions relegious festivals, correct, so therefore Muslims should continue working over the christmas and deepavali holidays, these are after all religious holidays correct? But no Muslims also enjoy this as a public holiday why, because historically this has been a public holiday for everyone. The US, UK, AU, EU do not have public holidays of Muslims becasue as it stands now and historically, there have never been many Muslims in these countries, but you can't say that they are being unfair because neither do they have holidays for religious festivals for Judaism, Hinduism etc. Islam is practiced by 1% of the population in Australia. In Malaysia, Buddism is practiced by 26% of the population and Christianity 9%. However unlike Malaysia, all the other countries mentioned treat Islam and any other religion equally under the eyes of the law. The only double standard you mention, exists only in Malaysia and other Muslims countries though as I have said, not all.

[Betong]

I don't know if this applies to Malaysian law but according to Australian law, which is similar to Malaysian law, there is such a thing as squatters rights, besides the land isn't owned privately but is crown land.

The govnt often talks about each race having an equitable share of the riches in Malaysia, the basis of the NEP. Well what share of the wealth do the ethnic Indians in Malaysia posses?

The govnt makes it law that all new housing developments must provide land for mosques, well what about land for a Hindu temple? The govnt provides public funds for the building of mosques, how much would it cost to relocate a hindu temple?

All new housing developments will provide land for religous purpose. This land not belong to any religion not only for Islam. It's up to neighbourhood to apply the land for religous purpose. Most of the time Malays applied first because they always the majority people there. Maybe the developers need to provide more land for this religous purpose.
Govt. only provide funds for building official mosque only. Most of this mosque located in cities. But majority of mosque which was being built didn't using public funds. It's from public donation.