.jpg)
KPDNKK cuts RON95 and RON97 by 35 sen, and diesel price by 30 sen beginning tomorrow
By Sulhi Azman
KUALA LUMPUR (Dec 31, 2014): The Domestic Trade, Co-operatives and Consumerism Ministry (KPDNKK) has announced that the retail petrol prices will be reduced by 35 sen each for RON95 and RON97, while the retail price for diesel will be reduced by 30 sen per litre, effective from 12:01am tonight.
The retail price reduction will see RON95 drop to RM1.91 per litre from RM2.11 per litre currently, while RON97 will drop to RM2.11 per litre from RM2.46 per litre and diesel will be reduced to RM1.93 per litre from RM2.23 per litre currently.
“The government will continue to follow market development in product cost and foreign currency exchange to determine the retail price for petrol and diesel for the coming months,” KPDNKK Minister Datuk Seri Hasan Malek, 68, said in a media statement this evening.
To recap, the government had on Nov 21 announced to rationalise the fuel subsidy by implementing the managed float system, where the monthly average of the world crude oil price would determine the retail fuel prices of the following month.
Earlier this month, the price of RON 95 were reduced by 4 sen to RM2.26 per litre, while the price for RON97 were slashed by 9 sen to RM2.46 per litre.
However, the price of diesel was increased by 3 sen from RM2.20 per litre.
It is worth noting that the World Bank had in its latest “Malaysia Economic Monitor” report said that the removal of fuel subsidies will help the government to save an estimated of between RM10 billion and 12 billion in 2015.
END
MAS extends condolences to families and friends of passengers in flight QZ8501
By Sulhi Azman
KUALA LUMPUR (Dec 30, 2014): Malaysian Airline System Bhd (MAS) – which was struck by two airline tragedies this year – has extended its heartfelt condolences and deepest sympathies to the families and friends of all passengers on PT AirAsia Indonesia’s flight QZ8501.
“As an airline that has recently experienced such great sadness, we stand in solidarity to offer our thoughts and prayers to everyone affected by this tragedy and with the team at AirAsia. This is indeed a sad time for everyone working in aviation and for all guests who fly,” the troubled national airline said in a media statement yesterday.
“We urge everyone to stay strong during this extremely trying time and to always respect the grieving families,” MAS added.
To recap, flight QZ8501 – en route to Singapore from Surabaya, Indonesia – had vanished from the radar screen on Sunday morning, after the pilot had reportedly requested to deviate from its original flight path to avoid thick clouds and rise to a height of 38,000 ft from the initial height of 32,000 ft.
The flight was speculated by the Indonesian authority to likely be “at the bottom of the sea”.
While this has yet to be fully ascertained, AirAsia Indonesia this evening confirmed that the debris found on the Java Sea earlier today is from its flight QZ8501.
The lost of flight QZ8501 is the first major blow to AirAsia founder and group chief executive officer Tan Sri Tony Fernandes, which he described via twitter as "his worst nightmare."
Meanwhile, loss-making MAS was hit by a double whammy this year, when it reported the loss of flight MH370 in March, and the shot down of flight MH17 which had killed all 283 passengers and 15 crews on board.
Following resuscitation from its largest shareholder Khazanah Nasional Bhd, the troubled national carrier – which has accumulated losses that has crossed the RM2 billion mark – will be taken private with an initial capital injection of RM6 billion on a staggered and conditional basis over a three-year period.
MAS will be delisted from Bursa Malaysia at 9am tomorrow (Dec 31).
END
Folks,
This is another tip for a men to be successful.
To appreciate this joke, you must first understand that in Islam, a man is allowed to marry up to four wives -- and strictly only if the first wife consent to it and if he can afford it.
Now, the joke in the picture below goes like this (translation):-
A husband's success,
Starts from the wife's prayer,
The more the wives,
The more the prayers,
And the more the success.
Folks,
Here is a good financial planning tip that one of my friends sent to me.
Guys (men) beware of this :)
Peeps,
I recently had a small debate with my sister about Sushi King and its halal status in a family WhatsApp group.
The story goes like this.
My sister announced in a family WhatsApp group that Sushi King is not halal and therefore should be avoided.
That immediately caught my attention as many Malaysia Muslims go there to eat.
Anyway, I did a quick Google search and it turned out that the restaurant -- Sushi King -- said in its website that they have not obtain a "halal" status.
But the company said that all of their meats are from halal sources and not mixed with wine or alcoholic liquid.
This is what Sushi King wrote in its website:-
"We are not Halal certified restaurant. No Mirin is used for food preparation in our restaurants. Our poultry products such as chicken and beef are Halal-certified".
So I told my sister to give Sushi King a benefit of doubt, as well as trust in their foods, for the company has clearly said that their meats are "halal" albeit not attaining a halal certification from a religious authority.
In Malaysia, the Department of Islamic Development Malaysia (Jakim) is the only authority to issue halal certification.
It is not immediately clear why the company (Sushi King) did not get a halal status.
The point that I am making here is that we should not jump to a straight conclusion to immediately stop going to this restaurant simply because it does not have a halal certification from a religious authority.
I wish to state that we should use the term "halal certification" as compared to "halal status" as it gives a much clearer meaning about the halal situation of a particular restaurant.
My sister, along with some other Malaysian Muslims that concur with her, may have forgotten that many hotels in Malaysia are also not certified halal.
This is simply because these hotels, although they do not serve pork, but they do serve acoholic drinks such as wine, beer etc.
Now the question here is, should we stop eating at these hotels? My answer is no.
According to Jakim's website, there are 414 hotels that has been certified as halal.
And quite a number of big, international and renowned hotels have not been accorded with a halal certification, and still many events are being held there.
I wonder what is Jakim's reaction on this since it involves many Muslim participants.
As for me, a halal certificate is a reassurance from religious authorities that the foods and drinks served there are safe to be consumed by Muslims.
And those hotels that serve alcoholic drinks are clearly unable to be accorded with a halal certification.
Now, before you jump into conclusion and accuse me of blasphemy, I want to reiterate that I am not criticising the halal certification.
But I am criticising those who practice double standard on this issue.
What I am trying to say here is that we should not be too quick to judge a particular place as "not for Muslims" if they do not have a halal certification.
The next question thay begs an answer is this: is it then haram (religiously illegal) to consume meals at a place that are not certified halal by the religious authority? This is certainly a broad question that would require long deliberations and explanations.
As for me, it is not haram to eat at places that are not certified halal by the religious authority, if you know the foods there are halal. You simply dont eat the non-halal foods lah.
Consider this: by standard definition, Malaysia Airlines flight is certainly not a halal place for Muslims as it serves alcoholic drinks, and yet many Muslims still travel on it. (How can it be halal when there is clearly a haram drinks inside a flight?)
Still, the Muslims buy its tickets on a purportedly non-halal airline for a "halal" purpose i.e. to visit relatives, study or even travelling
I know of many people and (religious) organisatons that travel on this so-called non-halal airline but no one makes a big fuss out of it.
I find it baffling why we point one mistake at a particular outlet for its non-halal certification but not at this instance. And we use "darurat" (emergency) excuse because this is apparently such a case that is unavoifable. This is far too many a time that we use such excuse to make things suit our needs, where convenient.
Another example is this: many conventional banks are not halal and provide haram services (interest [usury] products) but we still allow them to operate freely in Malaysia.
Worst, we allow them to co-exist with shariah-compliant banks that rides on strict Shariah-princple which prohibit usury and investments in non-halal business.
And many of these so-called Islamic banks are owned by conventional banks.
Talk about "halal mixing with haram."
And another classic example is this: the small restaurants and stalls that sell foods but with no halal certifications issued to them. And not a single soul make a brouhaha out of this issue.
And yet we trust them simply because they wear Islamic dress such as hijab or many of its patrons are Muslims. And they even display Islamic calligraphy and other displays to say that they are Muslimd and provide halal foods and drinks but with no 'proper' halal certification. These were all done exude confidence from the Malaysian Muslims.
But who is to say that their places are "truly halal" despite having no halal certification?
We tend not to question them, but we question others.
What is this madness?
Which brings me back to my argument: halal and haram are clearly stipulated in the Quran and prophetic traditions.
But the halal certification -- issued by religious departments -- is an extension of that in the holy scripture and structred in a more regulatory manner so as to assure the Muslims about the halal status of the foods.
But at the same time, we must look at a broader picture and be pragmatic with the halal issue.
When I say pragmatic, I mean a sensible, realistic and practical approach to a halal issue.
Being sensible is to have trust that the foods offered by the owners or operators are halal.
The onus is on the owner to provide such a trust and as the consumer, we must be convinced that such a trust is genuine.
If the consumer thinks that such a trust is not genuine, then there is definitely a doubt on the foods to be eaten and therefore the consumer need not eat it, on halal concerns.
But at the same time, the consumer has no right to badmouth and bitch about it unless they can establish a strong case against it, with hard and credible evidence.
Next is being realistic and practical, which means that we need to exercise critical judgment about such foods served.
If say, we are at a 5-star hotel in Kuala Lumpur, and we damn too well know that the hotel in the city provides a halal foods, then there is no reason why we cannot eat it.
Once trust is established, then it is only realistic and practical that we eat the foods offered, lest that we go and trouble ourself elsewhere to get a halal-certified one. Which certainly is not realistic and practical, at least to me.
I am mindful that the halal certification is good and no doubt an important one, but are we to abandon, dismiss and condemn those who sell foods that are halal but have no certification from the religious body?
The topic of halal and haram is a touchy and sensitive issue.
I am by no means condemning them, but I urge those to look at the issue from a much more broader perspectives.
As for me, it is all a matter of preference.
The religious authority has an obligation to issue halal certification to places that comply with their standard and regulations.
And the public has a choice to eat at those places that are assured and guaranteed as halal by the owner, but may not get a halal certification due to reasons best known to them.
In the end, my sister is still adamant about her view of Sushi King, but that is okay.
She is entitled to her own view but I told her to also give a benefit of doubt to the said restaurant chain.
Wallahu'alam (And Allah knows best).
Folks,
There were two tragedies in Australia that disturbed me the most in the past week.
First is the Sydney cafe siege in which an idiotic Islamist (unfortunately) held hostages of the patrons. The perpetrator and the two hostages were apparently killed when the police were rescuing the latter.
The death of the hostages saddened me the most, but the death of the perpetrator is one that I have no regret except for cherish and joy.
I hope the perpetrator will rot in hell for his action, which is clearly un-Islamic (goes against the teaching of the religion) and pathetic.
On the other hand, I sympathise with the family of the hostages who were also killed during the traumatic time of being rescued by the authority. I am saddled by the utter sadness.
This is why, I, as a Muslim, will never allow any religious scholars -- whether Christians, Muslims or otherwise -- to run and rule for a country, for fear of radical Islamic views that will results in the mushrooming of many others that would follow suit.
Just recently, a tragic incident happened in Pakistan, in which the Taliban was blamed as the mastermind behind the death of some 140-odd students in a school.
This reiterates my view once again about choosing and voting for a religious leader to run for the country.
In Malaysia, there are two Islamist groups that are politically linked. The first is Pertubuhan Agama Se-Malaysia (PAS) and second is Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (ISMA).
Both of these groups are also pressure groups in which they aspire to create Malaysia as an Islamic state.
While the idea is actually ideal, and very much welcomed by the Muslim community; I on the other hand, am not sure which part of Islamic teachings or sects or school of thoughts do they belong to.
Some of them are pathetically radical, calling for a ban on this and that; while other in the faction are more moderate, progressive, and pragmatic in their approach to certain issues.
Judging from the actions abroad, both in Pakistan and Australia, as well as others elsewhere; I am more than affirmative of my view of dismissing an Islamic state.
As for me, a state need not be Islamic; but the act of one is definitely indeed.
Islam does not advocate killing of others in the name of religion. And nor does Islam endorse its practitioners to impose its values to others.
The world as it currently is need not be Islamic.
It should be a safe haven where everyone could live in peace, prosperity and harmony, without fear of being intimidated by particular religious groups.
I denounce such a despicable act of killing innocent children and I pray that those behind the attack will be brought to justice, and eventually be forgiven by the families of the victims and God the Almighty.
Once again, I reiterate my view that a country should be ruled by moderates and not some religious scholars.
Second is the barbaric acts of murdering eight children in Australia.
Why oh why must these beautiful children be killed at such a young age, when they have yet to enjoy the bounty and plenty good things in this world?
I really am unable to fathom this.
Just what is this world turning into, I wonder.
