“Right-wing group Perkasa is not belligerent against non-Malays as its aim is to promote the empowerment of the Malay community” – Kamalanathan, quoted in Malaysiakini two days ago.
September, last year, the twelve UMNO or UMNO-connected individuals who were involved with the cow-head protest were charged in Shah Alam sessions court. You can read about this HERE.
On 9th September, last year, Staronline reported Ibrahim Ali of PERKASA as saying that Perkasa wants to provide legal counsel to the 12 “cow head protestors”, and that several lawyers within PERKASA were willing to take up the case ‘as a “jihad,” or any war undertaken in the name of Islam against unbelievers or backsliders’.
Ibrahim and PERKASA plainly support the acts of the cow-head demonstrators.
Kamalanathan has stated that “Perkasa is not belligerent against non-Malays”.
Can we assume, then, that in the eyes of Kamalanathan, the cow-head demonstration was not a belligerent act against non-Malays and, in the instant case, against the Hindus of this country?
If so, would this explain why, in the days after that demonstration, not a word condemning that insensitive demonstration, was ever uttered by this MIC chief of communcation?
Or, for that matter, anyone else from MIC?
September, last year, the twelve UMNO or UMNO-connected individuals who were involved with the cow-head protest were charged in Shah Alam sessions court. You can read about this HERE.
On 9th September, last year, Staronline reported Ibrahim Ali of PERKASA as saying that Perkasa wants to provide legal counsel to the 12 “cow head protestors”, and that several lawyers within PERKASA were willing to take up the case ‘as a “jihad,” or any war undertaken in the name of Islam against unbelievers or backsliders’.
Ibrahim and PERKASA plainly support the acts of the cow-head demonstrators.
Kamalanathan has stated that “Perkasa is not belligerent against non-Malays”.
Can we assume, then, that in the eyes of Kamalanathan, the cow-head demonstration was not a belligerent act against non-Malays and, in the instant case, against the Hindus of this country?
If so, would this explain why, in the days after that demonstration, not a word condemning that insensitive demonstration, was ever uttered by this MIC chief of communcation?
Or, for that matter, anyone else from MIC?
No comments:
Post a Comment