槟城副首长法鲁斯辞去本南地州议席议员，导致本南地须进行补选。首相纳吉认为不必要的补选劳民伤财，声称或许国阵不上阵，马华和民政也认同。
至于选委会，主席阿都阿兹，早前就提醒选民，若对这种执意制造补选现象不满，可以透过选票惩罚那些始作俑者。他也指责一些政党滥用民主程序以满足本身的议程，因此探讨修改选举法令的可能性。
阿都阿兹的确用心良苦，只遗憾他已经超越选委会的权限。选委会必须是中立的，它们的任务就是办好选举工作。至于修改法令这些问题，若主席也给自己的意见的话，即让人看到它们涉政，这些立法的事应该由国会议员去操心。
针对修改选举法令防随意制造补选一事，负责法律与国会事务的首相暑部长纳兹里较早前也说过，而林吉祥当时揶揄他国阵已经没有三分之二优势了，怎样能修改？是的，修改选举法令需要三分之二的赞成票，预料在此课题上，在朝党若动议修改法令的话，将不会获得在野党的支持的。
自从去年308大选至今，我国政坛的朝野对峙没有止息过。我读到梳邦市州议员杨巧双的部落格，她说有选民告诉他后悔支持政治变天，早知今天这样的乱局不断的话，宁愿让过去一路来传统的执政延续下去，以求安宁日子就好了。
这未免太悲观了吧？其实每个国家的民主路程都有一段崎岖的斗争路段的，过了此地就可见到曙光了。我国正在迈向民主政治体系，是处于调整阶段。国阵去年的挫折，不等于它会继续猾落。若民联的合作出误，国阵下届大选就会东山再起的。国阵在民联的强劲对抗下，有了竞争的对象，它必须决心去芜存菁。这样，如果两个阵营都为了争取人民的支持，双方都打出以民为主的治国方针的话，对整个国家的前途是灿烂的。改变是一个痛苦的过程，因此民主的斗争不可畏避改变。
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
马哈迪领军本南地补选最适合
槟城本南地州议席补选，首相纳吉怕怕。第一时间声称补选劳民伤财，国阵或许不竞选。
自去年308大选以来，当时是副首相的纳吉领军两场补选败北。成为首相后，面对三场补选，他知道国阵必没好结果的，所以把领军责任交给副手慕尤丁。结果1比2败北，但这不等于不关纳吉的事！
怕怕的纳吉不想国阵竞选，正中也是怕怕的马华和民政下怀，举脚赞成。谁知半路杀出垂帘听政的马哈迪，批评徒弟纳吉不该怕怕在野党。老马识途，自荐领军出征。老马以为国阵还像以前他时代那么优势掌控国家，以为它还受大多数人民欢迎，更以为自己还像以前那样能操风唤雨。
现在，国阵竞不竞选都双输了！竞选嘛，纳吉岂不是自打嘴巴？作为一国最高领袖，千万不要太快说话，他已经失言了！不竞选嘛，岂不是告诉全世界一国首相对在野党的挑战没有信心?
纳吉应该接受马哈迪的要求，派他领军。老马在武吉士南卯和武吉干当助选时，不助选还好，一助选即使国阵输得更惨！许多人说，纳吉当首相，就是等于“马哈迪主义”复苏了。所以派马哈迪领军，让国人看看“马哈迪主义”是否复苏了？即说，从国阵的输赢可看到。
自去年308大选以来，当时是副首相的纳吉领军两场补选败北。成为首相后，面对三场补选，他知道国阵必没好结果的，所以把领军责任交给副手慕尤丁。结果1比2败北，但这不等于不关纳吉的事！
怕怕的纳吉不想国阵竞选，正中也是怕怕的马华和民政下怀，举脚赞成。谁知半路杀出垂帘听政的马哈迪，批评徒弟纳吉不该怕怕在野党。老马识途，自荐领军出征。老马以为国阵还像以前他时代那么优势掌控国家，以为它还受大多数人民欢迎，更以为自己还像以前那样能操风唤雨。
现在，国阵竞不竞选都双输了！竞选嘛，纳吉岂不是自打嘴巴？作为一国最高领袖，千万不要太快说话，他已经失言了！不竞选嘛，岂不是告诉全世界一国首相对在野党的挑战没有信心?
纳吉应该接受马哈迪的要求，派他领军。老马在武吉士南卯和武吉干当助选时，不助选还好，一助选即使国阵输得更惨！许多人说，纳吉当首相，就是等于“马哈迪主义”复苏了。所以派马哈迪领军，让国人看看“马哈迪主义”是否复苏了？即说，从国阵的输赢可看到。
Friday, April 17, 2009
Warrior Saves 'Baby'
Source: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/4/16/nation/3702854&sec=nation
by SHARON LING
Thursday April 16, 2009
KUCHING: Highly-decorated former soldier Kanang Langkau has killed communists deep in Malaysian jungles, but has never seen a baby orang utan before.
“In all my 25 years serving in the jungle during my army days, I never came across a baby orang utan.
“They’re so rare and we need to protect them so that our grandchildren can still see them in the future,” he said.
*Pucker up: Kanang (left) getting a kiss from the baby orang utan before handing the primate over to Landong.*
Kanang, who was shot three times when his platoon ambushed a communist camp in Perak in 1980 and killed five communists, was awarded the Panglima Gagah Berani and Seri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa medals in 1981.
He had his first encounter with the baby primate last Friday when his friend businessman Tay Choon Yong was driving through the Lingga bazaar near Sri Aman, about 200km from here, and came across a boy playing with the baby orang utan by the roadside.
“I don’t know how the boy got hold of the orang utan but I suspect it was being kept as a pet,” Tay said.
Tay persuaded the boy to give him the animal by telling him that it could not be kept as a pet and that it probably would not survive in captivity.
He then called Kanang to inform him about the orang utan and Kanang proposed sending it to Semenggoh.
The two drove here yesterday to hand the animal over to Sarawak Forestry staff members and requested for it to be named Simanggang after the old name for the Sri Aman division where it was found.
Sarawak Forestry chief park warden Wilfred Landong said the orang utan would be sent to the Matang Wildlife Centre for rehabilitation and possibly released back into the wild.
“We may release it in the Kubah National Park, where the Matang Wildlife Centre is located, or at Semenggoh,” he said.
He added that special care would need to be given to the baby as it was without its mother.
“We’ll see if it can have a surrogate mother at Matang,” he said.
Landong said Sarawak Forestry would also investigate how the baby orang utan ended up in captivity.
He said Sarawak Forestry would send a team to Lingga to find out whether there was any previously unknown orang utan habitat in the area.
“We’re very interested in finding out if there’s a new habitat there. If yes, we will propose steps to protect the area,” he said.
by SHARON LING
Thursday April 16, 2009
KUCHING: Highly-decorated former soldier Kanang Langkau has killed communists deep in Malaysian jungles, but has never seen a baby orang utan before.
“In all my 25 years serving in the jungle during my army days, I never came across a baby orang utan.
“They’re so rare and we need to protect them so that our grandchildren can still see them in the future,” he said.
*Pucker up: Kanang (left) getting a kiss from the baby orang utan before handing the primate over to Landong.*Kanang, who was shot three times when his platoon ambushed a communist camp in Perak in 1980 and killed five communists, was awarded the Panglima Gagah Berani and Seri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa medals in 1981.
He had his first encounter with the baby primate last Friday when his friend businessman Tay Choon Yong was driving through the Lingga bazaar near Sri Aman, about 200km from here, and came across a boy playing with the baby orang utan by the roadside.
“I don’t know how the boy got hold of the orang utan but I suspect it was being kept as a pet,” Tay said.
Tay persuaded the boy to give him the animal by telling him that it could not be kept as a pet and that it probably would not survive in captivity.
He then called Kanang to inform him about the orang utan and Kanang proposed sending it to Semenggoh.
The two drove here yesterday to hand the animal over to Sarawak Forestry staff members and requested for it to be named Simanggang after the old name for the Sri Aman division where it was found.
Sarawak Forestry chief park warden Wilfred Landong said the orang utan would be sent to the Matang Wildlife Centre for rehabilitation and possibly released back into the wild.
“We may release it in the Kubah National Park, where the Matang Wildlife Centre is located, or at Semenggoh,” he said.
He added that special care would need to be given to the baby as it was without its mother.
“We’ll see if it can have a surrogate mother at Matang,” he said.
Landong said Sarawak Forestry would also investigate how the baby orang utan ended up in captivity.
He said Sarawak Forestry would send a team to Lingga to find out whether there was any previously unknown orang utan habitat in the area.
“We’re very interested in finding out if there’s a new habitat there. If yes, we will propose steps to protect the area,” he said.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
登州巫统议员为油钱内讧
拉惹粕特拉，谢谢你，你一言惊醒梦中人！你文章“这是偿还时候了” （It's Pay Back Time http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/20617/84/）分析登州10个巫统议员窝里反的原因，真的一针见血。
登州议席共32个，其中24个是属于国阵的，其余是民联的。10个国阵巫统议员，由前大臣依德里斯带领罢免出席州议会，潜伏推翻大臣阿末赛益的阴谋。国阵分裂为10对14议员，如果发动投大臣不信任票，10个巫统加8个民联，大臣就会倒台。
为什么去年308后，闹出元首（登州苏丹）和前首相阿都拉对峙大臣人选？原因是首相的人选依德里斯滥用中央的油钱拨款。从2000年到2008年，依德里斯滥用70至80亿令吉的油钱，油钱没有进入州库里，都落入州巫统库里，当时依德里斯是州主席。
登州3年季侯风的风帆赛，每年就吞了3亿令吉，如果你包括他们建造的房子，数目达到10亿令吉。所以元首坚持换人出任大臣。
记得今年的瓜拉登嘉楼国席补选吗？当时政府宣布把30亿令吉油钱交回给登州。所以现在你知道为什么出现巫统议员窝里反的事情了吗？答案就是钱钱钱钱！以前吃过知味可口，现在以为政权换了，想必有背后老板支撑的，怎可放弃以前那般吃惯了的生活呢？
所以巫统玩惯了金钱政治，死性不改。金钱不用在人民身上，而是为了自肥！国阵治国51年，本来每个人民都很富有的，但却不然，因为钱都落入贪官污吏户头里。
登州议席共32个，其中24个是属于国阵的，其余是民联的。10个国阵巫统议员，由前大臣依德里斯带领罢免出席州议会，潜伏推翻大臣阿末赛益的阴谋。国阵分裂为10对14议员，如果发动投大臣不信任票，10个巫统加8个民联，大臣就会倒台。
为什么去年308后，闹出元首（登州苏丹）和前首相阿都拉对峙大臣人选？原因是首相的人选依德里斯滥用中央的油钱拨款。从2000年到2008年，依德里斯滥用70至80亿令吉的油钱，油钱没有进入州库里，都落入州巫统库里，当时依德里斯是州主席。
登州3年季侯风的风帆赛，每年就吞了3亿令吉，如果你包括他们建造的房子，数目达到10亿令吉。所以元首坚持换人出任大臣。
记得今年的瓜拉登嘉楼国席补选吗？当时政府宣布把30亿令吉油钱交回给登州。所以现在你知道为什么出现巫统议员窝里反的事情了吗？答案就是钱钱钱钱！以前吃过知味可口，现在以为政权换了，想必有背后老板支撑的，怎可放弃以前那般吃惯了的生活呢？
所以巫统玩惯了金钱政治，死性不改。金钱不用在人民身上，而是为了自肥！国阵治国51年，本来每个人民都很富有的，但却不然，因为钱都落入贪官污吏户头里。
The End of Newsweek?
by Brent Bozell
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
One has to wonder whether Newsweek's financial gurus really think it's a smart business strategy to greet the Easter season with funerals for "Christian America," and greet the Christmas season by making the "religious case for gay marriage"? (That's not to mention all the reverent Obama worship in between.)
Christianity, in contrast to Newsweek, is in decent demographic shape. The American Religious Identification Survey that Newsweek touted -- from Trinity College in Connecticut -- estimated there are now 173.4 million self-identified Christians in America, up from 151.2 million in 1990. The percentage declined, but the actual number increased.
The real bold-faced result in the survey that spawned Newsweek's cover is the rise of what the pollsters called the "nones," up from 14 million to 34 million. In a typically ponderous essay, Newsweek editor Jon Meacham welcomed the alleged decline and fall of "the modern religious right's notion of a Christian America" because it creates a "calmer" political environment and a more "theologically serious religious life."
Translation: The "culture wars" should be declared over, and the left should be declared the winner. The Christian right should slink back to its church buildings and keep its antiquated notions of sin and salvation out of the public square. "Calmer" Christians will seek a creed that chummily goes along and gets along with the modern, secular culture. Only surrender on social issues is "theologically serious."
Newsweek greeted the coming of Easter with a black cover, and the headline "The Decline and Fall of Christian America," spelled out in red in the shape of a cross. Inside, it was more declarative: "The End of Christian America." Why? Because they found that the percentage of self-identified Christians had fallen 10 points since 1990. OK, then let's compare. How much has Newsweek's circulation fallen since 1990? Just since 2007, their announced circulation has dropped by 52 percent. It would be more plausible to state "The End of Newsweek."
At the end of 2007, Newsweek reduced its "base rate" (or circulation guaranteed to advertisers) from 3.1 million to 2.6 million, a 16 percent drop. At the end of 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported that Newsweek, faced with an estimated 21 percent decline in ad pages, could soon drop that circulation number by another 500,000 to 1 million readers. In February, the magazine confirmed the million-issue drop, saying it would drop to a base of 1.9 million in July and 1.5 million readers by January 2010.
"Mass for us is a business that doesn't work," Tom Ascheim, Newsweek's chief executive, told the New York Times. "Wish it did, but it doesn't. We did it for a long time, successfully, but we can't anymore." Now that U.S. News and World Report waved a white flag and said it would only publish monthly, the evidence is much stronger for wondering about the decline and fall of the American "news magazine" -- as if Time and Newsweek haven't already shed that label in everything but name.
Newsweek's strategy in the midst of all its financial decline is to double and triple the amount of editorializing, cast aside all semblance of "news" in favor of long, liberal essays by self-impressed Newsweek editor Jon Meacham and his international editor Fareed Zakaria. Is that really a business solution, or is it the captains performing violin solos on the deck of the Titanic?
Newsweek watchers might find it odd that Christians should surrender, but Muslims should be granted greater respect. A month ago, Newsweek's cover announced, "Radical Islam is a fact of life. How to live with it." Fareed Zakaria argued the smart strategy was "nuanced, noncombative rhetoric" that avoids sweeping declarations like "war on terror." Zakaria's piece ended right in the secular liberal's sweet spot. He was confident radical Islamism would eventually lose adherents, because "they lack answers to the problems of the modern world. They do not have a worldview that can satisfy the aspirations of modern men and women. We do. That's the most powerful weapon of all."
Modernity will win, and archaic religion will lose. All this leads back to the sneaking suspicion that the top minds at Newsweek think they are the wisest of men, the definers of trends and the shepherds of public opinion. So why is everyone abandoning their advice? Why are the captains of a magazine that's lost half its circulation telling the rest of us where the mainstream lies?
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Black, White Pentecostals Mark Historic Lynching With Unity Services
by Adrienne Gaines
April 14, 2009 -- Leaders from the Assemblies of God (AG) and the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) are crossing racial divides this week to mark the anniversary of an infamous Springfield, Mo., lynching that occurred more than 100 years ago today - the same day the Azusa Street revival began in Los Angeles.
Dubbed "A House No Longer Divided," the three-day preaching event began Monday and is designed to foster unity among Pentecostal churches in Springfield, where three African-American men were murdered by a white lynch mob on April 14, 1906. The same day, William J. Seymour, who was African-American, began holding revival services in a run-down mission at 312 Azusa Street in Los Angeles, sparking the modern Pentecostal movement.
"April 14, 1906, was witness to both the darkness of humanity and the light of God," said Darrin Rodgers, director of the Flower Pentecostal Heritage Center, the official research center for the AG and a co-sponsor of the event. "It is important that we not only remember, but also overcome, our painful history of racial disunity. A House No Longer Divided offers an opportunity to tell the world that, just like at Azusa Street, ‘the color line has been washed away in the blood [of Christ].'"
The event is also co-sponsored by Timmons Temple COGIC, Kingdom Movement Ministries and the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, all in Springfield. Speakers include leaders from both the AG and COGIC. The services will be held at Timmons Temple tonight, and at the William J. Seymour Chapel at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary tomorrow.
"The city really needs it," said John Wheeler, who came up with the idea as a way to build bridges across racial and denominational lines. Wheeler is a student at the AG's Central Bible College and the great-grandson of COGIC founder Charles H. Mason.
"Walls have been set up," Wheeler told Charisma. "I just believe that this can be the beginning of breaking down those walls."
Although Rodgers disputes the claim that the AG broke off from COGIC in 1914, he said racist practices were at work within the denomination. Rodgers noted that from 1939 until 1962, the AG had a policy against ordaining African-Americans and encouraged them to join their sister church, COGIC, instead.
"That attitude of separate but equal was a reflection of the evil structures of society of that time," Rodgers said. "We have taken and continue to need to take measures to overcome that."
Wheeler said he believes one day COGIC will no longer be predominantly black. "I can see that day," he said. But beyond seeing every church become multicultural, organizers say they want to see ministries fellowship with one another and work together to meet the needs of their community.
"Right now, cross-racially we don't do much with each other," said Elder T. J. Appleby, pastor of Timmons Temple COGIC. "There's very little, if any, kind of interracial fellowship. Even if we're not thinking that there are negative racial divides, where people are having negative feelings about a different race, we aren't coming across the racial line to fellowship and ... do things together in this community."
Rodgers said he hopes A House No Longer Divided will be more than just a single event. "We hope that this will not only allow us to get to know each other better but to establish a continuing, ongoing relationship between our bodies, not just between individuals but between organizations so that maybe we can better relate to each other in the future," he told Charisma. "We don't know exactly what the future holds for us, we just believe that God's going to be there, and this will lead to great things."
April 14, 2009 -- Leaders from the Assemblies of God (AG) and the Church of God in Christ (COGIC) are crossing racial divides this week to mark the anniversary of an infamous Springfield, Mo., lynching that occurred more than 100 years ago today - the same day the Azusa Street revival began in Los Angeles.
Dubbed "A House No Longer Divided," the three-day preaching event began Monday and is designed to foster unity among Pentecostal churches in Springfield, where three African-American men were murdered by a white lynch mob on April 14, 1906. The same day, William J. Seymour, who was African-American, began holding revival services in a run-down mission at 312 Azusa Street in Los Angeles, sparking the modern Pentecostal movement.
"April 14, 1906, was witness to both the darkness of humanity and the light of God," said Darrin Rodgers, director of the Flower Pentecostal Heritage Center, the official research center for the AG and a co-sponsor of the event. "It is important that we not only remember, but also overcome, our painful history of racial disunity. A House No Longer Divided offers an opportunity to tell the world that, just like at Azusa Street, ‘the color line has been washed away in the blood [of Christ].'"
The event is also co-sponsored by Timmons Temple COGIC, Kingdom Movement Ministries and the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary, all in Springfield. Speakers include leaders from both the AG and COGIC. The services will be held at Timmons Temple tonight, and at the William J. Seymour Chapel at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary tomorrow.
"The city really needs it," said John Wheeler, who came up with the idea as a way to build bridges across racial and denominational lines. Wheeler is a student at the AG's Central Bible College and the great-grandson of COGIC founder Charles H. Mason.
"Walls have been set up," Wheeler told Charisma. "I just believe that this can be the beginning of breaking down those walls."
Although Rodgers disputes the claim that the AG broke off from COGIC in 1914, he said racist practices were at work within the denomination. Rodgers noted that from 1939 until 1962, the AG had a policy against ordaining African-Americans and encouraged them to join their sister church, COGIC, instead.
"That attitude of separate but equal was a reflection of the evil structures of society of that time," Rodgers said. "We have taken and continue to need to take measures to overcome that."
Wheeler said he believes one day COGIC will no longer be predominantly black. "I can see that day," he said. But beyond seeing every church become multicultural, organizers say they want to see ministries fellowship with one another and work together to meet the needs of their community.
"Right now, cross-racially we don't do much with each other," said Elder T. J. Appleby, pastor of Timmons Temple COGIC. "There's very little, if any, kind of interracial fellowship. Even if we're not thinking that there are negative racial divides, where people are having negative feelings about a different race, we aren't coming across the racial line to fellowship and ... do things together in this community."
Rodgers said he hopes A House No Longer Divided will be more than just a single event. "We hope that this will not only allow us to get to know each other better but to establish a continuing, ongoing relationship between our bodies, not just between individuals but between organizations so that maybe we can better relate to each other in the future," he told Charisma. "We don't know exactly what the future holds for us, we just believe that God's going to be there, and this will lead to great things."
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
民政党必须迅速退出国阵
民政党主席许子根被委任为首相暑部长，外表看来好像对华裔很光荣。其实一点都不光荣，反而很丢脸。诸如该党前主席林敬益说，巫统作大哥，操纵整个国阵，其他成员党都好像乞丐一样向巫统讨东西。这番话民政党很快就忘记了，殊不知党主席的部长职乃好像乞丐一样讨回来的，民政党还能够在马来人眼中抬得起头来吗？
去年308，许子根弃州投国，为了就是很想上京当部长。岂知却不争气被选民遗弃，因过去掌槟城十多年当家不当权而使到整个政党兵败如山倒，狼狈要求辞去领导身份。当时党员呼吁民政党退出国阵，许子根也没有马上斥责，把事情带到大会辩论，可见他曾经有意赞成它。
现在许子根当部长，在华裔的眼中，批评多过赞赏。原因很简单，民政党败得那么惨，还增加一个部长，并且是由一个人民唾弃的候选人身份走后门进去。
我希望民政党现在应该为下届大选打算，留在国阵，贪图官位，肯定没有时间走得脱倒闭的灾难。就看副首相慕尤丁，补选输了，就骂华裔不感恩，这般种族主义的领袖极端思维，肯定会拖马华和民政下水的。民政党应该效法沙州的进步党，退出国阵，再好好计划下一步。民政党几位人才都已经加入公正党了，整个党再不迅速作恰当行动就会有更多人才消失的。
去年308，许子根弃州投国，为了就是很想上京当部长。岂知却不争气被选民遗弃，因过去掌槟城十多年当家不当权而使到整个政党兵败如山倒，狼狈要求辞去领导身份。当时党员呼吁民政党退出国阵，许子根也没有马上斥责，把事情带到大会辩论，可见他曾经有意赞成它。
现在许子根当部长，在华裔的眼中，批评多过赞赏。原因很简单，民政党败得那么惨，还增加一个部长，并且是由一个人民唾弃的候选人身份走后门进去。
我希望民政党现在应该为下届大选打算，留在国阵，贪图官位，肯定没有时间走得脱倒闭的灾难。就看副首相慕尤丁，补选输了，就骂华裔不感恩，这般种族主义的领袖极端思维，肯定会拖马华和民政下水的。民政党应该效法沙州的进步党，退出国阵，再好好计划下一步。民政党几位人才都已经加入公正党了，整个党再不迅速作恰当行动就会有更多人才消失的。
Put Your Bet on God over Newsweek
by Terry Paulson
Monday, April 13, 2009
A recent issue of Newsweek shouts—“The End of Christian America.” On this day after Easter, we can add Newsweek to those who for 2000 years have tried to push Christianity back into the tomb.
Jon Meacham’s featured article focuses on one key statistic—the number of Americans willing to claim that they have no religious affiliation has nearly doubling from 8 to 15 percent since 1990. But even Meacham observes: “While the percentage of Christians may be shrinking, rumors of the death of Christianity are greatly exaggerated. Being less Christian does not necessarily mean that America is post-Christian. A third of Americans say they are born again; this figure, along with the decline of politically moderate-to liberal mainline Protestants…suggests a movement towards more conservative beliefs and particularly to a more 'evangelical' outlook among Christians."
Rick Warren’s The Purpose Driven Life continues to set sales records. That is unless you consider the Bible which consistently outsells ever other book every year. In these difficult times, many churches report increased attendance. It may be more acceptable to claim unbelief, but the Christian faith remains vitally important to millions of Americans.
Contrary to what most secular Americans fear, most Christians want nothing to do with a government-endorsed religion. Nothing killed the vitality of the church in Europe more than government-sponsored churches. Open disagreements help test and strengthen one’s faith. God didn’t send his Son to win a popularity contest or impact surveys, nor did Jesus come to rally renewed patriotism. Jesus came to call people to faith and a personal relationship with God. But that shouldn’t discount the importance of the Judeo-Christian faith in founding and shaping America.
Bridging to Muslims worldwide, President Obama replied at a Turkish press conference, “One of the greatest strengths of the United States is, although as I mentioned before, we have a very large Christian population, we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation, a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens.”
While technically true, in contrast to Muslim countries under Sharia Law, he failed to honor our Judeo-Christian heritage’s role in shaping our culture and affirming the right of other faiths to exercise that faith without fear of persecution.
Even God can’t alter the past, but politicians sure try to change history. Our Declaration of Independence bases our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness on our Creator. Fifty-two of the fifty-five Founding Fathers who worked on the Constitution were active members of an orthodox Christian faith. They’d be shocked at the attempts to banish God from the public square. Presidents like Washington, Adams, Lincoln, FDR, Truman, Reagan, and Bush had no trouble affirming our nation’s Christian underpinnings.
John Adams noted the importance of faith in maintaining a just and civil society: “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
George Washington, in his Farewell Address, repeatedly affirmed the importance of Christianity: “Let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. …Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”
Secular relativism may rebel at such statements today, but as Feodor Dostoevski warned, "Without God, all things are permissible." America’s moral compass has been largely built on the Judeo-Christian view of right and wrong. While protecting the rights of citizens of other faiths, we should never be ashamed to affirm the central role Christianity has played in making America what it is today.
The next time President Obama welcomes Muslim leaders, I’d hope he’d change the script in his tele-prompter: “Just as you value your Muslim heritage and faith, we as Americans celebrate our Judeo-Christian heritage. For our rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness come not from Presidents or legislators, but from God. It’s our Christian values that have driven us to extend those freedoms to others, even if it means sending our young men and women to defend Muslim citizens in Bosnia and to free Muslims from tyranny in Iraq. It’s that same freedom in America that allows our Muslim citizens to freely exercise their faith without fear of persecution. We are not at war with Islam; we ask you to not be at war with Christians or Jews. We want to work with you and other responsible members of the international community to extend religious freedom to citizens throughout the world.”
We deserve presidents who are proud of our country. As a Christian himself, I’d hope that President Obama could both affirm his own faith and proudly honor America’s Christian majority for supporting equal rights for other faiths. Diplomacy requires gentleness and respect; it doesn’t require discounting our own history and core values.
As for the demise of the Christian faith, I’d put my bet on God sticking around longer than any magazine or newspaper!
Monday, April 13, 2009
慕尤丁应该感恩
慕尤丁率领三场补选，西马输两场，责怪华裔不感恩！
慕尤丁，你错了。没有感恩的是你。马哈迪讲纳税的，90％是从华裔来。而过去那些年来，华裔却好像乞丐一样向政府讨东西。国阵还能够执政，因为华裔给了马华和民政十多个议席，你应该感恩。不过，如果巫统仍然那么偏向种族主义的话，下届大选还给不给马华和民政机会，那就不敢担保了。
国家的财富，应该公平发给所有马来西亚人，不管他们是投选在朝党或在野党。国阵常常在大选和补选滥用国库款项拨款，这是51年来人民忍受的行为。我们不再沉默了，平常华裔得不到利益，等选举才来派糖果，这一套华裔不卖账了。华裔已经不再被牵着鼻子走路了，华裔不受贿选动心，乃要国阵晓得种族主义已经过时了。
如果分析一下慕尤丁的言论，他其实乃犯了煽动罪行，他在煽动马来人质疑华裔威胁他们。
慕尤丁，你错了。没有感恩的是你。马哈迪讲纳税的，90％是从华裔来。而过去那些年来，华裔却好像乞丐一样向政府讨东西。国阵还能够执政，因为华裔给了马华和民政十多个议席，你应该感恩。不过，如果巫统仍然那么偏向种族主义的话，下届大选还给不给马华和民政机会，那就不敢担保了。
国家的财富，应该公平发给所有马来西亚人，不管他们是投选在朝党或在野党。国阵常常在大选和补选滥用国库款项拨款，这是51年来人民忍受的行为。我们不再沉默了，平常华裔得不到利益，等选举才来派糖果，这一套华裔不卖账了。华裔已经不再被牵着鼻子走路了，华裔不受贿选动心，乃要国阵晓得种族主义已经过时了。
如果分析一下慕尤丁的言论，他其实乃犯了煽动罪行，他在煽动马来人质疑华裔威胁他们。
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Jesus was Betrayed
Jesus was Betrayed
- A Good Friday Meditation on the Word
“But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed.” (Lk 22:21-22).
It was the last supper of Jesus with his 12 disciples. The picture of being hailed as king on that particular “Palm” Sunday was still vivid in His mind. But He knew He will soon be left alone scaling up that Mount of Death – Calvary. His disciples will soon forsake Him. At last, only John was found standing by His dear mom’s side.
What broke His heart most was the betrayal by Judas. David had prophesied about this, “Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.” (Ps 41:9). No, Jesus did not put a curse on Judas. When He said “woe to that man”, it could be any man, and Judas had a choice, he needed not be that “man”.
It was not the cross that brought Him pain but rather a friend’s betrayal that had inflicted Him much. He showed concern about Judas’ salvation. Nevertheless Judas had never made a U-turn.
In real life, some of us have also suffered betrayal by someone. Such thing will be more prominent in the last days. Paul said, “But understand this, that in the last days, there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lover of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying the power. Avoid such people.” (2 Tim 3:1-5).
The above characters are related to one another. Why is a person being treacherous? Because he or she a lover of self, a lover of money, and is proud and arrogant. Don’t ever think that Paul was talking to the unbelievers. No, he was talking to people in the House of God. People of such description are to be seen everywhere, and the Church is of no exception.
We have seen enough saints making vain promises. They broke promises when material gains propped up along the way, thus friendship was sacrificed! In the last days, integrity is becoming less weighty than gold. Saints of God manifested an absolute character flaw. As a result, the Church was made a mockery by the world.
It was painful for the Lord to be betrayed. A Bible commentator has suggested that Jesus was probably died of heart failure. Jesus, being painful over people’s hardness of hearts, bore all their burdens alone. He was forgiving about the wicked deeds of them all, including that of Judas. That probably speaks why Jesus gave up the ghost sooner than the two robbers. There was no forensic technology at that time, so no one will know the cause of His death. No matter how, sooner or later, Jesus would die being nailed. Even if He died of heart failure, He died on the cross. There is no doubt about that.
Finally, the gist of my story of meditation is that living a life of character flaw is impossible to please God. If we have gone astray, let us make a U-turn now. If someone has hurt you, forgive him or her.
- A Good Friday Meditation on the Word
“But behold, the hand of him who betrays me is with me on the table. For the Son of Man goes as it has been determined, but woe to that man by whom he is betrayed.” (Lk 22:21-22).
It was the last supper of Jesus with his 12 disciples. The picture of being hailed as king on that particular “Palm” Sunday was still vivid in His mind. But He knew He will soon be left alone scaling up that Mount of Death – Calvary. His disciples will soon forsake Him. At last, only John was found standing by His dear mom’s side.
What broke His heart most was the betrayal by Judas. David had prophesied about this, “Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me.” (Ps 41:9). No, Jesus did not put a curse on Judas. When He said “woe to that man”, it could be any man, and Judas had a choice, he needed not be that “man”.
It was not the cross that brought Him pain but rather a friend’s betrayal that had inflicted Him much. He showed concern about Judas’ salvation. Nevertheless Judas had never made a U-turn.
In real life, some of us have also suffered betrayal by someone. Such thing will be more prominent in the last days. Paul said, “But understand this, that in the last days, there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lover of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying the power. Avoid such people.” (2 Tim 3:1-5).
The above characters are related to one another. Why is a person being treacherous? Because he or she a lover of self, a lover of money, and is proud and arrogant. Don’t ever think that Paul was talking to the unbelievers. No, he was talking to people in the House of God. People of such description are to be seen everywhere, and the Church is of no exception.
We have seen enough saints making vain promises. They broke promises when material gains propped up along the way, thus friendship was sacrificed! In the last days, integrity is becoming less weighty than gold. Saints of God manifested an absolute character flaw. As a result, the Church was made a mockery by the world.
It was painful for the Lord to be betrayed. A Bible commentator has suggested that Jesus was probably died of heart failure. Jesus, being painful over people’s hardness of hearts, bore all their burdens alone. He was forgiving about the wicked deeds of them all, including that of Judas. That probably speaks why Jesus gave up the ghost sooner than the two robbers. There was no forensic technology at that time, so no one will know the cause of His death. No matter how, sooner or later, Jesus would die being nailed. Even if He died of heart failure, He died on the cross. There is no doubt about that.
Finally, the gist of my story of meditation is that living a life of character flaw is impossible to please God. If we have gone astray, let us make a U-turn now. If someone has hurt you, forgive him or her.
纳吉新内阁
来源： http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/102011
新任首相纳吉今日揭盅其新内阁名单，这个被命名为“新团队”的内阁，共拥有28名部长及40名副部长。
纳吉强调，人民要求是一个对人民需求，反应迅速的负责任领袖，以达致“全民马来西亚”口号的目标。
纳吉也宣布将会设立关键绩效指标，来监督40名副部长的表现，并委任民政党主席许子根为首相署部长，特别负责监督此事。
此外，之前在308大选后，拒绝受委为交通部副部长，而引起政坛震撼的阿尼法终于扶正，担任外交部长。
至于备受瞩目的巫青团长凯里正如早前传闻般，不受委入阁；不过，其党选落败的对手，即马哈迪幼子慕克里兹，则出任副贸工部长。
另外两个巫统臂膀，即妇女组主席莎丽扎和女青年团长罗斯娜，皆榜上有名。同时，巫青团副团长拉沙里出任副青体部长。
莎丽扎是受委为上议员，重新出掌妇女、家庭与社会发展部长。
换言之，凯里是唯一没有受委入阁的巫统三大膀臂的领袖。
9原任部长遭到除名
至于被除名的9名前部长包括：前旅游部长阿查丽娜、前内政部长赛哈密、前房屋部长黄家泉、前首相署部长（经济策划单位）阿米山、前工程部长莫哈末晋、前乡村发展部长莫哈末泰益、前直辖区部长朱哈斯南、前天然资源及环境部道格拉斯翁卡恩巴斯及前贸消部长沙里尔（上周已呈辞）。
纳吉本身兼掌财政部，巫统署理主席慕尤丁出任副首相兼掌教育部。
第一高票副主席阿末扎希担任国防部长，第二高票副主席希山慕丁担任内政部长，第三高票副主席莎菲益则出掌乡村发展部长。
这次内阁改组中，原本的科艺部和能讯部，已合并为能源、绿色工艺及水务部，并由陈华贵出掌部长。
此外，新闻部也与文化及艺术部合并成为新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部，由莱士雅丁出掌。
许子根负责团结事务
华裔部长方面，今日宣誓就任上议员的许子根受委为首相署部长，负责团结及表现事务。
至于马华则维持4名部长及6副部长的格局。江作汉升正为房政部长，取代在党选中落败的黄家泉。
黄燕燕转任旅游部长，翁诗杰继续执掌交通部，廖中莱则继续担任卫生部长。
马华6名副部长则是，副财政部长则曹智雄、副教育部长魏家祥、副高教部长何国忠、以及今日受委为上议员的马华妇女组主席周美芬。至于两名入阁的新人则是副新闻部长王赛芝及副外交部长李志亮。
以下是新内阁名单阵容：
首相：纳吉
副首相：慕尤丁
1）首相署部长：
1）许子根（团结与表现事务）
2）纳兹里（法律与国会事务）
3）诺莫哈末（经济策划单位）
4）加米尔（回教事务）
首相署副部长：
1）刘伟强
2）玛西达
3）迪瓦玛尼
4）阿末玛兹兰
5）慕鲁基亚
2）财政部长：纳吉
第二财长：阿末胡斯尼
副财长：曹智雄、阿旺阿迪
3)教育部长：慕尤丁
副教长：魏家祥、弗亚查卡西
4)交通部长：翁诗杰
副部长：阿都拉欣巴克里、刘会洲
5）工业、园丘和原产业部长：柏纳东博
副部长：韩查再努丁
6）内政部长：希山慕丁
副部长：阿布瑟曼、遮亮末沙
7）新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部长：莱士雅丁
副部长：佐瑟沙朗、王赛芝
8）能源、绿色工艺与水务部长：陈华贵
副部长：诺丽雅
9）乡村与区域发展部长：沙菲宜阿达
副部长：哈山马力、佐瑟恩都鲁
10）高教部长：卡立诺丁
副部长：何国忠、赛夫丁阿都拉
11）国际贸易与工业部长：慕斯达法
副部长：慕克里兹、贾谷沙岸
12）科学、工艺与革新部长：麦西慕
副部长：法迪拉尤索夫
13）旅游部长：黄燕燕
副部长：苏莱曼泰益
14）农业部长：诺奥玛
副部长：佐哈里、罗蛤妮
15）国防部长：阿末扎希
副部长：阿都拉迪夫
16）工程部长：沙兹曼
副部长：杨坤成
17）卫生部长：廖中莱
副部长：罗斯娜
18）青年与体育部长：阿末沙比里
副部长：拉查里、黄日升
19）人力资源部长：苏巴马廉
副部长：玛兹娜
20）国内贸易与消费人事务部长：依斯迈沙比里
副部长：陈莲花
21）房屋与地方政府部长：江作汉
副部长：拉兹乌京
22）妇女、家庭与社会发展部长：莎丽扎
副部长：周美芬
23）外交部长：阿尼法
副部长：柯希兰、李志亮
24）联邦直辖区部长：拉惹侬仄再纳阿比丁
副部长：沙拉瓦南
新任首相纳吉今日揭盅其新内阁名单，这个被命名为“新团队”的内阁，共拥有28名部长及40名副部长。
纳吉强调，人民要求是一个对人民需求，反应迅速的负责任领袖，以达致“全民马来西亚”口号的目标。
纳吉也宣布将会设立关键绩效指标，来监督40名副部长的表现，并委任民政党主席许子根为首相署部长，特别负责监督此事。
此外，之前在308大选后，拒绝受委为交通部副部长，而引起政坛震撼的阿尼法终于扶正，担任外交部长。
至于备受瞩目的巫青团长凯里正如早前传闻般，不受委入阁；不过，其党选落败的对手，即马哈迪幼子慕克里兹，则出任副贸工部长。
另外两个巫统臂膀，即妇女组主席莎丽扎和女青年团长罗斯娜，皆榜上有名。同时，巫青团副团长拉沙里出任副青体部长。
莎丽扎是受委为上议员，重新出掌妇女、家庭与社会发展部长。
换言之，凯里是唯一没有受委入阁的巫统三大膀臂的领袖。
9原任部长遭到除名
至于被除名的9名前部长包括：前旅游部长阿查丽娜、前内政部长赛哈密、前房屋部长黄家泉、前首相署部长（经济策划单位）阿米山、前工程部长莫哈末晋、前乡村发展部长莫哈末泰益、前直辖区部长朱哈斯南、前天然资源及环境部道格拉斯翁卡恩巴斯及前贸消部长沙里尔（上周已呈辞）。
纳吉本身兼掌财政部，巫统署理主席慕尤丁出任副首相兼掌教育部。
第一高票副主席阿末扎希担任国防部长，第二高票副主席希山慕丁担任内政部长，第三高票副主席莎菲益则出掌乡村发展部长。
这次内阁改组中，原本的科艺部和能讯部，已合并为能源、绿色工艺及水务部，并由陈华贵出掌部长。
此外，新闻部也与文化及艺术部合并成为新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部，由莱士雅丁出掌。
许子根负责团结事务
华裔部长方面，今日宣誓就任上议员的许子根受委为首相署部长，负责团结及表现事务。
至于马华则维持4名部长及6副部长的格局。江作汉升正为房政部长，取代在党选中落败的黄家泉。
黄燕燕转任旅游部长，翁诗杰继续执掌交通部，廖中莱则继续担任卫生部长。
马华6名副部长则是，副财政部长则曹智雄、副教育部长魏家祥、副高教部长何国忠、以及今日受委为上议员的马华妇女组主席周美芬。至于两名入阁的新人则是副新闻部长王赛芝及副外交部长李志亮。
以下是新内阁名单阵容：
首相：纳吉
副首相：慕尤丁
1）首相署部长：
1）许子根（团结与表现事务）
2）纳兹里（法律与国会事务）
3）诺莫哈末（经济策划单位）
4）加米尔（回教事务）
首相署副部长：
1）刘伟强
2）玛西达
3）迪瓦玛尼
4）阿末玛兹兰
5）慕鲁基亚
2）财政部长：纳吉
第二财长：阿末胡斯尼
副财长：曹智雄、阿旺阿迪
3)教育部长：慕尤丁
副教长：魏家祥、弗亚查卡西
4)交通部长：翁诗杰
副部长：阿都拉欣巴克里、刘会洲
5）工业、园丘和原产业部长：柏纳东博
副部长：韩查再努丁
6）内政部长：希山慕丁
副部长：阿布瑟曼、遮亮末沙
7）新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部长：莱士雅丁
副部长：佐瑟沙朗、王赛芝
8）能源、绿色工艺与水务部长：陈华贵
副部长：诺丽雅
9）乡村与区域发展部长：沙菲宜阿达
副部长：哈山马力、佐瑟恩都鲁
10）高教部长：卡立诺丁
副部长：何国忠、赛夫丁阿都拉
11）国际贸易与工业部长：慕斯达法
副部长：慕克里兹、贾谷沙岸
12）科学、工艺与革新部长：麦西慕
副部长：法迪拉尤索夫
13）旅游部长：黄燕燕
副部长：苏莱曼泰益
14）农业部长：诺奥玛
副部长：佐哈里、罗蛤妮
15）国防部长：阿末扎希
副部长：阿都拉迪夫
16）工程部长：沙兹曼
副部长：杨坤成
17）卫生部长：廖中莱
副部长：罗斯娜
18）青年与体育部长：阿末沙比里
副部长：拉查里、黄日升
19）人力资源部长：苏巴马廉
副部长：玛兹娜
20）国内贸易与消费人事务部长：依斯迈沙比里
副部长：陈莲花
21）房屋与地方政府部长：江作汉
副部长：拉兹乌京
22）妇女、家庭与社会发展部长：莎丽扎
副部长：周美芬
23）外交部长：阿尼法
副部长：柯希兰、李志亮
24）联邦直辖区部长：拉惹侬仄再纳阿比丁
副部长：沙拉瓦南
Why did Altantuya have to die?
Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/lite/articles.php?id=22809
APRIL 9 — Why. That is the start of many questions that have yet to be answered in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial.
The Shah Alam High Court today convicted two policemen for her October 2006 death. We now know the who, when, what, where and how of the entire murder. Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar have a right to appeal the sentence which carries the mandatory death penalty.
The trial has ended but we still don't know the whys.
Why did the prosecution or defence not call the police aide to Datuk Seri Najib Razak who recommended the policemen to political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda?
That was the tenuous link the opposition have picked on to link the prime minister to the killing. There have been wild allegations that have even appeared in newspapers across the world, including statutory declarations and cautioned statements, that have haunted Najib since the beginning of the sensational case.
Why did Altantuya hound Abdul Razak? That she even risked coming to this country to meet him but to no avail.
Why didn't he just lodge a report for harassment? But went and asked a favour from a friend in the police force.
Why did the policemen commit the crime? She was an interpreter in a country far from home and surely no threat to anyone but she died a horrible death. Why?
Why did Abdul Razak's private investigator P. Balasubramaniam disappear after filing two statutory declarations that contradict each other? And why is he still missing?
All we know is that she is dead and two people have been convicted of her murder.
We also know the trial has broken records such as being the most number of days for hearing at 159 and the most number of witnesses at 84 during the prosecution case and just two during the defence stage.
And according to police records, Azilah has been detained in prison for 891 days and Sirul, for 895 days.
But in none of those days or from among the witnesses and the accused have any of these questions been asked and answered.
And that is really what it is about, why did Altantuya have to die?
APRIL 9 — Why. That is the start of many questions that have yet to be answered in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial.
The Shah Alam High Court today convicted two policemen for her October 2006 death. We now know the who, when, what, where and how of the entire murder. Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar have a right to appeal the sentence which carries the mandatory death penalty.
The trial has ended but we still don't know the whys.
Why did the prosecution or defence not call the police aide to Datuk Seri Najib Razak who recommended the policemen to political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda?
That was the tenuous link the opposition have picked on to link the prime minister to the killing. There have been wild allegations that have even appeared in newspapers across the world, including statutory declarations and cautioned statements, that have haunted Najib since the beginning of the sensational case.
Why did Altantuya hound Abdul Razak? That she even risked coming to this country to meet him but to no avail.
Why didn't he just lodge a report for harassment? But went and asked a favour from a friend in the police force.
Why did the policemen commit the crime? She was an interpreter in a country far from home and surely no threat to anyone but she died a horrible death. Why?
Why did Abdul Razak's private investigator P. Balasubramaniam disappear after filing two statutory declarations that contradict each other? And why is he still missing?
All we know is that she is dead and two people have been convicted of her murder.
We also know the trial has broken records such as being the most number of days for hearing at 159 and the most number of witnesses at 84 during the prosecution case and just two during the defence stage.
And according to police records, Azilah has been detained in prison for 891 days and Sirul, for 895 days.
But in none of those days or from among the witnesses and the accused have any of these questions been asked and answered.
And that is really what it is about, why did Altantuya have to die?
Death for Sirul and Azilah
Malaysian court rules today that Sirul and Azilah, cops involved in Altantuya murder case, were to be hanged. I am doubtful why are the cops still covering their faces? Since the verdict was made, they are pronounced guilty, the public has the right to know who they are.
Throughout court-times, no body saw their faces outside the courts. What is the authority up to? Why was Razak Baginda released? Why did not the Private Investigator Bala be summoned to testify?
Since a French newspaper had reported on it, why did not the prosecutor extend its investigation over the submarines commission?
These are some of the unresolved questions revolving in the minds of many people.
Both Sirul and Azilah looked calm when the sentences were pronounced. Will they escape death at the end?
Also refer to: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/101984
Throughout court-times, no body saw their faces outside the courts. What is the authority up to? Why was Razak Baginda released? Why did not the Private Investigator Bala be summoned to testify?
Since a French newspaper had reported on it, why did not the prosecutor extend its investigation over the submarines commission?
These are some of the unresolved questions revolving in the minds of many people.
Both Sirul and Azilah looked calm when the sentences were pronounced. Will they escape death at the end?
Also refer to: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/101984
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
补选成绩引进政治进步
民联在4月7日的三场补选，胜武吉干当和武吉士南卯，输峇当艾，增加放眼下届大选执政的信心。砂州峇当艾是一个朴素的小地方，人民在资讯上非常落伍，对去年西马政治大变天来龙去脉欠缺了解，因此民联不易攻破它传统满足于国阵糖果政策的思维。
在资讯唾手可得的西马则不然，人民知识水平高，现在不少人已经不会盲目接受政治人物的言论了！在环境上，国阵比民联条件更好。首先，补选拖了整两个月，这让巫统领袖不必同时应付党选和补选。其次，国阵策划霹雳州变天，拖久了导致不满者情绪淡化。其三，国阵出现了大马新首相，理应让人民对它抱着期盼，使支持在野党的选民回流。可是反风仍然延续，人民真的思变，国阵未能扭转乾坤。
竞选期间，国阵三番四次地恳求选民给它们机会，真的匪夷所思，这番话应该是出自民联的口才对！人民已经给了国阵51年机会，是时候它必须以行动改变来讨好人心了！巫统再不改变，必定拖累国阵。当民联打着“不分种族”的牌时，巫统仍然高举马来人主权，无形中就是政治自杀。它们只一味归咎安华是分裂马来人的罪魁，而不检讨内部仍然炽热的贪污和金钱政治现象。
民联胜国会议席，对霹州和整个国家的民主进展是一件好事。原本属于国阵的武吉干当，上届大选输给回教党，现在却再飞走了！国阵须解读霹州选民对它夺权的行动表示不满，尼查胜出，表示人民还是要他作州务大臣。换句话说，在民主社会里，在朝在野阵线要执政的话，应该通过选票方式。
巫统在峇东埔和瓜登国席败选时患上否定民心思变的症候群，没有迅速改变。它们在巫统大会没有关注如何带领国阵跑超种族路线的课题，以便与在这课题上跑在前方的民联拼一天下。希望武吉干当的败选，巫统会痛定思痛，带领国阵作出不分种族利惠人民的政策以证明决心改变。相反的，巫统若赢，它就不会改变。因为现在有民联作为竞争的对象，国阵不改变的话，人民就会改变它。
纳吉作为新首相，现在打着“一个马来西亚”的牌，必须勇于说服支持巫统的马来人秉持开明态度去与其他族群共同分享公民的利益，国阵才会成功。纳吉必须勇于迅速改变，因为拖久了，譬如废除新经济政策课题，巫统向来以“还未到时候”而一再不想废除，类似这样例子只让人民看到国阵没诚意。“一个马来西亚”，应该包括使公民没有“土著”和“非土著”之分。
总结，我看到这三场补选成绩，为大马引进了政治的进步。大马有希望进一步成为全世界多元种族和谐相处及同心合力的模范。这才是真材实料的“大马能！”
在资讯唾手可得的西马则不然，人民知识水平高，现在不少人已经不会盲目接受政治人物的言论了！在环境上，国阵比民联条件更好。首先，补选拖了整两个月，这让巫统领袖不必同时应付党选和补选。其次，国阵策划霹雳州变天，拖久了导致不满者情绪淡化。其三，国阵出现了大马新首相，理应让人民对它抱着期盼，使支持在野党的选民回流。可是反风仍然延续，人民真的思变，国阵未能扭转乾坤。
竞选期间，国阵三番四次地恳求选民给它们机会，真的匪夷所思，这番话应该是出自民联的口才对！人民已经给了国阵51年机会，是时候它必须以行动改变来讨好人心了！巫统再不改变，必定拖累国阵。当民联打着“不分种族”的牌时，巫统仍然高举马来人主权，无形中就是政治自杀。它们只一味归咎安华是分裂马来人的罪魁，而不检讨内部仍然炽热的贪污和金钱政治现象。
民联胜国会议席，对霹州和整个国家的民主进展是一件好事。原本属于国阵的武吉干当，上届大选输给回教党，现在却再飞走了！国阵须解读霹州选民对它夺权的行动表示不满，尼查胜出，表示人民还是要他作州务大臣。换句话说，在民主社会里，在朝在野阵线要执政的话，应该通过选票方式。
巫统在峇东埔和瓜登国席败选时患上否定民心思变的症候群，没有迅速改变。它们在巫统大会没有关注如何带领国阵跑超种族路线的课题，以便与在这课题上跑在前方的民联拼一天下。希望武吉干当的败选，巫统会痛定思痛，带领国阵作出不分种族利惠人民的政策以证明决心改变。相反的，巫统若赢，它就不会改变。因为现在有民联作为竞争的对象，国阵不改变的话，人民就会改变它。
纳吉作为新首相，现在打着“一个马来西亚”的牌，必须勇于说服支持巫统的马来人秉持开明态度去与其他族群共同分享公民的利益，国阵才会成功。纳吉必须勇于迅速改变，因为拖久了，譬如废除新经济政策课题，巫统向来以“还未到时候”而一再不想废除，类似这样例子只让人民看到国阵没诚意。“一个马来西亚”，应该包括使公民没有“土著”和“非土著”之分。
总结，我看到这三场补选成绩，为大马引进了政治的进步。大马有希望进一步成为全世界多元种族和谐相处及同心合力的模范。这才是真材实料的“大马能！”
是时候改革算票制度
三场刚落幕的补选，民联胜二，国阵胜一。选后分析，武吉干当和武吉士南卯华印裔偏向民联。
我对于我国的选举和算票方式感到纳闷了很多年，投票不是所谓“秘密”的吗？那么为什么国人对于投票结果能够分析某某族群支持某某政党的呢？他们又怎样知道多少巴仙的某某族群支持谁呢？原来其中弊病之一就是算票的制度。
在算票中心，当算票时按个别投票站票箱算票。基于从选民册我们知道各投票站的种族比率，所以从它的投票结果，可以分析这些族群支持的对象。譬如以华裔为主的十八丁，尼查获得压倒性的胜利，即证明华裔支持他。
分析也说，在武吉干当和武吉士南卯，华巫印选票未回流国阵。目前在我国，无论是大选或补选，虽然华印裔是少数族群，但却扮演着举足轻重的角色。华印裔不想被责怪为造成国阵败阵的罪人，尤其在获得选举糖果后，免得日后不获得政府发展的支持。在这般的投票情况下，他们实在感到太沉重。所以选民不能发挥自由权，因怕秋后算账而按着良心投票。
我认为大马已经独立了51年，在选举制度上应该改革得更公平，民主及透明。既然每个票箱已经在投票结束后被密封，在双方的监督下，在运输的过程即可免却舞弊。算票时选委会可以先计算每个箱收回来多少张票，但不要按个别箱子来计算。民主的算票制度，应该把所有箱子的票都倒在一起，搅杂后才来算票。这般的算票制度，选民才不会顾虑秋后算帐的烦恼。制度改革也会使到政治人物玩弄种族课题的情况减少。他们会减少对这个族群讲一套话，对那个族群讲另一套话的情况。不让政党知道哪个族群投票给哪个阵线，有助于迫使各阵线努力服务选区，否则的话就别想获得支持。
这样做，也可抵御执政党利用国库拨款来讨好选民的情况。无论大选或补选，国家的财库必须不可被牵涉在内。执政党不可利用在政府里的便利执行部门工作来赢取民心。在大马的国情，大多数的情况是以族群为对象。执政党一旦宣布了对族群有利的政策，那些族群若不投给它的话，这些利益可能就因此一江春水往东流了。
选区无论由在朝党或在野党当议员，基于支持哪方的人民都是纳税人，因此双方获得国库发展乃是理所当然的。国人对政治意识越来越成熟了，在选举时才来大派糖果的作法已经在许多选民心中行不通了。在许多国家，金钱政治经常是民主的致命伤。大马也不例外，我们要成为先进国，必须大刀阔斧地改进国家的选举制度，以便减低金钱政治手法。
我对于我国的选举和算票方式感到纳闷了很多年，投票不是所谓“秘密”的吗？那么为什么国人对于投票结果能够分析某某族群支持某某政党的呢？他们又怎样知道多少巴仙的某某族群支持谁呢？原来其中弊病之一就是算票的制度。
在算票中心，当算票时按个别投票站票箱算票。基于从选民册我们知道各投票站的种族比率，所以从它的投票结果，可以分析这些族群支持的对象。譬如以华裔为主的十八丁，尼查获得压倒性的胜利，即证明华裔支持他。
分析也说，在武吉干当和武吉士南卯，华巫印选票未回流国阵。目前在我国，无论是大选或补选，虽然华印裔是少数族群，但却扮演着举足轻重的角色。华印裔不想被责怪为造成国阵败阵的罪人，尤其在获得选举糖果后，免得日后不获得政府发展的支持。在这般的投票情况下，他们实在感到太沉重。所以选民不能发挥自由权，因怕秋后算账而按着良心投票。
我认为大马已经独立了51年，在选举制度上应该改革得更公平，民主及透明。既然每个票箱已经在投票结束后被密封，在双方的监督下，在运输的过程即可免却舞弊。算票时选委会可以先计算每个箱收回来多少张票，但不要按个别箱子来计算。民主的算票制度，应该把所有箱子的票都倒在一起，搅杂后才来算票。这般的算票制度，选民才不会顾虑秋后算帐的烦恼。制度改革也会使到政治人物玩弄种族课题的情况减少。他们会减少对这个族群讲一套话，对那个族群讲另一套话的情况。不让政党知道哪个族群投票给哪个阵线，有助于迫使各阵线努力服务选区，否则的话就别想获得支持。
这样做，也可抵御执政党利用国库拨款来讨好选民的情况。无论大选或补选，国家的财库必须不可被牵涉在内。执政党不可利用在政府里的便利执行部门工作来赢取民心。在大马的国情，大多数的情况是以族群为对象。执政党一旦宣布了对族群有利的政策，那些族群若不投给它的话，这些利益可能就因此一江春水往东流了。
选区无论由在朝党或在野党当议员，基于支持哪方的人民都是纳税人，因此双方获得国库发展乃是理所当然的。国人对政治意识越来越成熟了，在选举时才来大派糖果的作法已经在许多选民心中行不通了。在许多国家，金钱政治经常是民主的致命伤。大马也不例外，我们要成为先进国，必须大刀阔斧地改进国家的选举制度，以便减低金钱政治手法。
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Do Mahathir A Favour: Ignore Him
by TUNKU ABDUL AZIZ
Apr 3, 2009
Source: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/22780
UMNO succeeded brilliantly in putting on a well-orchestrated monologue carnival on the universally fashionable twin-theme of change and reform at their just concluded annual political jamboree. They succeeded in the event of mesmerising themselves into a frenzy. Talking change is easy, but “walking the change” is when the uncommitted falls by the wayside.
By all accounts, UMNO, of all political parties in Malaysia, is a most unlikely candidate for change. It is stuck in a time warp. Its leadership, never known for its ability to focus on critical national issues and respond quickly to the needs of the moment, more often than not, has absolutely no clue where to begin the process.
Blaming the opposition for things that do not go according to plan is well and good, but it would be more helpful and constructive for UMNO to accept and digest a simple fact of life which stipulates that the external pressures acting on you are only as influential as your internal weaknesses. UMNO’s internal weaknesses are there for all to see, but it says a great deal about its organisational culture that the leaders remain both deaf and blind to the rot that stares them in the face. This being the case, UMNO continues to stumble from crisis to crisis, quite unaware why even the Malays who should be rallying round to support it are instead turning their backs on it.
"Admitting Mahathir back into UMNO’s inner sanctum will add to its problems."
UMNO is not ready to move forward. More baffling is why its leaders are making overtures to Mahathir to return and even act as “adviser.” It somehow suggests complete arrogance, totally muddled thinking and a disdain for Malaysian public opinion on their part. It is, I am convinced, a pathological streak that is part of the UMNO political tradition. We have had enough of Mahathir’s brand of “good governance” for twenty-two agonising, heart-rending, years that saw “Grand Corruption”, ( first coined by George Moody-Stuart and used as the title of his famous book on international corruption) being institutionalised in every important facet of our national life. By any yardstick, Mahathir’s tenure was twenty-two years too long. We need Mahathir as we need a tail between our legs.
For UMNO in particular, any attempt at open reconciliation with Mahathir, the ‘megalomeddler’, (a new word I have just invented to add further to the richness of English) will be the kiss of death. If, in the intoxicating afterglow of their 59th general assembly UMNO leaders were disposed to be generous towards Mahathir, and forgive him all his transgressions and sins against society, they need to have their heads examined.
Based on what we know about the man, Mahathir is happiest when he is also at his mischievous best. If there is no crisis, Mahathir will see to it that one is invented. He survived 22 years in office by playing on, and manipulating shamelessly, our fears of a recurrence of the May 13 incident which nearly tore this nation apart in 1969. It is a card that some UMNO types at good at pulling out of their pack when they feel threatened by challenges to “ketuanan Melayu.”
It is not in the man’s mental make up to give, as we have seen in his unremitting hostility to Abdullah Badawi, his anointed successor, a sporting chance to make a mark as prime minister. But, then, Mahathir was not a sportsman in the mould of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein or even Tun Hussein Onn. One of the central dogmas of Mahathirism and one espoused by the great man with unbounded passion is “winner takes all.”
He did not believe in taking prisoners. The battle field of his choice was the judicial arena where he held sway, and where crouching judges were falling over each other in an embarrassingly sycophantic display of eternal gratitude to their benefactor and where witnesses were “turned” at will to coerce them to cooperate. In one fell swoop, one of the most respected judicial institutions in the Commonwealth became an object of fun, ridicule and derision.
His maniacal urge to dominate everything and everyone in sight is a serious character flaw. To think that he will ever be a moderating influence and, therefore, an asset in the much-needed reinvention of UMNO to be in readiness for the 13th general elections is to believe in Grimm’s Fairy Tales of my childhood.
The nation is well-rid of the man. In God’s name, let him go his own meddling way and we, our own, free to determine our lives in accordance with the Constitution and the dictates of our conscience.
Admitting Mahathir back into UMNO’s inner sanctum will add to its problems, and internal unity will forever remain a gleam in the eye, and it will hasten the demise of UMNO, now already on its last legs. Perhaps I should just say nothing and let UMNO leaders find out for themselves the joy of having Mahathir under the same roof. (By TUNKU ABDUL AZIZ/ MySinchew)
Apr 3, 2009
Source: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/22780
UMNO succeeded brilliantly in putting on a well-orchestrated monologue carnival on the universally fashionable twin-theme of change and reform at their just concluded annual political jamboree. They succeeded in the event of mesmerising themselves into a frenzy. Talking change is easy, but “walking the change” is when the uncommitted falls by the wayside.
By all accounts, UMNO, of all political parties in Malaysia, is a most unlikely candidate for change. It is stuck in a time warp. Its leadership, never known for its ability to focus on critical national issues and respond quickly to the needs of the moment, more often than not, has absolutely no clue where to begin the process.
Blaming the opposition for things that do not go according to plan is well and good, but it would be more helpful and constructive for UMNO to accept and digest a simple fact of life which stipulates that the external pressures acting on you are only as influential as your internal weaknesses. UMNO’s internal weaknesses are there for all to see, but it says a great deal about its organisational culture that the leaders remain both deaf and blind to the rot that stares them in the face. This being the case, UMNO continues to stumble from crisis to crisis, quite unaware why even the Malays who should be rallying round to support it are instead turning their backs on it.
"Admitting Mahathir back into UMNO’s inner sanctum will add to its problems."
UMNO is not ready to move forward. More baffling is why its leaders are making overtures to Mahathir to return and even act as “adviser.” It somehow suggests complete arrogance, totally muddled thinking and a disdain for Malaysian public opinion on their part. It is, I am convinced, a pathological streak that is part of the UMNO political tradition. We have had enough of Mahathir’s brand of “good governance” for twenty-two agonising, heart-rending, years that saw “Grand Corruption”, ( first coined by George Moody-Stuart and used as the title of his famous book on international corruption) being institutionalised in every important facet of our national life. By any yardstick, Mahathir’s tenure was twenty-two years too long. We need Mahathir as we need a tail between our legs.
For UMNO in particular, any attempt at open reconciliation with Mahathir, the ‘megalomeddler’, (a new word I have just invented to add further to the richness of English) will be the kiss of death. If, in the intoxicating afterglow of their 59th general assembly UMNO leaders were disposed to be generous towards Mahathir, and forgive him all his transgressions and sins against society, they need to have their heads examined.
Based on what we know about the man, Mahathir is happiest when he is also at his mischievous best. If there is no crisis, Mahathir will see to it that one is invented. He survived 22 years in office by playing on, and manipulating shamelessly, our fears of a recurrence of the May 13 incident which nearly tore this nation apart in 1969. It is a card that some UMNO types at good at pulling out of their pack when they feel threatened by challenges to “ketuanan Melayu.”
It is not in the man’s mental make up to give, as we have seen in his unremitting hostility to Abdullah Badawi, his anointed successor, a sporting chance to make a mark as prime minister. But, then, Mahathir was not a sportsman in the mould of Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein or even Tun Hussein Onn. One of the central dogmas of Mahathirism and one espoused by the great man with unbounded passion is “winner takes all.”
He did not believe in taking prisoners. The battle field of his choice was the judicial arena where he held sway, and where crouching judges were falling over each other in an embarrassingly sycophantic display of eternal gratitude to their benefactor and where witnesses were “turned” at will to coerce them to cooperate. In one fell swoop, one of the most respected judicial institutions in the Commonwealth became an object of fun, ridicule and derision.
His maniacal urge to dominate everything and everyone in sight is a serious character flaw. To think that he will ever be a moderating influence and, therefore, an asset in the much-needed reinvention of UMNO to be in readiness for the 13th general elections is to believe in Grimm’s Fairy Tales of my childhood.
The nation is well-rid of the man. In God’s name, let him go his own meddling way and we, our own, free to determine our lives in accordance with the Constitution and the dictates of our conscience.
Admitting Mahathir back into UMNO’s inner sanctum will add to its problems, and internal unity will forever remain a gleam in the eye, and it will hasten the demise of UMNO, now already on its last legs. Perhaps I should just say nothing and let UMNO leaders find out for themselves the joy of having Mahathir under the same roof. (By TUNKU ABDUL AZIZ/ MySinchew)
為馬哈迪做件事：別理他！
作者：東姑阿都阿茲
2009-04-03 20:02
來源： http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/9390
巫統在剛結束喧嘩改變和改革雙主題的年度政治大拜拜中，成功主導了一場獨腳戲。他們自我催眠進入狂熱狀態中。改變說來容易，但“落實改革”是不受承諾約束者遭受失敗時才做的。
根據各種說法，在大馬所有政黨中，巫統是極不可能改變的一個。她還沉浸在舊時光輝中，被認為缺乏能力專注於重大國家議題並快速反應的領導層，經常不知道該如何開始改革。
凡事無法按照計劃就責備反對黨，那的確有效，然而，如果巫統能夠接受並領悟一項簡單道理，即外在壓力和內在軟弱有著同樣影響力，對該黨會更有幫助和具建設性。巫統的內部弱點大家都很清楚，但其結構文化導致領導層對問題根源視而不見。有鑒於此，巫統不斷被一個接一個的危機所羈絆，無法意識到為甚麼那些原本應該支持她的馬來人也背棄了她。
巫統沒有準備好向前邁進，更令人困惑的是，為甚麼其領袖竟然主動要求馬哈迪回歸，甚至成為“顧問”？從某種角度而言，這是徹底的傲慢、思想糊塗，並輕蔑大馬民意。我相信病態傾向是巫統政治文化的一部份。令人痛苦的22年馬哈迪模式“良好管治”，導致“重大腐敗”（ 這是George Moody-Stuart在其著名的國際貪污著作中首倡的用語）在國民生活中每一重大層面都被制度化的年代，我們認為已經足夠。不論以甚麼標準來衡量，馬哈迪22年的掌政期太長了。
尤其對巫統而言，任何嘗試去與馬哈迪公開和解的舉動將是危險的。如果在59屆巫統常年大會的亢奮餘韻中，巫統領袖打算對馬哈迪寬厚，並原諒他對社會所做的一切錯誤，看來他們需要去檢查一下頭腦。
根據我們對馬哈迪的瞭解，他最開心的時候，也是作最多傷害他人的事的時候。如果沒有議題，他會虛構一個。在他22年首相生涯中，他一再玩弄和操縱各種課題，如我們擔心會重演的513事件。每當巫統感受到“馬來主權”受到威脅，他們就會祭出這張王牌。
他並不大方，從他對他親自挑選卻沒有信心的接班人──阿都拉不間斷的敵對動作就可看出。然而，馬哈迪並非像東姑阿都拉曼、敦拉薩或敦胡申翁那樣，是具有運動家品格的人。馬哈迪主義的其中一項中心信條，也是這位偉人用無止盡的熱誠去擁護的信條，即是“勝者為王”。
他不相信別人。他選擇支配司法，那些法官爭先恐後奉承他們的恩主，證人可以隨意被“轉向”，以迫使他們合作。共和聯邦國家其中一個最受尊崇的司法體制，就這樣一下子淪為開玩笑、奚落和嘲笑的對象。
他瘋狂地要支配一切和所有人，是他性格上的嚴重瑕疵。一旦想到他將永遠具有支配的領導力，更是至需改革的巫統準備面對第十三屆大選的資產，那就等於相信童話。
國人很幸運的擺脫了他。以上蒼之名，讓他繼續愛管閒事，而我們將自由地根據憲法和本身良知來決定我們的生活。
允許馬哈迪回歸巫統會添加問題，而內部團結將持續微弱，並加速巫統衰敗。或許我應該不多說，就讓巫統自己去享受有馬哈迪同在的快樂。（譯：張立德）
星洲日報／言路‧作者：東姑阿都阿茲‧民主行動黨副主席
2009-04-03 20:02
來源： http://opinions.sinchew-i.com/node/9390
巫統在剛結束喧嘩改變和改革雙主題的年度政治大拜拜中，成功主導了一場獨腳戲。他們自我催眠進入狂熱狀態中。改變說來容易，但“落實改革”是不受承諾約束者遭受失敗時才做的。
根據各種說法，在大馬所有政黨中，巫統是極不可能改變的一個。她還沉浸在舊時光輝中，被認為缺乏能力專注於重大國家議題並快速反應的領導層，經常不知道該如何開始改革。
凡事無法按照計劃就責備反對黨，那的確有效，然而，如果巫統能夠接受並領悟一項簡單道理，即外在壓力和內在軟弱有著同樣影響力，對該黨會更有幫助和具建設性。巫統的內部弱點大家都很清楚，但其結構文化導致領導層對問題根源視而不見。有鑒於此，巫統不斷被一個接一個的危機所羈絆，無法意識到為甚麼那些原本應該支持她的馬來人也背棄了她。
巫統沒有準備好向前邁進，更令人困惑的是，為甚麼其領袖竟然主動要求馬哈迪回歸，甚至成為“顧問”？從某種角度而言，這是徹底的傲慢、思想糊塗，並輕蔑大馬民意。我相信病態傾向是巫統政治文化的一部份。令人痛苦的22年馬哈迪模式“良好管治”，導致“重大腐敗”（ 這是George Moody-Stuart在其著名的國際貪污著作中首倡的用語）在國民生活中每一重大層面都被制度化的年代，我們認為已經足夠。不論以甚麼標準來衡量，馬哈迪22年的掌政期太長了。
尤其對巫統而言，任何嘗試去與馬哈迪公開和解的舉動將是危險的。如果在59屆巫統常年大會的亢奮餘韻中，巫統領袖打算對馬哈迪寬厚，並原諒他對社會所做的一切錯誤，看來他們需要去檢查一下頭腦。
根據我們對馬哈迪的瞭解，他最開心的時候，也是作最多傷害他人的事的時候。如果沒有議題，他會虛構一個。在他22年首相生涯中，他一再玩弄和操縱各種課題，如我們擔心會重演的513事件。每當巫統感受到“馬來主權”受到威脅，他們就會祭出這張王牌。
他並不大方，從他對他親自挑選卻沒有信心的接班人──阿都拉不間斷的敵對動作就可看出。然而，馬哈迪並非像東姑阿都拉曼、敦拉薩或敦胡申翁那樣，是具有運動家品格的人。馬哈迪主義的其中一項中心信條，也是這位偉人用無止盡的熱誠去擁護的信條，即是“勝者為王”。
他不相信別人。他選擇支配司法，那些法官爭先恐後奉承他們的恩主，證人可以隨意被“轉向”，以迫使他們合作。共和聯邦國家其中一個最受尊崇的司法體制，就這樣一下子淪為開玩笑、奚落和嘲笑的對象。
他瘋狂地要支配一切和所有人，是他性格上的嚴重瑕疵。一旦想到他將永遠具有支配的領導力，更是至需改革的巫統準備面對第十三屆大選的資產，那就等於相信童話。
國人很幸運的擺脫了他。以上蒼之名，讓他繼續愛管閒事，而我們將自由地根據憲法和本身良知來決定我們的生活。
允許馬哈迪回歸巫統會添加問題，而內部團結將持續微弱，並加速巫統衰敗。或許我應該不多說，就讓巫統自己去享受有馬哈迪同在的快樂。（譯：張立德）
星洲日報／言路‧作者：東姑阿都阿茲‧民主行動黨副主席
Friday, April 3, 2009
面对面的侧写―― 他还没脱裤，你就叫春了
来源： http://www.merdekareview.com/news/n/9273.html
作者／林宏祥专栏 Apr 03, 2009 11:46:34 am
【荒城手记／林宏祥专栏】去年3月8日以后，我们一路颠簸，走到了今天。此时，我们被逼眼睁睁看着纳吉上台，成为马来西亚第六任首相。这一刻以后，纳吉要在国际舞台上代表马来西亚人发言。无论他的“一个马来西亚”概念是否有我的存在，总之他口中的每一句话，我都要负上最起码“无法让他不代表我”的责任。
是的，我是新闻从业员，但这不代表我不能对纳吉持有个人立场。我不认为我需要用“伪中立”、“假客观”掩饰自己真实的想法与感受――反正这个年代，每个人心中都有一把尺，在纷乱的“偏见”中主观判断。问题不在“主观”，而在于谁的主观垄断了新闻、谁的偏见主导了舆论。
过去一年，日期的数字，组成了这个社会的集体记忆与想象，也解构了社会心理的恐惧。“308政治海啸”袭卷以后，“916变天”的憧憬，取代了“513暴乱”的阴影。然而，“528报殇”的伤口，始终没有愈合。“403纳吉上台”之前，这个脓包溃烂的臭味，再度飘荡在空中……
蒙古女子命案：
何为公平的要求？
“一个人被证明有罪之前是无辜的”。我若不坚守这个原则，我会失去反对《1960年内安法令》的主要理由。我对嫌犯应有“受审与辩护”的基本人权没有双重标准――对“可能”撞进双峰塔的恐怖分子如此，对“可能”用C4炸掉蒙古女子尸体的凶手亦然。
“……正如他所说，人民应该以他的实际表现来评断他，不是以各种猜测和刻板印象来看待他。这是一项公平的要求。”（摘自郑丁贤《与纳吉面对面》）
我认同，这是一项公平的要求。然而，马来西亚人民要求自己的第六任首相，通过独立、透明、具公信力的司法程序，公开证明自己不只是清白，且看起来清白――这，莫非是不公平的要求吗？
这绝非（只是）“关起房门你情我愿”的男女（男男／女女）私情，这是“在森林公开摧毁人命、引爆尸体”的谋杀案件。嫌凶是纳吉身旁的智囊、保镖；C4出自纳吉掌管的国防部（案发时）……纳吉没有否认网络上揭露的来往手机短讯内容，仅以“这是隐私”、“我没有滥权”回身闪避。【点击：间接承认手机短讯真实性？ 纳吉否认滥权干预蒙女案】
他的清白，原来都是自己给自己下判的――然后转告记者，或者在众目睽睽之下向神发誓。留下记录的白纸黑字，则用来严禁他人在补选中议论此事。只是，2009年不再是“领袖说他自己清白，就清白”的年代――怀疑是为了相信；“禁止怀疑”，只会更快地把人推向“另一个相信”。
避重就轻：
岂止是猜测与刻板印象？
把纳吉一切负面的消息轻轻扫在“猜测和刻板印象”的地毯下，如果不是避重就轻，应该就是水准太低的问题。即便不追究1987年站在“用华人的血洗马来人的剑”布条中的那个身影（因为那是善于把“跨代事物和历史”联接起来的马华公会总会长翁诗杰都不敢触碰的拼图方块板），而把时间范围锁在308之后－－若哪个本地评论人对纳吉还处于“不清楚、看不透”的状况，唯一能解释的应该就是香港的陶杰没有写过关于纳吉的文章。
一个副首相在日理万机之际，有闲情检验一个23岁奶油男生的屁眼，然后在自己领军督导的峇东埔补选中，把“安华将阳具插入赛夫肛门”露骨的描绘－－用言语散播在群众大会上、用文字挂在路边、用影像塞进家家户户的电视荧幕中。
面对民意的流失，这名巫统署理主席，在马来人社会虚造“危机”，指责政敌是出卖马来人的叛徒。雪兰莪、霹雳、槟州民联政府签批建设养猪场、签发华人新村地契、公开招标的课题被炒作－－在马来人社会制造不安、惶恐，在族群与族群之间制造猜疑、煽动敌意。
面对政权垮台的可能，内政部在去年9月16日前夕援引《1960年内安法令》扣留部落客拉惹柏特拉、民联雪州资深行政议员郭素沁、《星洲日报》高级记者陈云清－－至今都没有找到犯罪的证据。这名候任首相，没有一丝歉意。
2009年2月，纳吉入主霹雳州巫统／国阵，民联议员突告失踪，然后出现在他的记者会上。一个民选州政府，像“民主之树”旁的石碑，被砸碎、被泼漆、被连根拔起－－而纳吉始终不敢面对民意，推说“解散州议会、重新选举”，是劳民伤财之举。
眼前正在发生的是，内政部在三场补选频临之际，将人民公正党及回教党的喉舌高高吊起，长达三个月。水炮车长驱直入、催泪弹空中散落，强硬驱逐出席聆听民联政治讲座的人民。纳吉领导下的巫统，继续用“背叛君王”的罪名，套在民联大臣莫哈末尼查（Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin）身上；继续用粗糙的论述，愚弄马来人社会，要这个民族停留在“君要臣死，臣不得不死”的封建时代……
拒在脱裤前叫春
这么一个政客，在上台前夕，抵访《星洲日报》。一个小时的“独家”对话，表达了疲弱的“不认同以‘关闭报社、禁发准证’作为控制媒体的手段”之立场，却未解释何以吊销两份党报三个月的决定；倡议一个“全民马来西亚”，却不晓得如何与“马来西亚人的马来西亚”概念区分的；对于《1960年内安法令》、《1948年煽动法令》，甚至《星洲日报》最为切身之痛的《1984年印刷机与出版法令》的存废……这些“不清楚”、“看不透”，统统留给了读者。
然而，在媒体人笔下，纳吉“流露出‘仔细倾听’的特质”、“展现自信与干练，以及掌握议题的高度能力；对于未来政策，也隐然有全面的腹稿”。
过去的丑闻与争议，于是尽数淹没在青楼此起彼落的“叫春”呻吟里；未来的期许，充斥无数的假设－－“只要新政府贯彻公平原则，摒弃偏差的种族主义政策，我们坚信，纳吉必然可成为全民拥戴的首相”、“如果他愿意继续聆听民声，瞭解社会的事实、真相和黑暗面，‘全民的马来西亚’将不会只是一个海市蜃楼”……
我只想说，如果媒体拒绝在权势脱裤之前叫春，不让胡子变成脸上的一撮阴毛，在它长驱直入前主动为权力的棒子服务－－它必然是读者爱戴的报纸，言论自由将不会只是一个海市蜃楼。
这是一项公平的要求。
林宏祥现任Voice网络台（www.voicemedia.com.my）主编。
作者／林宏祥专栏 Apr 03, 2009 11:46:34 am
【荒城手记／林宏祥专栏】去年3月8日以后，我们一路颠簸，走到了今天。此时，我们被逼眼睁睁看着纳吉上台，成为马来西亚第六任首相。这一刻以后，纳吉要在国际舞台上代表马来西亚人发言。无论他的“一个马来西亚”概念是否有我的存在，总之他口中的每一句话，我都要负上最起码“无法让他不代表我”的责任。
是的，我是新闻从业员，但这不代表我不能对纳吉持有个人立场。我不认为我需要用“伪中立”、“假客观”掩饰自己真实的想法与感受――反正这个年代，每个人心中都有一把尺，在纷乱的“偏见”中主观判断。问题不在“主观”，而在于谁的主观垄断了新闻、谁的偏见主导了舆论。
过去一年，日期的数字，组成了这个社会的集体记忆与想象，也解构了社会心理的恐惧。“308政治海啸”袭卷以后，“916变天”的憧憬，取代了“513暴乱”的阴影。然而，“528报殇”的伤口，始终没有愈合。“403纳吉上台”之前，这个脓包溃烂的臭味，再度飘荡在空中……
蒙古女子命案：
何为公平的要求？
“一个人被证明有罪之前是无辜的”。我若不坚守这个原则，我会失去反对《1960年内安法令》的主要理由。我对嫌犯应有“受审与辩护”的基本人权没有双重标准――对“可能”撞进双峰塔的恐怖分子如此，对“可能”用C4炸掉蒙古女子尸体的凶手亦然。
“……正如他所说，人民应该以他的实际表现来评断他，不是以各种猜测和刻板印象来看待他。这是一项公平的要求。”（摘自郑丁贤《与纳吉面对面》）
我认同，这是一项公平的要求。然而，马来西亚人民要求自己的第六任首相，通过独立、透明、具公信力的司法程序，公开证明自己不只是清白，且看起来清白――这，莫非是不公平的要求吗？
这绝非（只是）“关起房门你情我愿”的男女（男男／女女）私情，这是“在森林公开摧毁人命、引爆尸体”的谋杀案件。嫌凶是纳吉身旁的智囊、保镖；C4出自纳吉掌管的国防部（案发时）……纳吉没有否认网络上揭露的来往手机短讯内容，仅以“这是隐私”、“我没有滥权”回身闪避。【点击：间接承认手机短讯真实性？ 纳吉否认滥权干预蒙女案】
他的清白，原来都是自己给自己下判的――然后转告记者，或者在众目睽睽之下向神发誓。留下记录的白纸黑字，则用来严禁他人在补选中议论此事。只是，2009年不再是“领袖说他自己清白，就清白”的年代――怀疑是为了相信；“禁止怀疑”，只会更快地把人推向“另一个相信”。
避重就轻：
岂止是猜测与刻板印象？
把纳吉一切负面的消息轻轻扫在“猜测和刻板印象”的地毯下，如果不是避重就轻，应该就是水准太低的问题。即便不追究1987年站在“用华人的血洗马来人的剑”布条中的那个身影（因为那是善于把“跨代事物和历史”联接起来的马华公会总会长翁诗杰都不敢触碰的拼图方块板），而把时间范围锁在308之后－－若哪个本地评论人对纳吉还处于“不清楚、看不透”的状况，唯一能解释的应该就是香港的陶杰没有写过关于纳吉的文章。
一个副首相在日理万机之际，有闲情检验一个23岁奶油男生的屁眼，然后在自己领军督导的峇东埔补选中，把“安华将阳具插入赛夫肛门”露骨的描绘－－用言语散播在群众大会上、用文字挂在路边、用影像塞进家家户户的电视荧幕中。
面对民意的流失，这名巫统署理主席，在马来人社会虚造“危机”，指责政敌是出卖马来人的叛徒。雪兰莪、霹雳、槟州民联政府签批建设养猪场、签发华人新村地契、公开招标的课题被炒作－－在马来人社会制造不安、惶恐，在族群与族群之间制造猜疑、煽动敌意。
面对政权垮台的可能，内政部在去年9月16日前夕援引《1960年内安法令》扣留部落客拉惹柏特拉、民联雪州资深行政议员郭素沁、《星洲日报》高级记者陈云清－－至今都没有找到犯罪的证据。这名候任首相，没有一丝歉意。
2009年2月，纳吉入主霹雳州巫统／国阵，民联议员突告失踪，然后出现在他的记者会上。一个民选州政府，像“民主之树”旁的石碑，被砸碎、被泼漆、被连根拔起－－而纳吉始终不敢面对民意，推说“解散州议会、重新选举”，是劳民伤财之举。
眼前正在发生的是，内政部在三场补选频临之际，将人民公正党及回教党的喉舌高高吊起，长达三个月。水炮车长驱直入、催泪弹空中散落，强硬驱逐出席聆听民联政治讲座的人民。纳吉领导下的巫统，继续用“背叛君王”的罪名，套在民联大臣莫哈末尼查（Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin）身上；继续用粗糙的论述，愚弄马来人社会，要这个民族停留在“君要臣死，臣不得不死”的封建时代……
拒在脱裤前叫春
这么一个政客，在上台前夕，抵访《星洲日报》。一个小时的“独家”对话，表达了疲弱的“不认同以‘关闭报社、禁发准证’作为控制媒体的手段”之立场，却未解释何以吊销两份党报三个月的决定；倡议一个“全民马来西亚”，却不晓得如何与“马来西亚人的马来西亚”概念区分的；对于《1960年内安法令》、《1948年煽动法令》，甚至《星洲日报》最为切身之痛的《1984年印刷机与出版法令》的存废……这些“不清楚”、“看不透”，统统留给了读者。
然而，在媒体人笔下，纳吉“流露出‘仔细倾听’的特质”、“展现自信与干练，以及掌握议题的高度能力；对于未来政策，也隐然有全面的腹稿”。
过去的丑闻与争议，于是尽数淹没在青楼此起彼落的“叫春”呻吟里；未来的期许，充斥无数的假设－－“只要新政府贯彻公平原则，摒弃偏差的种族主义政策，我们坚信，纳吉必然可成为全民拥戴的首相”、“如果他愿意继续聆听民声，瞭解社会的事实、真相和黑暗面，‘全民的马来西亚’将不会只是一个海市蜃楼”……
我只想说，如果媒体拒绝在权势脱裤之前叫春，不让胡子变成脸上的一撮阴毛，在它长驱直入前主动为权力的棒子服务－－它必然是读者爱戴的报纸，言论自由将不会只是一个海市蜃楼。
这是一项公平的要求。
林宏祥现任Voice网络台（www.voicemedia.com.my）主编。
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Jesus Died On Our Behalf
Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed Him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But He was wounded for our transgressions; He was crushed for our iniquities; upon Him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all. (Isaiah 53: 4-6).
It is Good Friday! On Thursday evening two thousand years ago, Jesus had the Last Supper with His twelve disciples. At supper, what hurt Him most was the betrayal of Judas, one of His disciples. Jesus did not condemn him. However, He said, “Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!” He did not say, “Woe to Judas by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!” He was actually giving an opportunity for him to repent. Unfortunately Judas did not make it. And for just 30 pieces of silver, which was the price of a slave, he betrayed the Lord whom he lived with for three and a half years.
As Christians, we too have betrayed the Lord in one way or another. Say, some Christians are so embarrassed to identify their belief in front of others. Or for some, when their lives are threatened (especially in situations where persecution is prevalent among antichrist governments), would choose to deny Jesus. Or even for some, their faith in the Lord is getting colder each day. Such move is likened to crucifying the Lord once more.
Good Friday is a time for Christians to check their lives for any areas that are not pleasing to the Lord. It is also a time for the world to see how miserable their states of life are. Jesus was nailed to the Cross. “He must be a great a sinner,” thought the crowd at Calvary, “For He had to suffer such a cruel punishment from God!” They were ignorant that Jesus laid down His life for them on His own initiative. John 3: 16 says, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” Two thousand years ago, Jesus forsook His riches in Heaven. “And being found in human form, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a Cross.” (Philippians 2: 5-8).
Jesus was sinless, but yet He had to bear the sins of mankind. There had been a great struggle deep within His spirit. Soon after the Last Supper with His disciples, He prayed fervently in the Garden of Gethsemane. Three times did He negotiate with the Father to let the cup (death on the Cross) pass from Him. And for each round of negotiation, He too pleaded, “Not as I will, but as You will.” The Bible says, “His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (Luke 22: 44). It shows that behind the scene, there was a great spiritual warfare going on. Jesus confronted Satan. The third pleading was final, and Jesus had determined to drink the cup! He won the war. No other forces (including the persuasions of Pontius Pilate) could change His mind to embrace the suffering of the Cross.
God made our ancestors, Adam and Eve, a sinless mankind. When they had consumed the forbidden fruit, curse was sent upon men – the curse of death! “For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners.” (Romans 5: 19). When Adam sinned, not only was mankind accursed but the ground as well. Subsequently, in pain, men shall eat of it all the days of their life (Genesis 3: 17 – 19).
Thank God, “By The One Man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” (Romans 5: 19). Should Jesus be disobedient to the Father in embracing the Cross for mankind, we would never have salvation. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree’.” (Galatians 3: 13 – 14). Chapters 27 to 30 of Deuteronomy tell us more about the consequences of curse, including deaths, pestilences, poverty, etc.
When we received the sacrificial work of Jesus, we are saved. He had taken from us curses which He hung on the tree at Calvary. “But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God.” (John 1: 12). What you need to do now is to make this simple prayer, and mean it in your heart. “Lord Jesus, I am a sinner. I ask of You to forgive me. Now I want to invite You into my heart to be my Savior and Lord. Amen!”
It is Good Friday! On Thursday evening two thousand years ago, Jesus had the Last Supper with His twelve disciples. At supper, what hurt Him most was the betrayal of Judas, one of His disciples. Jesus did not condemn him. However, He said, “Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!” He did not say, “Woe to Judas by whom the Son of Man is betrayed!” He was actually giving an opportunity for him to repent. Unfortunately Judas did not make it. And for just 30 pieces of silver, which was the price of a slave, he betrayed the Lord whom he lived with for three and a half years.
As Christians, we too have betrayed the Lord in one way or another. Say, some Christians are so embarrassed to identify their belief in front of others. Or for some, when their lives are threatened (especially in situations where persecution is prevalent among antichrist governments), would choose to deny Jesus. Or even for some, their faith in the Lord is getting colder each day. Such move is likened to crucifying the Lord once more.
Good Friday is a time for Christians to check their lives for any areas that are not pleasing to the Lord. It is also a time for the world to see how miserable their states of life are. Jesus was nailed to the Cross. “He must be a great a sinner,” thought the crowd at Calvary, “For He had to suffer such a cruel punishment from God!” They were ignorant that Jesus laid down His life for them on His own initiative. John 3: 16 says, “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.” Two thousand years ago, Jesus forsook His riches in Heaven. “And being found in human form, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a Cross.” (Philippians 2: 5-8).
Jesus was sinless, but yet He had to bear the sins of mankind. There had been a great struggle deep within His spirit. Soon after the Last Supper with His disciples, He prayed fervently in the Garden of Gethsemane. Three times did He negotiate with the Father to let the cup (death on the Cross) pass from Him. And for each round of negotiation, He too pleaded, “Not as I will, but as You will.” The Bible says, “His sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (Luke 22: 44). It shows that behind the scene, there was a great spiritual warfare going on. Jesus confronted Satan. The third pleading was final, and Jesus had determined to drink the cup! He won the war. No other forces (including the persuasions of Pontius Pilate) could change His mind to embrace the suffering of the Cross.
God made our ancestors, Adam and Eve, a sinless mankind. When they had consumed the forbidden fruit, curse was sent upon men – the curse of death! “For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners.” (Romans 5: 19). When Adam sinned, not only was mankind accursed but the ground as well. Subsequently, in pain, men shall eat of it all the days of their life (Genesis 3: 17 – 19).
Thank God, “By The One Man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.” (Romans 5: 19). Should Jesus be disobedient to the Father in embracing the Cross for mankind, we would never have salvation. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree’.” (Galatians 3: 13 – 14). Chapters 27 to 30 of Deuteronomy tell us more about the consequences of curse, including deaths, pestilences, poverty, etc.
When we received the sacrificial work of Jesus, we are saved. He had taken from us curses which He hung on the tree at Calvary. “But to all who did receive Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God.” (John 1: 12). What you need to do now is to make this simple prayer, and mean it in your heart. “Lord Jesus, I am a sinner. I ask of You to forgive me. Now I want to invite You into my heart to be my Savior and Lord. Amen!”
耶稣为我们受难
“他（耶稣）诚然担当我们的忧患，背负我们的痛苦。我们却以为他受责罚，被神击打苦待了。那知他为我们的过犯受害，为我们的罪孽压伤。因他受的刑罚我们得平安。因他受的鞭伤我们得医治。我们都如羊走迷，各人偏行己路。耶和华使我们众人的罪孽都归在他身上。”（以赛亚书53：4－6）。
这是“耶稣受难节”了！两千年前的星期四傍晚是耶稣跟十二门徒吃最后的晚餐的日子。在晚餐，最令耶稣痛心的事是门徒之一的犹大出卖他。耶稣没定犹大的罪，他不是讲“卖人子的犹大有祸了”，而是“卖人子的人有祸了”，他是给机会犹大悔改。很可惜，犹大没有临崖勒马，为了三十块钱（一个奴隶的价钱）出卖了与他生活了三年半的主。
作为基督徒，我们在某方面也出卖了耶稣。譬如，有些信徒不敢在别人面前承认自己的信仰。或者有些信徒遇到生命受到威胁时（尤其在敌对基督的政体里），为了自保而选择否认耶稣。又或有些信徒信心渐渐冷淡了，这乃如同把耶稣重钉十字架一样。
“耶稣受难节”是让基督徒省察自己亏欠主的时刻，也是让世人正视自己生命贫乏的时刻。耶稣被钉十字架，当时的人以为他必定是个大罪人，所以必须承担上帝如此残酷的刑罚。其实他们却不晓得耶稣乃自愿为世人死，《约翰福音》3：16说：“上帝爱世人，甚至将他的独生子（耶稣）赐给他们，叫一切信他的，不致灭亡，反得永生。”耶稣暂时舍弃天堂的荣华富贵，“取了人的样式，就自己卑微，存心顺服，以至于死，且死在十字架上。”（《腓立比书》2：5－8）。
耶稣是一个没有罪的人，却要担当世人的罪，也曾面对心灵的挣扎。他和十二门徒吃了最后的晚餐，之后到“客西马尼园”祷告，跟天父三次讨价还价。耶稣三次求天父免却他饮这个苦杯（上十字架），同时又三次求不要照他自己的意思行，只要照天父的旨意行。耶稣甚至流出“血汗”，可想象他当时对峙撒旦那场属灵战争是何等的激烈！耶稣第三次的决定是最后的了，他不再挣扎，他已经得胜了，再没有任何势力（包括稍后罗马高官彼拉多游说他放弃受死的念头）可以改变他上十字架的决定。
上帝创造人类始祖亚当和夏娃，他们原本是无罪的，当他们吃了禁果之后，咒诅就临到他们－死！“因一人的悖逆，众人成为罪人。”（《罗马书》5：19）。始祖犯罪，不但人类受咒诅，连地土也受咒诅，所以男人从此必须汗流满面才得糊口（《创世记》3：17－19）。
感谢上帝，人类“因一人的顺服，众人也成为义了。”（《罗马书》5：19）。如果耶稣不顺服天父的旨意为世人死的话，人类就没有得救。“耶稣既为我们成了咒诅，就赎出我们脱离律法的咒诅。因为经上（旧约圣经）记着「凡挂在木头上都是被咒诅的」。”（《加拉太书》3：13－14）。《申命记》27－30章记载违逆上帝戒命所当承受的咒诅，包括死亡、瘟疫、贫穷等。但当我们接受那在十字架牺牲的耶稣时，我们就得救。他把我们的咒诅都一并拿走，把它们跟他一起钉在十字架上。“凡是接待他（耶稣）的，就是信他名的人，他就赐他们权柄，作上帝的儿女。”（《约翰福音》1：12）。你只需很简单作这样的祷告：“主耶稣，我是个罪人，求你赦免我的罪。我现在邀请你祢进入我的心作我的救主和主人。阿们。”
这是“耶稣受难节”了！两千年前的星期四傍晚是耶稣跟十二门徒吃最后的晚餐的日子。在晚餐，最令耶稣痛心的事是门徒之一的犹大出卖他。耶稣没定犹大的罪，他不是讲“卖人子的犹大有祸了”，而是“卖人子的人有祸了”，他是给机会犹大悔改。很可惜，犹大没有临崖勒马，为了三十块钱（一个奴隶的价钱）出卖了与他生活了三年半的主。
作为基督徒，我们在某方面也出卖了耶稣。譬如，有些信徒不敢在别人面前承认自己的信仰。或者有些信徒遇到生命受到威胁时（尤其在敌对基督的政体里），为了自保而选择否认耶稣。又或有些信徒信心渐渐冷淡了，这乃如同把耶稣重钉十字架一样。
“耶稣受难节”是让基督徒省察自己亏欠主的时刻，也是让世人正视自己生命贫乏的时刻。耶稣被钉十字架，当时的人以为他必定是个大罪人，所以必须承担上帝如此残酷的刑罚。其实他们却不晓得耶稣乃自愿为世人死，《约翰福音》3：16说：“上帝爱世人，甚至将他的独生子（耶稣）赐给他们，叫一切信他的，不致灭亡，反得永生。”耶稣暂时舍弃天堂的荣华富贵，“取了人的样式，就自己卑微，存心顺服，以至于死，且死在十字架上。”（《腓立比书》2：5－8）。
耶稣是一个没有罪的人，却要担当世人的罪，也曾面对心灵的挣扎。他和十二门徒吃了最后的晚餐，之后到“客西马尼园”祷告，跟天父三次讨价还价。耶稣三次求天父免却他饮这个苦杯（上十字架），同时又三次求不要照他自己的意思行，只要照天父的旨意行。耶稣甚至流出“血汗”，可想象他当时对峙撒旦那场属灵战争是何等的激烈！耶稣第三次的决定是最后的了，他不再挣扎，他已经得胜了，再没有任何势力（包括稍后罗马高官彼拉多游说他放弃受死的念头）可以改变他上十字架的决定。
上帝创造人类始祖亚当和夏娃，他们原本是无罪的，当他们吃了禁果之后，咒诅就临到他们－死！“因一人的悖逆，众人成为罪人。”（《罗马书》5：19）。始祖犯罪，不但人类受咒诅，连地土也受咒诅，所以男人从此必须汗流满面才得糊口（《创世记》3：17－19）。
感谢上帝，人类“因一人的顺服，众人也成为义了。”（《罗马书》5：19）。如果耶稣不顺服天父的旨意为世人死的话，人类就没有得救。“耶稣既为我们成了咒诅，就赎出我们脱离律法的咒诅。因为经上（旧约圣经）记着「凡挂在木头上都是被咒诅的」。”（《加拉太书》3：13－14）。《申命记》27－30章记载违逆上帝戒命所当承受的咒诅，包括死亡、瘟疫、贫穷等。但当我们接受那在十字架牺牲的耶稣时，我们就得救。他把我们的咒诅都一并拿走，把它们跟他一起钉在十字架上。“凡是接待他（耶稣）的，就是信他名的人，他就赐他们权柄，作上帝的儿女。”（《约翰福音》1：12）。你只需很简单作这样的祷告：“主耶稣，我是个罪人，求你赦免我的罪。我现在邀请你祢进入我的心作我的救主和主人。阿们。”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
