by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Monday, 28th October 1991:
Going by Liong Sik’s argument, no MCA leader has the right to talk about Islamisation since the MCA leaders had consistently supported Islamisation policies and programmes by the Barisan Nasional government at both national and state levels for over a decade since the 1980s
MCA President, Datuk Dr. Ling Liong Sik, said in Malacca yesterday that the DAP has no right to talk about the Tunku Abdul Rahman (TAR) College because DAP had never supported the TAR College.
The first resort of a person who knows in his heart of hearts that he cannot win in an argument or debate because of paucity of facts, reasons or examples will be to find an excuse to end the debate by claiming that the other person has no right to talk in the first place. This is what Liong Sik has done!
It was only very recently that Liong Sik declared that the MCA had launched an all-out war against the DAP, particularly accusing the DAP of supporting over 60 Islamisation programmes in Kalantan adversely affecting non-Muslim rights.
But when I challenged Liong Sik to a public debate on the respective politics of DAP and MCA, the MCA President has swiftly flown the white flag of surrender, which is again illustrated by his speech in Malacca as it is his way of saying that there is no need for such a DAP-MCA debate for the DAP has no right to take part in such a debate or ‘war’!
If Liong Sik has no confidence in personally spearheading an ‘all-out war’ against the DAP, why did he fall into the trap of his advisers into declaring such an ‘all-out war’ in the first place.
The MCA leaders however should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves that despite the history of the TAR College, it is the DAP leaders who are championing the right of the TAR College students for full recognition of their diplomas and studies.
If the DAP had not intervened on behalf of the interests of the TAR College students, the Government would have recognized even fewer of its diplomas and courses. We do not ask for any ‘thank you’ from Liong Sik or the MCA, as the DAP always do what is right.
Why didn’t Liong Sik tell Mohamed Rahmat and other UMNO Ministers that they have no right to comment or criticise the Malaysian Chinese Cultural City proposal?
If Liong Sik claims that TAR College is a purely MCA affair, and nobody else has the right to talk or comment about it, why is it Liong Sik dare not tell the same thing to the UMNO leaders like the UMNO Secretary-General, Datuk Mohamed Rahmat, and the other UMNO Ministers like Datuk Abdullah Badawi, Datuk Najib Tun Razqak and Datuk Sabarrudin Cik, as well as the UMNO Youth and UMNO Divisions who had attacked the MCA’s Malaysian Chinese Cultural City proposal?
Why didn’t Liong Sik tell al these UMNO leaders to mind their won business and that they have no right to give any view, comments or criticisms of the Malaysian Chinese Cultural City project as this is a strictly MCA matter?
Xxxxxxxxxxxxx the MCA President for again and again giving new and more instances of the politics of parasitism of the MCA leaders in the Barisan Nasional government!
In fact, going by Liong Sik’s argument, the MCA President and all MCA leaders have no right to talk about Islamisation in Kelantan, since it is the MCA leasers themselves who had consistently and fully supported Islamisation policies and programmes by the Barisan Nasional government at both the Federal Government and state government levels in the last decade since the 1980s.
Didn’t the MCA leaders fully supported the Islamisation policies and programme of UMNO in the administration, economy, education and in all other aspects of government policy, until the Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikkhism had to launch a nation-wide campaign to protest against the imposition of Islamic laws and principles on non-Muslims before the 1990 general elections?
In fact, such widespread application of Islamisation approaches by the Barisan Nasional government had become so pervasive that it can be seen in many Federal Government policies and actions as for instance in the recent Immigration decision that non-Muslim Malaysians cannot employ Indonesian maids but only Filipino maids. MCA Ministers and Deputy Ministers see nothing wrong in such discriminatory government laws or actions because they have become full converts of the Islamisation policies and process of UMNO.
The DAP however will not maintain Liong Sik’s unreasonable attitude. The DAP will not say that just because the MCA leaders had been responsible in supporting the formulation and implementation of the most serious and far-reaching Islamisation policies and programmes by the Barisan Nasional government at the Federal and state government levels for the last decade, the MCA has no right any more to talk about Islamisation in Kelantan.
I am still waiting for Liong Sik to spell out the over 60 Islamisation programmes which the MCA claimed had been carried out in Kelantan in the past year which adversely affect non-Muslim rights, and I have given Liong Sik the public assurance that I am prepared to form a united front with him to oppose any Islamisation programme in Kelantan which adversely affect non-Muslim rights.
But is Liong Sik prepared to form a common united front with me to oppose Islamisation programmes which adversely affect non-Muslim rights carried out by the Barisan Nasional government, whether at the Federal or state level?
Or is Liong Sik taking the stand that it is all right for the Barisan Nasional government, whether at the federal or state level, to carry out Islamisation programmes adversely affecting non-Muslim rights?
Finally, I want to give Liong Sik a friendly advice. Liong Sik again said in Malacca that the DAP had no stand on the second Johore-Singapore link – when the DAP had made it very clear that we agree to the construction of the second Johore-Singapore Link, but object to the manner of the award of the multi-billion project to the UMNO company, United Engineers Malaysia (UEM) without proper public tender as this will lead to conflict of interest, abuse of power and malpractices.
I know Liong Sik does not read Chinese newpapers, but he must make sure that his political advisers and assistants read the Chinese newspapers before giving their political advice. When Liong Sik continues to make such blunders, it is not his advisers who are made to look stupid and foolish, but Liong Sik himself.
If his present set of advisers are incompetent, as for example in trapping him to declare and all-out war against the DAP when he dare not spearhead it, may be the time has come for a change of his political advisers and ‘handlers’.