Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe by Email 1. It seems the protesters are claiming that it was reporters who asked the to pose with the cow head. Now its the reporters’ fault! Name the reporters la, let the police take action. If their claim is true, then I think the cow head is meant for the protesters themselves. since they are so stupid until can listen to reporters to pose for photos!
2. The antic of some cows at at a hall in Shah Alam reflects the problem faced by the state government. 30 over years of exclusivity in Shah Alam had created this mentality among the people, and possibly this extends throughout the country. Its always they are right, supported by lopsided law, and the rest are wrong.
There’s not many places in Shah Alam that can relate to Indians because its heavily imbalanced, population-wise. Finding vegetarian food means Sri Muda or Padang Jawa. Want to but prayer items, also same. I think better to move out from this place.
I think its high time the authorities take not of the population imbalance and do something about it. Having one race with very high population compared to others looks like recipe for disaster. The herd mentality may cloud judgment.
3. Let’s look at the commotion (look at the antics of a primate at minute 5:47):
From Malaysiakini:
A public dialogue organised by the Shah Alam City Council with Section 23 residents over the relocation of a 150-year temple to their area has descended into a shouting match this morning.
Some of the participants shouted profanities at Selangor Mentri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim, and called him “MB bodoh” and “Khalid babi”.
Also heard above the din were “you should be ashamed of being a Malay” and “don’t be like a cow led by a ring through the nose”.
The fracas began when about 50 unruly residents of the 300-strong crowd – most of whom were at the controversial cow-head protest last Friday – wanted several people out of the hall as they were apparently not from their residential area.
Participants were required to register before being allowed into the hall and were restricted to one person per household.
The situation took a turn for the worse when the residents began booing Abdul Khalid as well as a number of state government leaders as they were introduced at the dialogue.
Even when order was restored, the shouting continued from the floor as Selangor state leaders, including Shah Alam parliamentarian Khalid Samad, attempted to speak to the residents.
The interruptions, boos and profanities continued throughout the dialogue while the Indian residents sitting on the other side of the hall, remained mostly quiet.
MB appeals for calm repeatedly
Aside from the two Khalids, those on the podium at the Shah Alam City Council hall were Batu Tiga state assemblyperson Rodziah Ismail, state development agency PKNS chief Othman Omar and mayor Mazalan Md Noor.
However, executive councillor Dr A Xavier Jayakumar, who was blamed by the residents for the controversial relocation of the Sri Maha Mariamman Temple from Section 19 to Section 23 – was absent.
Mazalan said the temple committee could not agree to a site in Section 22 proposed by the previous administration as it was located 6km from the original site and that there was no residential area nearby.
Abdul Khalid repeatedly appealed for calm during the dialogue but he was ignored by the residents, many of whom continued to hurl insults at the Selangor mentri besar.
After a rowdy two-hour meeting, the dialogue came to an end at 12.15pm with Abdul Khalid announcing that the state government would be looking for an alternative site for the temple.
“We will pay for the land even if we have to,” said the MB, who was greeted with applause from the residents.
‘I don’t want to fight my Hindu brothers’
Earlier during the intense dialogue, the Malay residents accused the state government of “shifting the problem” from Section 19 to Section 23 rather than solving the matter.
The 150-year-old Hindu temple needs to be relocated as residential areas have subsequently sprouted near the complex.
In his speech, resident Jamil Isa said that Section 23 folk, Malays and Indians alike have been living “peacefully” before their neighbourhood was being forced to accommodate the temple.
“(But) this proposal suggested by these two ‘ekor’ (pointing at both Abdul Khalid and Khalid Samad) has caused some tension among us,” he said angrily, while suggesting that the temple should be located to a non-Malay majority area such as Section 18 or Section 22. [Section 18 is non-Malay majority area? Its packed with Mydin, Giant, Uitm campus, and business area. Section 22 is heavy industries area. So, this is the tolerance preached?]
Meanwhile, a resident named Mastura alleged that the state government, in particular state exco and Batu Tiga state rep Rodziah, had “refused” to meet the residents to discuss the matter.
“I had been saving up for many years to buy a house in Section 23 and I have the right to object to this. And now we are speaking in anger… and don’t make us look stupid by quoting Quranic verses to us,” she told Khalid Samad. [Wah…is that like insulting the Quran?]
Ainul Hisham, who is a teacher, said she feared the relocation of the temple would create a “higher crime rate” in the neighbourhood. [Aiks!! This is teacher ka? A real teacher or one who thinks she’s a teacher? Macamlah her place of worship creates holy people all the time! Pray 5 times a day and going to religious classes in the aftenoon also no point la if involved in crime. Might as well be an atheist and save the religion’s name.]
Despite all the criticisms and negative feedback from the residents, only one came up with an alternative for the state government to consider.
Saifuddin Said, 42, said there was an unoccupied land near a factory compound in Section 23 and it is located two kilometres away from the residential area.
“I do not want to fight my Hindu brothers as I have lived with them side by side for the past one year.
“I just hope the state government considers my proposal to put the temple a little further than the the original, which is also in Section 23,” he said and was met by applause from the residents. [At least got one human give a suggestion! Thanks to him]
Tense moments
However, situation turned chaotic again when a member of the Indian community spoke up, saying that the Malay residents should be more “tolerant” about the temple relocation.
He raised the issue of tolerance among the non-Muslim community to the all of ‘azan’ five times a day.
Twenty-seven-year-old resident R Gunaretiram, said his relationship with his Malay neighbours have turned sour following the temple controversy.
“I want to ask them, in Shah Alam, there is no such thing as non-Malay majority area so where is the temple going to be relocated?
“Although our law says we should be tolerant towards other religions, I have to admit that I have not been talking to them (Muslim Malays) face to face since this has happened.” [Hmm…he should have not let this issue spoil the relationship with neighbors. They should sit down and talk together, and not let negative elements influence the neighbors]
Gov’t leaders slog on despite boos
To rebut the residents’ criticisms, Abdul Khalid said that Shah Alam has been a predominantly Malay area since it first opened and that there is no ‘non-Malay majority’ areas.
He also said that proposed sites such as Section 18 – although it is fully equipped with some infrastructures – had been rejected by the Indian community because of it was “too far”.
“And we work differently from the previous government who had spent a lot of money on the site and now it is not even utilised.
“What we are doing now is to first consult PKNS, MBSA and the (Section 19) temple committee before suggesting it to the residents. And you have to remember that this is merely a proposal – it is not approved yet.”
Meanwhile, Rodziah who was greeted by boos, denied that she had rejected a meeting with the residents, saying that she had met the residents’ action committee chairperson Mahyuddin Manaf and was informed about their grievances.
“I even have the proof and documents to show that we held meetings before this,” said Rodziah.
As the end of the dialogue, Mahyuddin told reporters that the police should investigate both Khalid Samad and Rodziah for “posting seditious postings on their blogs”. [What about his own antics? Not seditious or inciting violence?]
He also denied that he and other protesters last week had intended to step on the cow’s head but instead blamed it on the media for encouraging by “asking us to step on it for photo purposes”. [The cow is actually reflecting the protestor. They are the one who must have been dumb.]
4. Let’s see what the problem is. Is it the claim that the government did not consult the residents or the uneasiness of accommodation another religion’s place of worship? Which is the actual cause of protest by the residents? Either one or both?
One article by Malaysia Insider is interesting to read:
SHAH ALAM, September 5 — “Muslim sensitivities” was used by the Malay residents of Section 23 as the central reason to reject the Hindu temple relocation, but when some were asked today what these “sensitivities” really were, none of them could give a straight answer.
Yet Malay residents of Section 23 said they felt their religion, Islam, had been profoundly threatened by the temple relocation proposal by the Selangor Pakatan Rakyat government.
It prompted them to take to the streets with a cow’s head recently to defend their religion; it drove them to discard civic consciousness and adopt extreme measures, to go as far as insulting another religion, knowing full well such action could lead to physical confrontations.
“It would disrupt traffic flow,” said one female resident of Section 23 when asked what exactly these Muslim sensitivities are.
The female resident, who spoke on condition of anonymity, was one of the army of residents that attended a dialogue session held by the Selangor government this morning.
It was organised to resolve the deadlock but sadly, the event was fruitless after it transformed into a free-for-all verbal assault session, when the residents turned rowdy and began insulting Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim and other PR leaders.
Residents threw racial insults towards the leaders. They rejected any alternative proposals even before the leaders had managed to raise them. Some accused the leaders of insulting Islam if they were to go on with the relocation.
“We don’t like the smells. It would be noisy and the temples would usually get bigger so we just don’t want it to be near our homes,” said another resident, Roshan, 42, on why he was against the temple being built there.
When suggested that Malays in other parts of Selangor and Kuala Lumpur have no problems with Hindu temples being built near their houses, even when these areas are predominantly Malays, Roshan rebutted gushingly.
“I am from the May 13 generation,” he said, referring to the infamous racial riots four decades ago. “(Malays in these areas are fine because) the land there is limited,” he said.
Throughout the “dialogue”, residents insisted their rejection of the temple relocation had nothing to do with racism and that they were not extremists.
They boasted of their harmonious ties with their Indian counterparts but blame the temple relocation proposal and its proposer, the PR government, as the cause of the strained interracial bond.
The temple, originally located in Section 19, had been proposed to be relocated after an agreement with the city council and other relevant authorities, to Section 23, some 300 meters from the residential area after residents in Section 19 complained.
But many Malay Section 23 residents will have none of it. For them, building a Hindu temple in the midst of an industrial area to provide their Indian counterparts, which make up about 10 per cent of the Section 23 population, the right to practice their religion is a threat to the sanctity of Islam.
Notwithstanding, almost all the replies given by residents when interviewed by The Malaysian Insider cited traffic congestion as the main reason behind their rejection of the temple relocation.
They failed to define how a Hindu temple built some 300 metres away from their houses was insensitive towards Islam but one cannot but feel that as the fiasco goes on, more and more of these Muslim sensitivities will be raised in their arguments.
Syed Jaymal Zahiid is a reporter with The Malaysian Insider, who covered this morning’s chaotic town hall meeting.
5. The relocation plan is shelved and PKNS have to look for another piece of land now, with the MB saying they will even buy a piece of land if necessary.
From NST:
The dialogue between the Section 23 residents in Shah Alam and Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim started off on the wrong foot this morning. The meeting had to be put off to another date not specified yet.
The dialogue, which started at 10am this morning lasted for about 2 hours, did not go very well with some of the residents shouting profanities,and trying to throw chairs and even their shoes. It was an extremely rowdy meeting with some of residents opposing the relocation of the temple.
The residents mentioned that they were not there to discuss anything but just to oppose the relocation of the temple.The crowd of about 200 people almost got out of hand when some of the residents who supported the relocation voiced out their stand.
The session was to resolve the issue of the relocation of a century-old temple from Section 19 to Section 23. Besides the Selangor MB, also present were the Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad and Batu 3 Assemblyman, Rodziah Ismail.
Meanwhile, Bernama reports that the Selangor government has temporarily deferred the relocation of the Maha Mariamman temple from Section 19 to Section 23.
Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim made the announcement after a dialogue with Section 23 residents which turned rowdy as some of those present were adamant on voicing out their stand.
Speaking at a news conference after the dialogue, Abdul Khalid said, the decision was made after taking into consideration the views and feelings of the people in the area.
The menteri besar however said that the relocation of the Section 19 temple would have to be resolved as the problem had been going on for nearly 20 years.
“This is not easy. The next step is to discuss with PKNS (Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor) and the Section 19 temple committee on the suitable site to relocate the temple. We should resolve this as soon as possible as it can create issues among the residents,” he said.
From Malaysiakini:
Selangor Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has decided to shelve the temple relocation plan in Shah Alam following fierce objections from Section 23 residents at a two-hour public dialogue this morning.
Speaking to reporters at his official residence, the menteri besar said that the controversial relocation of the Sri Maha Mariamman Temple from Section 19 to Section 23 will be deferred until a more suitable alternative site has been identified.
“In order not to create an adverse reaction and further misunderstanding, the state government has decided that we should put it on hold, but that does not mean we should stop finding a more appropriate site,” he said.
Asked when a solution is expected to be found, Abdul Khalid said “as soon as possible, but due process needed to be followed including discussions with all stakeholders”.
“After we meet PKNS (state development agency), MBSA (city council) and the (Section 19) temple committee, only then will we come up with a proposal for the temple relocation,” he said.
In the meantime, he said, all residents in Section 23 “should stop further discussions” pertaining to the temple relocation until a proper solution is found.
Khalid nevertheless did not regret organising today’s rowdy public dialogue, adding that such open meetings were essential for the state government to continue to have open communication with the people.
‘Not disappointed’ with the commotion
When asked whether he was disappointed with the commotion that erupted earlier today during the dialogue, the menteri besar said no, saying that “we understand (the residents’ feelings)”.
“But I must thank Khalid Samad (Shah Alam MP) who has all the patience and skills of answering questions under duress,” he quipped.
On a serious note, he said under such circumstances, “rationality is normally not the answer but we do appreciate some good points (raised at the dialogue)”.
“For instance, a resident suggested to us to look at another area in Section 23, which is quite distant from the housing area. Overall, we have positive suggestions as much as emotional feelings (during the dialogue),” he said.
“We should not be cowed by this group of people. Although this group will continue to be there, this will not stop us from finding the best solution for all, and we should not take this as a deterrent but as a challenge for us to prove them wrong,” said Abdul Khalid.
According to Khalid Samad who was also present at the press conference, there was a lot of “misinformation” stating that the final decision to relocate the temple had already been made.
“They also claimed that the construction has taken place. This means they are trying to prove that we have done something without the residents’ approval, and this was what angered the residents the most,” he said.
The 150-year-old temple needs to be relocated as residential areas have subsequently sprouted near the complex.
The press conference was also attended by state exco Rodziah Ismail, who is Batu Tiga state assemblyperson.
From Malaysian Insider:
Khalid Ibrahim has temporarily shelved the relocation of the 150-year-old Sri Mahamariamman Temple to Section 23, following protests from some residents who hijacked what was supposed to be a civil town hall meeting this morning.
The Selangor menteri besar said the state government would look for another location to shift the temple to and would even consider suggestions from local residents for the Selangor Development Corporation (PKNS) to purchase private land some distance from residential homes in Section 23 for the temple.
Khalid downplayed the thuggish behaviour earlier by some residents which disrupted the meeting.
“We expected the strong reaction from some of the residents today, because of their cow head protest last week, and will not be cowed by the group.”
“The problem had been festering for over two decades and we will take it as a challenge to solve the issue,” Khalid said.
He said PKNS has an obligation to find a new site for the temple and more town hall meetings will be held, despite the ruckus today, to allow people to voice their concerns.
Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad, who faced the brunt of the criticism from residents, said the issue had been blown up because of the misinformation which had been fed to these residents.
The residents had claimed the idea to relocate the temple was cast in stone and construction had already begun because hoarding was put up around the site.
They believed the state had by-passed their concerns and felt if they did not voice their protest, the project would have gone ahead despite their objections.
However Khalid said the Selangor government only agreed for the proposal to be considered on August 5 and today’s meeting was held to seek the opinions of the residents there.
“I was hoping that the residents would have remained more calm, cool and objective.”
He said the protesters were encouraged to act as they did today by the slow action of the authorities who have yet to act against their earlier cow head protest.
“If today’s episode had happened during the previous Barisan National (BN) administration, they all would have already been arrested.”
From the word go it was clear that those who opposed the temple, many of whom were also involved in the cow head protest last week, were only interested in expressing their intolerance to the idea.
A total of 211 residents from Section 23 attended the meeting at the Shah Alam City Council (MBSA) auditorium and more than one third noisily expressed their objections to the temple and refused to even listen to explanations from the mayor, representatives of the Selangor Development Corporation (PKNS) and the state government.
Khalid Samad also lashed out at Datuk Seri Khir Toyo for continuing to propose all temples in Shah Alam to be relocated to a cluster site in Section 18.
The previous state government had spent RM600,000 to prepare the site meant for seven temples but the idea failed to take off because the temple committees had rejected the idea.
Khalid said the previous state government had first prepared the site, then attempted to arm twist these temple committees to move.
“If I was Dr Khir, I would be ashamed to admit that I have spent so much money without solving the issue.”
Meanwhile Hindu residents of Section 23, which comprised of 48 families, said claims by the cow head protesters that they were against the temple were just not true.
Teacher M. Sekar said the community was unanimous in their support for the temple to be moved to Section 23.
“We want our rights, too,” he said. He added that were at least 28 other Chinese families who live in Section 28 who did not object.
“If they did, they would be here.” [They should have been there to show support. The dialogue was for every household in Section 23 to provide opinion]
He said many of his Muslim neighbours also did not have a problem but there are groups who are instigating the issue.
Malaysian Hindu Sangam advisor Datuk A. Vaithilingam told The Malaysian Insider they would wait to hear from the state government officially before issuing any statement about the decision to shelve the proposal to relocate the temple.
“Our only regret is that the people involved in the cow head protest, who we hear behaved like hooligans today, have yet to be arrested and charged by the police.”
He said the Hindu community is saddened by this episode and disappointed at the reluctance on the part of the police to take action.
Another article:
SHAH ALAM, Sept 5 — The town hall meeting called today by Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim to hold dialogue over the recent cow-head protest controversy descended into chaos, with around 300 residents from Section 23 jeering and mocking the meeting.
Proceedings barely got off the ground before the protesters started shouting and booing at Khalid, along with Khalid Samad (MP for Shah Alam), and Shah Alam mayor Mazalan Md Noor.
Despite calls for calm, the ruckus continued with the upset residents yelling “Penipu!” (liar!) and “Bodoh!” (stupid!) each time Khalid attempted to address them.
Tempers frayed at one point, with rowdy protesters standing on their chairs while shouting.
One Indian Section 23 resident confronted a cow-head protester, prompting MBSA enforcement officers to step in to defuse the situation.
Tensions appeared to ease after that, but the protesters started to get worked up again when Batu Tiga state assemblyman Rodziah Ismail took to the podium. The residents accused her of ignoring their views when planning the relocation of the temple, pelting her with shouts of “Tipu!”
Khalid Ibrahim has said the state government will now reconsider the location of the temple, and that the state development board (PKNS) would need to come up with an amicable solution. This did not placate the irate residents any.
The situation deteriorated further when protesters insulted an Indian attendee, telling him Indians could easily stand listening to the “azan” (Muslim call to prayers) five times daily. This triggered another round of altercations even as the mentri besar plead for calm.
He asked all parties to halt arguing over the issue, saying he would seek out their views personally before making a final decision on the matter.
Proceedings kept being halted by shouting protesters, who made up one-third of the attendees. Around 40 Indian residents from Section 23, who are in favour of the temple relocating there, were also at the meeting.
With no clear outcome possible from the emotionally-charged meet, aides led the mentri besar away. The meeting ended with the situation exactly as it was, with no resolution in sight….
6. As the next by-election takes shape in Bagan Pinang, which seems to have significant number of Indian voters (more than 20%?), one wonders if the current issues like Kg Buah Pala and Section 23 wil favor the ruling state government or otherwise. Would the Indian voters in Bagan Pinang show displeasure towards Pakatan coalition in Selangor and Perak?
Or would the Pakatan coalition able to use this two cases intelligently to gain support of the Indian community? The by-election will be interesting.
7. In case you are wondering, Indian leaders like Mohan of MIC Youth, Ganabatirau and Vasanthakumar (HINDRAF ex-ISA detainees) were at Section 17 Padang Jawa temple for a komatha prayer:
A special Hindu prayer session, that had a calf in it, turned into a lively debate between rival political groups over the Shah Alam ‘cow-head’ protest last week.
Organised by former Internal Security Act detainee K Vasanthakumar, the event was initially meant as a protest against Umno for its alleged role in the incident.
Some 200 people attended the komatha pooja prayers, where tributes were offered to a calf to seek blessings, were performed at Padang Jawa Sri Maha Marriamman temple in Shah Alam.
Shortly after the prayers concluded, several pro-Pakatan Rakyat individuals took to the stage to condemn Umno, which they blamed for the ‘cow head’ demo.
A team of MIC Youth leaders, who were also present and led by its head T Mohan, however rebutted the claims saying that the protestors were a small isolated group that was not endorsed by Umno.
“(Umno Youth chief) Khairy Jamaluddin’s statement, that desecrating the cow head is as bad as desecrating the quran, proves that Umno is not involved,” Mohan told reporters later.
He hoped that the government would take action soon in order to prevent similar protests from happening and to avoid being perceived as practicing double standards.
“There should not be a precedent where, for example, people start to protest against the buildingof a surau in an Indian-majority area. We should not create this kind of environment,” he said.
The MIC delegation was invited by Vasanthakumar. Also in attendance were members of Pakatan coalition parties and NGOs.
Hisham backed protestors
Another former ISA detainee V Ganabatirau disagreed with the MIC youth stand. He said Home Minister and Umno vice-president Hishammuddin Hussein’s initial defence of the protestors showed Umno had given tacit support.
“After that, he had a dialogue with those extremist. How could he? If he said that no temple can be built in a Malay-majority area, then where are we to go?” said Ganabatirau.
Similarly, Vasanthakumar told the crowd that Umno appeared to be backing the group, with the purpose of using race to regain support.
“You can see in Permatang Pasir that Umno is losing Malay support… Each time this happens, Umno will end up using racial methods. We advise them to stop and think of fostering racial harmony instead.
“They must remember that at the (upcoming) Bagan Pinang by-election, 22 percent or 2,800 voters are Indians. They will be closely watching how Umno handles this matter,” said Vasanthakumar.
Both Vasanthakumar and Ganabatirau were incarcerated under the ISA in December 2007 for their involvement in Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf).
8. Finally let’s have look at the views of this guy:
