Posted on 12/02/2007 4:17:45 AM PST by sukhoi-30mki
> It was convenient that the Malaysian Indians were largely Hindu. As it happened, by the late 1990s Mahatir Mohammed, Malaysia’s leader for over 20 years ending 2003 — and, ironically, a man with Indian/ Malayalee as well as Malay blood in his veins — had discovered the political utility of Islam. “Malaysia has encountered a steady Wahabbisation and Arabisation for some years now,” says a senior diplomat in Singapore.
Amazing! In less than two generations, the muzzies subjugated this country from within to make it an Islamic cesspool.
As an American, I am happy that Malaysia has at least one other country to hate. It would have been pretty boring for the Bumiputera to have to chant the same boring slogans day after day.
The radical madrassas (Islamic schools) offer free room and board (paid for from subsidies from Arab oil) in exchange for submitting to indoctrination. Graduates become radical imams in the mosques (again with Arab subsidies). The net effect is they take over within a generation or two
I think Malaysia has pretty high economic indicators compared to most Islamic nations(almost near to Persian Gulf states)-it’s made amazing progress since the past 30 years & it cannot be attributed to Arab oil.
I wonder how the average Bumiputras feel about China & Chinese-not too great in all probability.
Islam
And doesn't Malaysia have discrimination against Chinese written into their constitution?
Yeah, envy is a pretty destructive thing.
The emotion the average Bumiputera SHOULD feel toward the Chinese and Malayo-Chinese is pure gratitude. The place would be nothing if not for the peranakan laut.
I'm not talking about Arab money going towards the country as a whole. I'm talking about Arab money being used to cultivate selected individuals as agents of influence in various Islamic countries, through subsidies of radical madrassas and imams
If you have traveled in Malaysia, you cannot help but notice that any domestic business of any size is run by ethnic Chinese and, to a lesser extent, Indians. Any foreign business is Japanese and, to a lesser extent, American.
The Malay majority, while nowhere near as shiftless and uneducated as, say, the Arabs in Saudi Arabia, is visible only in government posts or running 7-11 type businesses.
Malaysia has traditionally done well financially because it has welcomed foreign investment and treated local capitalists like the engines of economic growth which they are.
Interesting article. Thanks for posting.
LBT
......
In a word: ISLAM.
And that Malay majority is transforming itself into a bunch of Coconut Arabs just as fast as it can. Saudi Oil money is the engine of an Arab cultural imperialism that transcends anything the area has ever seen.
the question to ask is, "who cares?"
For me between Singapore and Malaysia its a clear choice. I think we should be cautious about our military sales to Malaysia.
The problem with India trying to be more forceful would be ASEAN showing a collective aversion,since most of the members essentially have political arrangements similar to Malaysia.
This is an article by the usually hardhitting B Raman-
MALAYSIA: INDIA RUSHES IN WHERE CHINA FEARS TO TREAD
By B.Raman
http://saag.org/papers25/paper2484.html
Why should anyone (Malaysia included) be expected to tolerate foreigners in their country. Indians fought long and hard to remove foreigners from their country, now they complain because people are treating them the same as they treated foreigners until 1947.
If you think those Malaysian Indians should leave Malaysia,then you should also agree that all those White Australians & White/Black Americans should also leave their current homelands-afterall they are foreigners over there.
Those Indians have little in common with the land of their origin barring their religion.Many were brought as indentured labourers by the British when they colonised Malaya 2 centuries ago,while others came as merchants.
Actually, I do not think those Indians ‘should’ do anything. They should do what is best for them. And if they think it is best for them to colonise foreign countries (something which many of my own countrymen used to think would be good for us), then they should do it. BUT, they should not expect the Malaysians to love them, or even tolerate them, while they are occupying their land. There is no objective right or wrong when it comes to international politics. It is all subjective.
As for the Australians and Americans, neither are objectively ‘foreign’. Most Australians are White (or Anglo-Celtic as they refer to themselves), thus to most Australians, it is the Aborigines who are foreign, though to the latter, the former is foreign. To an Indian in Malaysia, the Malay are foreign, to the Malay, the Indians are foreign. And anyway, in general, the Aborigines and Amerindians, understandably, hate the Whites who conquered them and took their land. If you ever spoke to either group you would be well aware of this. That is unsurprising. Nor is it that the Malay do not like foreigners in their country. That is human nature for you. If the Malay did like foreigners in their country, the British would still rule it (as with your own country). In the same way that I understand why Indians hate the English, I understand why Malays hate the Indians in their country.
There are no rights to anything in this world, only those you take for yourself. The Americans and Australians fought and won land. If the Aborigines or Amerindians want their land back, then they should try and take it. Maybe, with the birth rate differentials and everything, that will happen in the future (though with the immigration crisis in both countries, it will not be long before both pieces of land are in the ownership of people who the Americans and Australians consider foreign, and it will not be the Amerindians or Aborigines).
This is what irks me about the article, and the bit at the bottom about the Indians complaining about the British not giving them rights as a community in Malaysia upon decolonisation. Not only do they want to occupy other people’s land (which is human nature) they want the people of that land to stop complaining about it AND they want foreign countries half a world away to help them do it. THe British did not give Brits in Malaysia speciual rights why should we give the Indians special rights. In fact Britain never gave Brits special rights in India, and the Indians certainly will never give Brits any. The double standards of kicking foreigners out of your country, then expecting others to accept you into their country is breathtaking. It would be like an American expecting an Amerindian to be happy at the destruction of their culture. By all means, take land and colonise it, just do not expect the people who own the land to accept it and lie down.
If the Indians in Malaysia have so little in common with India, why are they classing themselves as Indians?
As for the indentured servitude, what is your point? Many of the early European settlers of America were also indentured servants, and many of the early Australians were criminals. The early Aussies they did not go by choice. Does this mean that the Aborigines should accept them. Maybe you should tell them that.
Whereas Britain left Malaysia decades ago, the Indians are still there, no-one is forcing them to stay. In fact the Malaysians are doing quite the opposite.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.