Give me a western government that is truly sympathetic to the plight of, the Citizenry of Myanmar within and especially beyond the border, and I shall give you CBO’s that has been overseeing and can undertake the transition to resettle or otherwise all the legit concern that you brought forth
The fact that this country, Myanmar, survived such useless careless policy this long is a testimonial to the spirit of the people, that is made possible partly by the tireless efforts of these CBO’s.
Suffering the 2nd worst known natural disaster within this century of human existence in the delta region, as an example:
1)Not succumbing to the aftermath, despite the shameful lack of help, not just 2┬║ to the present government paranoia, but mainly due to the West zeal to vilify the SPDC over providing just humanitarian services.
2)Soldiering on to THIS day, from within with minimal help from the West, yet still witnessing the CONTINUING tragedies that the west has white washed.
The Western government that have so wisely taken the names of individuals and companies, from the yellow pages, to be listed as the benefactors of their useless careless policy can surely now look in the white pages for these CBO’s, if their intention is to be truly the friend of Myanmar Citizenry only.
Personally I don’t think Paul Handley has anything to prove regarding his commitment to shining a light onto the Thai monarchy.
So what if this review is not a damning and searing critique? The comparison to Gump is certainly as withering and as brutal a putdown one could imagine.
Let’s also not forget TKNS is still a defining text and was written at a time when such work required proper investigative journalism in Thailand at some great personal risk to the author rather than just stealing some computer files from your old employer, whilst resident in Singapore, and then telling everyone time after time that you’re going to “save Thailand”.
The attacks on Handley here seem even more cynical given that one of his attackers (and it seems quite personal as well) quotes about half of Handley’s book in his own “opus”.
That KBAALW if mentions TKNS is, as I’ve said before, an amazing achievement considering how strict this culture is. This is a good sign and hopefully it will signal that more discussion is possible.
I skimmed Handley’s harrowing chapter “Family Headaches” in TKNS and am reminded how difficult it must have been for Anand to include any discussion of this book.
Perhaps this is the beginning of a great discussion involving many more people. A discussion, not yelling and screaming and shooting and hating. A discussion where all types of Thai citizens weigh in on such things like TKNS and agree and disagree, support some of its views, disagree with others, and everyone walks away a bit more elevated and the sky doesn’t fall down.
And for once, the monarchy takes direction from the people.
“Handley interprets the book specifically as the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure. His lack of vitriol, that appears to have dismayed some, is because he tackles the book from this perspective, soberly, and I think, appropriately.”
WHY would reviewing the book from the perspective of seeing it as “the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure” have to mean avoiding pointing out explicitly when there are distortions and lies?
I also see the book as “the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure” – nothing particularly special about this “perspective”, it’s just plain common sense for anyone following what’s going on the past few years. But I wouldn’t just sum up the distortion and the lies without pointing them out clearly. I see no reason why Handley didn’t either.
P.S. Whether Andrew MacGregor Marshall’s writings on the monarchy are as you say they are is clearly irrelevant to the quality of Handley’s review. The latter has to be judged on its own. And the reason I (presumably others too) who know something about the king, feel amazed at the blandness of Handley’s review is that, given the contents of the book, as summarized by Handley himself here, in comparison to that knowledge, a more forthright review should have been written.
Having been a bit surprised on the one hand, but also appreciating on the other the journalist’s code, when I read The King Never Smiles I also wondered at first about pulling punches. But whatever was so pulled was done in taste and expertise, and likely with good reason. The work remains a tribute to good writing whatever anyone else says.
“Is this escalation in rhetoric indicative of a fit of pique at Mr Handley not trashing A Life’s Work heartily enough while you currently ‘own’ this discussion?”
Not at all: for one thing I do not, of course, ‘own’ this discussion, and for another, having a variety of different views is what makes debate interesting.
I think “abysmal” is a fair summary of KBAALW (and is frankly a de-escalation of rhetoric compared with the rather longer and more detailed evisceration of the book on my website).
I think Handley’s approach to the book is very interesting. As “nontock”, clearly not my biggest fan, commented in #11, Paul Handley treats the book as the latest in a series of mythmaking endeavours by core figures in the section of the network monarchy allied to the king, and his review looks at incremental changes in how the king – and modern Thai history – are presented. Which is of course an interesting and valid approach.
My own view however is that after the WikiLeaks cables, the king’s retreat to Siriraj, the massive escalation of lese majeste and computer crimes cases and convictions, and the emergence of a mass movement in Thailand questioning the monarchy for the first time in history, the whole debate has fundamentally changed, and I wonder whether we should treat documents like KBAALW with the hushed reverence that its creators desire, as if this was still Thailand circa 1999.
As Somsak Jeamteerasakul commented in #8, much of KBAALW is outright false. Of course, this book was never going to be the “warts and all” account that Anand promised, but I was struck by just how closely it stuck to earlier hagiographies, and how inadequate it was in the current climate. Tiny incremental changes in tone are of little importance when Thailand is undergoing a momentous transformation.
In my view, the message KBAALW sends is that the people who created it really have no understanding at all of what has been happening in Thailand since 2006.
Finally, apologies to “nontock” #11 for taking up so much of his time of late. Not sure how this happened, but for future reference, all my work is available free online, and reading it is not compulsory. Those who don’t like my stuff are welcome to choose not to read it. So there is really no need for anybody to have their time wasted. Unless you are employed in MICT’s windowless bunker scouring the internet for scandalous web pages to block.
> “All I can say is, Paul Handley was considerably more charitable to the abysmal KBAALW than KBAALW was about The King Never Smiles.”
I just checked, you haven’t used the word ‘abysmal’ to describe this book on your own site yet. Is this escalation in rhetoric indicative of a fit of pique at Mr Handley not trashing A Life’s Work heartily enough while you currently ‘own’ this discussion?
> “Andrew Marshall Macgregor has taken up a lot of my time of late, and with no personal disrespect to him, I feel justified to say the following. After months of bluster and promises of fresh insights and revelations … He has lost a lot of credibility also I think with his constant revisions, failure to meet his own deadlines and perhaps a rather grandiose view of what he is doing. ”
Come on, don’t beat up on the guy like that. I too have refreshed his website countless times expecting an update, often sure I must have missed one, but I’ve lapped up what he’s thrown over the wall so far and the experience has been a net gain.
If a guy doesn’t have a full and ever-expanding to-do list, doesn’t get stimulated and side-tracked by this and that and is able to digest material and then regurgitate works of art to a steady cadence then that guy mist be tremendously self-disciplined!
I find his sources and background illuminating – they’re certainly not stale and well-trodden to me. Also I’m very pleased to read anything written by Paul M. Handley – thanks New Mandala.
It is precisely in the case of apostasy that I have pointed out how such dictation by strict Islamic scholars is invalid. (Not about stealing or other case, but apostasy.)
So if this dictation is invalid, then the Sharia judge who presides over such apostasy cases should not even consider such invalid “hukum” dictation, whether it is implemented or not. Implementation does not mean valid.
I agree there should not be blaming and hatred towards religion. I hope none of the commenters here are like that. The blaming and hatred is towards invalid dictation that is untruthful and unjust, regardless whether it is a religion or not.
Handley interprets the book specifically as the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure. His lack of vitriol, that appears to have dismayed some, is because he tackles the book from this perspective, soberly, and I think, appropriately. He balances the book against its precedents and in doing so is able to better isolate and analyse what it is and what it means. As a work on its own, its weaknesses are perhaps easy for those of a certain view to identify, and I don’t think it is particularly interesting or constructive to post paragraphs of outrage and corrections.
Andrew Marshall Macgregor has taken up a lot of my time of late, and with no personal disrespect to him, I feel justified to say the following. After months of bluster and promises of fresh insights and revelations, I can still see no more than an overlong condensation of other people’s work on the Thai monarchy, replete with lengthy quotations. Most who read NM are more than familiar with all this material already I would think. I don’t wish to be uncharitable, but I have to say that despite his extensive reading, Macgregor’s lack of background in Thai studies makes his handling of some of this subject matter a little jarringly amateurish at times.
He has lost a lot of credibility also I think with his constant revisions, failure to meet his own deadlines and perhaps a rather grandiose view of what he is doing. This may of course change as more of his work comes out, but I am starting to doubt that now. Especially with his recent announcement of an even broader scope. I won’t comment on his writing style, but I was given cause to reflect on it when I read his criticism of the same in KBAALW.
This is just my personal view as a regular reader of NM; I don’t for a second deny the importance of activist writing and journalism, but I enjoy reading posts and comments written by academic specialists and those who follow them closely the most.
I doubt if Muyhiddin has enough support to oust Najib. he has Mathathir’s support, but is a very cautious guy who would not dare to make a move without absolute certainty. BTW Mathathir’s level of support is seriously overblown… lots of hotair but not that much substance. Just look at the “size” of crowd he can’t gather!
Thanks, Paul. As I note earlier, I believe that you are the right person to review this book.
BTW, will this book be officially translated into Thai? Though it is not perfect, it is better than none. If it is available in Thai by official means, some of the new messages can be delivered across the population.
I have a suspicion that the book is too good to be officially translated into Thai and those who dare doing/distribution a pirate translation will face the usual consequence. Can anyone confirm this?
#35 – I don’t know which kampong you’re from, but the last time I check my kampung in Durian Tunggal Melaka, they do more or less living like your kampong in the fifties and sixties which you’re describing. In fact my in laws in Kampung Pasir Raja in Dungun Terengganu where the Malay community strictly adheres to Islamic teachings, was still having the same atmosphere as you described, except the chinese neighbours now are paying Rm10 to pick the fruits from the fruits orchards.
#38 – Very true indeed. Good point. I try to answer your question briefly as I can.
(1) Would Malaysia (and its Muslim citizens) be a better country simply by following the rule of law instead of relying on Islamic norms?
A: I don’t know. There are a lot countries that are following the rule of law, take the Phillipines for example. Are they any better than us?
(2) Would Malaysia (and Muslim citizens) be better of if the best Malaysians were chosen to lead or employed in the GLCs, public sector, politics rather than only Muslims?
A: Yes. I strongly believed that those positions should be given based on eligibility and not preferences, like when they give Malaysia Airlines (MAS) to Datuk Idris Jala once. (note: Idris Jala is a non-muslim).
(3) Has Islam made Muslims in Malaysia weak?
A: No. As a matter of fact, Islam made Muslims in Malaysia much stronger and navigates them to a better way. The progression can be reflected by looking into the financial world – Islamic banking. It began with the establishment of the first Islamic bank in 1983 and in the year that followed, the first Takaful operator. We have never looked back since then to evolve a comprehensive domestic Islamic financial system operating alongside the conventional financial system, comprising the Islamic banking institutions, the takaful industry, the Islamic money and capital markets. These respective components have been progressively liberalized over the years, allowing for more foreign presence in the market to become internationally more integrated. This has led to diversity in market players, and the increased competitive forces now provide the impetus for increased innovation in the market. The dynamism in the market has been supported by a robust regulatory and supervisory framework, reinforced by the legal and Shariah framework, the payment and settlement systems. The Shariah framework in particular is distinctively robust, through the consultative role of the Shariah Advisory Council of Bank Negara Malaysia and Securities Commission, complemented by the Shariah board of individual Islamic financial institutions.
#40 – My point was based on the originality and the discussed ‘hukum’ , not what is implemented. The words “have impact on others”, loosen the community (Jamaah), and “some might get insulted” is what the strict Islamic scholars dictates. It’s like the hudud law; stealing as per say. Not every person who steals will get their hands chopped off. It must be within certain strict requirements. And in the apostasy issue, from my opinion, just present the case to a Sharia Judge, and let him/her decides.
#42 – In 21st July 2005, Puan Kamariah Ali stated that she was no longer a Muslim by confessing in front of Justice Wan Abdul Malik Wan Sidek at 12.50 pm upon being interviewed in Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Besut. She wanted to rejects the acquisition face by her of preaching and heretic, so she applies to apostate. The case then goes to Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Kuala Terengganu and in March 2008, she was given a 2 year sentence after the Justice Mohamad Abdullah found her guilty for apostasy. In reading his judgment, Justice Mohamad said that the reasons being given by the defendant was not concrete and there is confusions in her affidavit. She do believes in Allah and Muhammad but in addition she believes Ayah Pin is also a Messenger from Allah to brings all religion together. The case continues when they brought up the case to Civil High Court. Later the court rejected her case as reported in Malay Mail dated July 18th 2011 which reports :
“Justices Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin, Datuk Azhar Ma’ah and Datuk Clement Allan Skinner agreed with the decision of the then High Court judge Tan Sri Md Raus Shariff (now Federal Court judge) that the matter was within the sole domain of the Syariah Court by virtue of Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution. Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution gives the exclusive jurisdiction to the Syariah Court to determine matters relating to Islam.”
In conclusion for all these, let’s stop all the blaming and hatred towards other religion. Islam can always co-exists with other religion and the non-Muslim should never fear of their rights in a Muslim world. Issues related to creed or religion like apostasy, are often being orchestrated by the politicians in the media for whatever reason that they might have. The issues are often sensationalized to cover up certain issues. What I really wanted to see is that more scholars and academicians in Southeast Asia focusing more on bringing a new knowledge to the world. To test if a theory really works and can be applied in the real world. Not dancing to a nasty-hidden-politician’s rhythm.
[…] those who haven’t yet seen it, at New Mandala, journalist and author of The King Never Smiles, Paul Handley has reviewed King Bhumibol Adulyadej, […]
Frankly, I am still trying to understand why Khun Paul Handley wrote such a bland review. Admittedly, I haven’t read the book yet; it’s sold out in Bangkok, and the new lot won’t come in until sometimes after January 20 (I called to check every week, the last call just yesterday).
But even merely relying on Khun Handley’s own summation, there should definitely be more – much more – criticism of the book. Some obvious examples: Anand’ s claim of “transparency”, the case of Rama VIII’s death, “6 October”, the CPB, lesse majeste, etc, etc. Some of these covered in the book (as summarized by Khun Handley) are not only misleading, distortion; they are outright false.
I may have committed the sin of obscurity (24), so I should explain. A Sokalism is a piece of obscure, pseudo-scientific verbiage that Post Modernists pretend to understand. Alan Sokal exposed the whole movement to ridicule by submitting a paper deliberately stuffed with obscure terms with no meaning at all, and having it accepted by a high-status Post Modernist journal. If English is not your first language, and you are having trouble understanding some of the longer pieces in this thread, do not be discouraged! At least you are not deluding yourself.
“And if such incremental changes continue then the vocabulary, and conceptual apparatus, for describing Burmese society will likely need some rapid overhaul.”
It behooves the West to reckon that time is neither on their side nor on the side of the Citizenry of Myanmar.
“In response, the United States government, in what is surely part of a long-planned package of re-engagement incentives, announced that they want to upgrade diplomatic relations to Ambassador level.”
It will indeed be tragic if this unacceptable, useless careless policy of yesteryear as the base from which now the re-engagement is to be evaluated from.
“Burma’s leadership will, however, need to get a quick and peaceful resolution to the war in Kachin State. Getting a deal done before the 51st anniversary of Kachin Revolution Day on 5 February 2012 would be highly symbolic; that could be a good deadline for President Thein Sein to bear in mind.”
Might I and my ilks remind one and all here @ New Mandala that from the other side POV:
1) Well stated by Thant-Myint U “Where China Meet India”:
This POV with supporting articles everywhere here @ New Mandala must surely remind all that:
1)The west only have one good chance/window to redeem, with an all out effort to help the Citizenry of Myanmar.
2)’How high can you jump’ yesteryear posturing, a focus on the government, but NOT the Citizenry, has already made the West and their poster person DASSK, that drag the unwitting Citizenry of Myanmar the looser.
3)The only recourse is to be the true friend of the only Citizenry of Myanmar, instead of DASSK or the present military controlled government.
Also without meaning to be pedantic, this was Bhumibol’s seventh cycle birthday. He is just beginning his eighth cycle. It will be completed when he is 96, if he is still alive then.
Your example of the blind men and the elephant is a good one but it should not be applied to such a basic issue as apostasy. It should be applied to religion. Our creator is omnipotent and we could never hope to envisage fully His greatness in the scheme of things. So, like the blind men, we could only touch the surface and like the blind men, all of us could be partially right. We should never condemn nor belittle the faith of others as long as they do not cause harm. I would accept someone who believes in a stone (or the spirit within) if it could inspire him to do good. The moment he uses it to hurt others, it becomes unacceptable.
On the issue of apostasy, we have to get the basics right. If you believe that everyone should be given the freedom of belief, then it has to apply both ways, in and out of any religion. You could not have it one way and not the other. All religions would surely prefer their adherents to stay. So, we have to find other ways to prevent believers from leaving while maintaining the basic right. We could persuade, we could appeal, we could even beg them to stay. But we should never threaten them with punishment and harm. The intimidation would only confirm that the religion is indeed not good for them and they would want out even more so.
And one swallow does not, a summer make. Not even the few cases of apostasy being allowed would indicate freedom to disbelief. If Lina Joy were to appeal to the Syaria courts, I am pretty sure she would be like Makcik Kamariah Ali, who has been in and out of the courts for the past umpteen years without being given the right to apostasize. She was also reportedly imprisoned for 20 months in 1992, presumably for apostasy. (Ref: http://legitexpect.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/kamariah-ali/ )
How and why, in heaven’s name, could a person be subjected to so much anguish, pain and suffering and yet not be given proper closure? I personally do not believe that Islam would allow it. And the ultimate irony is that, while the courts still consider her a Muslim, when she dies, she would most likely be buried somewhere other than a Muslim cemetry, like one of her Sky Kingdom members. How sad and how tragic.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Out of the Burmese daze?
T F Rhoden
Give me a western government that is truly sympathetic to the plight of, the Citizenry of Myanmar within and especially beyond the border, and I shall give you CBO’s that has been overseeing and can undertake the transition to resettle or otherwise all the legit concern that you brought forth
The fact that this country, Myanmar, survived such useless careless policy this long is a testimonial to the spirit of the people, that is made possible partly by the tireless efforts of these CBO’s.
Suffering the 2nd worst known natural disaster within this century of human existence in the delta region, as an example:
1)Not succumbing to the aftermath, despite the shameful lack of help, not just 2┬║ to the present government paranoia, but mainly due to the West zeal to vilify the SPDC over providing just humanitarian services.
2)Soldiering on to THIS day, from within with minimal help from the West, yet still witnessing the CONTINUING tragedies that the west has white washed.
The Western government that have so wisely taken the names of individuals and companies, from the yellow pages, to be listed as the benefactors of their useless careless policy can surely now look in the white pages for these CBO’s, if their intention is to be truly the friend of Myanmar Citizenry only.
Review of A Life’s Work
Personally I don’t think Paul Handley has anything to prove regarding his commitment to shining a light onto the Thai monarchy.
So what if this review is not a damning and searing critique? The comparison to Gump is certainly as withering and as brutal a putdown one could imagine.
Let’s also not forget TKNS is still a defining text and was written at a time when such work required proper investigative journalism in Thailand at some great personal risk to the author rather than just stealing some computer files from your old employer, whilst resident in Singapore, and then telling everyone time after time that you’re going to “save Thailand”.
The attacks on Handley here seem even more cynical given that one of his attackers (and it seems quite personal as well) quotes about half of Handley’s book in his own “opus”.
Review of A Life’s Work
That KBAALW if mentions TKNS is, as I’ve said before, an amazing achievement considering how strict this culture is. This is a good sign and hopefully it will signal that more discussion is possible.
I skimmed Handley’s harrowing chapter “Family Headaches” in TKNS and am reminded how difficult it must have been for Anand to include any discussion of this book.
Perhaps this is the beginning of a great discussion involving many more people. A discussion, not yelling and screaming and shooting and hating. A discussion where all types of Thai citizens weigh in on such things like TKNS and agree and disagree, support some of its views, disagree with others, and everyone walks away a bit more elevated and the sky doesn’t fall down.
And for once, the monarchy takes direction from the people.
Review of A Life’s Work
Nontook writes #11
“Handley interprets the book specifically as the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure. His lack of vitriol, that appears to have dismayed some, is because he tackles the book from this perspective, soberly, and I think, appropriately.”
WHY would reviewing the book from the perspective of seeing it as “the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure” have to mean avoiding pointing out explicitly when there are distortions and lies?
I also see the book as “the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure” – nothing particularly special about this “perspective”, it’s just plain common sense for anyone following what’s going on the past few years. But I wouldn’t just sum up the distortion and the lies without pointing them out clearly. I see no reason why Handley didn’t either.
P.S. Whether Andrew MacGregor Marshall’s writings on the monarchy are as you say they are is clearly irrelevant to the quality of Handley’s review. The latter has to be judged on its own. And the reason I (presumably others too) who know something about the king, feel amazed at the blandness of Handley’s review is that, given the contents of the book, as summarized by Handley himself here, in comparison to that knowledge, a more forthright review should have been written.
Review of A Life’s Work
Having been a bit surprised on the one hand, but also appreciating on the other the journalist’s code, when I read The King Never Smiles I also wondered at first about pulling punches. But whatever was so pulled was done in taste and expertise, and likely with good reason. The work remains a tribute to good writing whatever anyone else says.
Review of A Life’s Work
Jon Wright #13
“Is this escalation in rhetoric indicative of a fit of pique at Mr Handley not trashing A Life’s Work heartily enough while you currently ‘own’ this discussion?”
Not at all: for one thing I do not, of course, ‘own’ this discussion, and for another, having a variety of different views is what makes debate interesting.
I think “abysmal” is a fair summary of KBAALW (and is frankly a de-escalation of rhetoric compared with the rather longer and more detailed evisceration of the book on my website).
I think Handley’s approach to the book is very interesting. As “nontock”, clearly not my biggest fan, commented in #11, Paul Handley treats the book as the latest in a series of mythmaking endeavours by core figures in the section of the network monarchy allied to the king, and his review looks at incremental changes in how the king – and modern Thai history – are presented. Which is of course an interesting and valid approach.
My own view however is that after the WikiLeaks cables, the king’s retreat to Siriraj, the massive escalation of lese majeste and computer crimes cases and convictions, and the emergence of a mass movement in Thailand questioning the monarchy for the first time in history, the whole debate has fundamentally changed, and I wonder whether we should treat documents like KBAALW with the hushed reverence that its creators desire, as if this was still Thailand circa 1999.
As Somsak Jeamteerasakul commented in #8, much of KBAALW is outright false. Of course, this book was never going to be the “warts and all” account that Anand promised, but I was struck by just how closely it stuck to earlier hagiographies, and how inadequate it was in the current climate. Tiny incremental changes in tone are of little importance when Thailand is undergoing a momentous transformation.
In my view, the message KBAALW sends is that the people who created it really have no understanding at all of what has been happening in Thailand since 2006.
Finally, apologies to “nontock” #11 for taking up so much of his time of late. Not sure how this happened, but for future reference, all my work is available free online, and reading it is not compulsory. Those who don’t like my stuff are welcome to choose not to read it. So there is really no need for anybody to have their time wasted. Unless you are employed in MICT’s windowless bunker scouring the internet for scandalous web pages to block.
Bests
Andrew
Review of A Life’s Work
> “All I can say is, Paul Handley was considerably more charitable to the abysmal KBAALW than KBAALW was about The King Never Smiles.”
I just checked, you haven’t used the word ‘abysmal’ to describe this book on your own site yet. Is this escalation in rhetoric indicative of a fit of pique at Mr Handley not trashing A Life’s Work heartily enough while you currently ‘own’ this discussion?
Review of A Life’s Work
> “Andrew Marshall Macgregor has taken up a lot of my time of late, and with no personal disrespect to him, I feel justified to say the following. After months of bluster and promises of fresh insights and revelations … He has lost a lot of credibility also I think with his constant revisions, failure to meet his own deadlines and perhaps a rather grandiose view of what he is doing. ”
Come on, don’t beat up on the guy like that. I too have refreshed his website countless times expecting an update, often sure I must have missed one, but I’ve lapped up what he’s thrown over the wall so far and the experience has been a net gain.
If a guy doesn’t have a full and ever-expanding to-do list, doesn’t get stimulated and side-tracked by this and that and is able to digest material and then regurgitate works of art to a steady cadence then that guy mist be tremendously self-disciplined!
I find his sources and background illuminating – they’re certainly not stale and well-trodden to me. Also I’m very pleased to read anything written by Paul M. Handley – thanks New Mandala.
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
Hi Namaku Muhammad,
It is precisely in the case of apostasy that I have pointed out how such dictation by strict Islamic scholars is invalid. (Not about stealing or other case, but apostasy.)
So if this dictation is invalid, then the Sharia judge who presides over such apostasy cases should not even consider such invalid “hukum” dictation, whether it is implemented or not. Implementation does not mean valid.
I agree there should not be blaming and hatred towards religion. I hope none of the commenters here are like that. The blaming and hatred is towards invalid dictation that is untruthful and unjust, regardless whether it is a religion or not.
Peace.
Review of A Life’s Work
Handley interprets the book specifically as the latest in a series of responses from the palace to pressure. His lack of vitriol, that appears to have dismayed some, is because he tackles the book from this perspective, soberly, and I think, appropriately. He balances the book against its precedents and in doing so is able to better isolate and analyse what it is and what it means. As a work on its own, its weaknesses are perhaps easy for those of a certain view to identify, and I don’t think it is particularly interesting or constructive to post paragraphs of outrage and corrections.
Andrew Marshall Macgregor has taken up a lot of my time of late, and with no personal disrespect to him, I feel justified to say the following. After months of bluster and promises of fresh insights and revelations, I can still see no more than an overlong condensation of other people’s work on the Thai monarchy, replete with lengthy quotations. Most who read NM are more than familiar with all this material already I would think. I don’t wish to be uncharitable, but I have to say that despite his extensive reading, Macgregor’s lack of background in Thai studies makes his handling of some of this subject matter a little jarringly amateurish at times.
He has lost a lot of credibility also I think with his constant revisions, failure to meet his own deadlines and perhaps a rather grandiose view of what he is doing. This may of course change as more of his work comes out, but I am starting to doubt that now. Especially with his recent announcement of an even broader scope. I won’t comment on his writing style, but I was given cause to reflect on it when I read his criticism of the same in KBAALW.
This is just my personal view as a regular reader of NM; I don’t for a second deny the importance of activist writing and journalism, but I enjoy reading posts and comments written by academic specialists and those who follow them closely the most.
Malaysia’s next Prime Minister?
Hai Greg,
I doubt if Muyhiddin has enough support to oust Najib. he has Mathathir’s support, but is a very cautious guy who would not dare to make a move without absolute certainty. BTW Mathathir’s level of support is seriously overblown… lots of hotair but not that much substance. Just look at the “size” of crowd he can’t gather!
Review of A Life’s Work
Thanks, Paul. As I note earlier, I believe that you are the right person to review this book.
BTW, will this book be officially translated into Thai? Though it is not perfect, it is better than none. If it is available in Thai by official means, some of the new messages can be delivered across the population.
I have a suspicion that the book is too good to be officially translated into Thai and those who dare doing/distribution a pirate translation will face the usual consequence. Can anyone confirm this?
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
Hello everybody.
#35 – I don’t know which kampong you’re from, but the last time I check my kampung in Durian Tunggal Melaka, they do more or less living like your kampong in the fifties and sixties which you’re describing. In fact my in laws in Kampung Pasir Raja in Dungun Terengganu where the Malay community strictly adheres to Islamic teachings, was still having the same atmosphere as you described, except the chinese neighbours now are paying Rm10 to pick the fruits from the fruits orchards.
#38 – Very true indeed. Good point. I try to answer your question briefly as I can.
(1) Would Malaysia (and its Muslim citizens) be a better country simply by following the rule of law instead of relying on Islamic norms?
A: I don’t know. There are a lot countries that are following the rule of law, take the Phillipines for example. Are they any better than us?
(2) Would Malaysia (and Muslim citizens) be better of if the best Malaysians were chosen to lead or employed in the GLCs, public sector, politics rather than only Muslims?
A: Yes. I strongly believed that those positions should be given based on eligibility and not preferences, like when they give Malaysia Airlines (MAS) to Datuk Idris Jala once. (note: Idris Jala is a non-muslim).
(3) Has Islam made Muslims in Malaysia weak?
A: No. As a matter of fact, Islam made Muslims in Malaysia much stronger and navigates them to a better way. The progression can be reflected by looking into the financial world – Islamic banking. It began with the establishment of the first Islamic bank in 1983 and in the year that followed, the first Takaful operator. We have never looked back since then to evolve a comprehensive domestic Islamic financial system operating alongside the conventional financial system, comprising the Islamic banking institutions, the takaful industry, the Islamic money and capital markets. These respective components have been progressively liberalized over the years, allowing for more foreign presence in the market to become internationally more integrated. This has led to diversity in market players, and the increased competitive forces now provide the impetus for increased innovation in the market. The dynamism in the market has been supported by a robust regulatory and supervisory framework, reinforced by the legal and Shariah framework, the payment and settlement systems. The Shariah framework in particular is distinctively robust, through the consultative role of the Shariah Advisory Council of Bank Negara Malaysia and Securities Commission, complemented by the Shariah board of individual Islamic financial institutions.
#40 – My point was based on the originality and the discussed ‘hukum’ , not what is implemented. The words “have impact on others”, loosen the community (Jamaah), and “some might get insulted” is what the strict Islamic scholars dictates. It’s like the hudud law; stealing as per say. Not every person who steals will get their hands chopped off. It must be within certain strict requirements. And in the apostasy issue, from my opinion, just present the case to a Sharia Judge, and let him/her decides.
#42 – In 21st July 2005, Puan Kamariah Ali stated that she was no longer a Muslim by confessing in front of Justice Wan Abdul Malik Wan Sidek at 12.50 pm upon being interviewed in Mahkamah Rendah Syariah Besut. She wanted to rejects the acquisition face by her of preaching and heretic, so she applies to apostate. The case then goes to Mahkamah Tinggi Syariah Kuala Terengganu and in March 2008, she was given a 2 year sentence after the Justice Mohamad Abdullah found her guilty for apostasy. In reading his judgment, Justice Mohamad said that the reasons being given by the defendant was not concrete and there is confusions in her affidavit. She do believes in Allah and Muhammad but in addition she believes Ayah Pin is also a Messenger from Allah to brings all religion together. The case continues when they brought up the case to Civil High Court. Later the court rejected her case as reported in Malay Mail dated July 18th 2011 which reports :
“Justices Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin, Datuk Azhar Ma’ah and Datuk Clement Allan Skinner agreed with the decision of the then High Court judge Tan Sri Md Raus Shariff (now Federal Court judge) that the matter was within the sole domain of the Syariah Court by virtue of Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution. Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution gives the exclusive jurisdiction to the Syariah Court to determine matters relating to Islam.”
In conclusion for all these, let’s stop all the blaming and hatred towards other religion. Islam can always co-exists with other religion and the non-Muslim should never fear of their rights in a Muslim world. Issues related to creed or religion like apostasy, are often being orchestrated by the politicians in the media for whatever reason that they might have. The issues are often sensationalized to cover up certain issues. What I really wanted to see is that more scholars and academicians in Southeast Asia focusing more on bringing a new knowledge to the world. To test if a theory really works and can be applied in the real world. Not dancing to a nasty-hidden-politician’s rhythm.
To understand Islam is to be Islam.
Peace, love and empathy.
Malaysia’s next Prime Minister?
Malaysia’s next Prime Minister in my opinion is most likely to be current Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin.
Prime Minister Najib Razak has stated that he has zero tolerance for corruption.
The National Feedlot Corporation scandal gives Mr. Najib an excellent opportunity to finish off his greatest rival.
[Mr. Anwar Ibrahim is another meadow/kettle of cows/fish altogether.]
Does Mr. Najib have the guts to take Mr. Muhyiddin on or will he leave it to the First Lady?
Review of A Life’s Work
[…] those who haven’t yet seen it, at New Mandala, journalist and author of The King Never Smiles, Paul Handley has reviewed King Bhumibol Adulyadej, […]
Review of A Life’s Work
Frankly, I am still trying to understand why Khun Paul Handley wrote such a bland review. Admittedly, I haven’t read the book yet; it’s sold out in Bangkok, and the new lot won’t come in until sometimes after January 20 (I called to check every week, the last call just yesterday).
But even merely relying on Khun Handley’s own summation, there should definitely be more – much more – criticism of the book. Some obvious examples: Anand’ s claim of “transparency”, the case of Rama VIII’s death, “6 October”, the CPB, lesse majeste, etc, etc. Some of these covered in the book (as summarized by Khun Handley) are not only misleading, distortion; they are outright false.
The straw man critique of neoliberalism in Cambodia
I may have committed the sin of obscurity (24), so I should explain. A Sokalism is a piece of obscure, pseudo-scientific verbiage that Post Modernists pretend to understand. Alan Sokal exposed the whole movement to ridicule by submitting a paper deliberately stuffed with obscure terms with no meaning at all, and having it accepted by a high-status Post Modernist journal. If English is not your first language, and you are having trouble understanding some of the longer pieces in this thread, do not be discouraged! At least you are not deluding yourself.
Out of the Burmese daze?
Nich
Excellent!
“And if such incremental changes continue then the vocabulary, and conceptual apparatus, for describing Burmese society will likely need some rapid overhaul.”
It behooves the West to reckon that time is neither on their side nor on the side of the Citizenry of Myanmar.
“In response, the United States government, in what is surely part of a long-planned package of re-engagement incentives, announced that they want to upgrade diplomatic relations to Ambassador level.”
It will indeed be tragic if this unacceptable, useless careless policy of yesteryear as the base from which now the re-engagement is to be evaluated from.
“Burma’s leadership will, however, need to get a quick and peaceful resolution to the war in Kachin State. Getting a deal done before the 51st anniversary of Kachin Revolution Day on 5 February 2012 would be highly symbolic; that could be a good deadline for President Thein Sein to bear in mind.”
Might I and my ilks remind one and all here @ New Mandala that from the other side POV:
1) Well stated by Thant-Myint U “Where China Meet India”:
http://www.newmandala.org/2012/01/06/where-china-meets-india/
2) The not so long ago SG Than Swe/SPDC knavery yet brilliant strategy to befriend N. Korea.
3) Acquiring and practicing successfully the true China’s and worst N. Korean version of, similar yet quite different the one by Dale Carnegie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People
This POV with supporting articles everywhere here @ New Mandala must surely remind all that:
1)The west only have one good chance/window to redeem, with an all out effort to help the Citizenry of Myanmar.
2)’How high can you jump’ yesteryear posturing, a focus on the government, but NOT the Citizenry, has already made the West and their poster person DASSK, that drag the unwitting Citizenry of Myanmar the looser.
3)The only recourse is to be the true friend of the only Citizenry of Myanmar, instead of DASSK or the present military controlled government.
Review of A Life’s Work
Also without meaning to be pedantic, this was Bhumibol’s seventh cycle birthday. He is just beginning his eighth cycle. It will be completed when he is 96, if he is still alive then.
Apostasy in Malaysia: The hidden view
Dear Namaku Muhammad #37,
Your example of the blind men and the elephant is a good one but it should not be applied to such a basic issue as apostasy. It should be applied to religion. Our creator is omnipotent and we could never hope to envisage fully His greatness in the scheme of things. So, like the blind men, we could only touch the surface and like the blind men, all of us could be partially right. We should never condemn nor belittle the faith of others as long as they do not cause harm. I would accept someone who believes in a stone (or the spirit within) if it could inspire him to do good. The moment he uses it to hurt others, it becomes unacceptable.
On the issue of apostasy, we have to get the basics right. If you believe that everyone should be given the freedom of belief, then it has to apply both ways, in and out of any religion. You could not have it one way and not the other. All religions would surely prefer their adherents to stay. So, we have to find other ways to prevent believers from leaving while maintaining the basic right. We could persuade, we could appeal, we could even beg them to stay. But we should never threaten them with punishment and harm. The intimidation would only confirm that the religion is indeed not good for them and they would want out even more so.
And one swallow does not, a summer make. Not even the few cases of apostasy being allowed would indicate freedom to disbelief. If Lina Joy were to appeal to the Syaria courts, I am pretty sure she would be like Makcik Kamariah Ali, who has been in and out of the courts for the past umpteen years without being given the right to apostasize. She was also reportedly imprisoned for 20 months in 1992, presumably for apostasy. (Ref: http://legitexpect.wordpress.com/2008/03/11/kamariah-ali/ )
How and why, in heaven’s name, could a person be subjected to so much anguish, pain and suffering and yet not be given proper closure? I personally do not believe that Islam would allow it. And the ultimate irony is that, while the courts still consider her a Muslim, when she dies, she would most likely be buried somewhere other than a Muslim cemetry, like one of her Sky Kingdom members. How sad and how tragic.