Alvin Tan Uses The Quran As Toilet Paper

In his latest salvo against religion, Alvin Tan posted a comic strip showing him using a page from the Quran as toilet paper. The Internet literally EXPLODED with thousands of people sharing and/or commenting on it. Take a look at the post that has polarised so many Malaysians…

Alvin Tan Uses Quran As Toilet Paper - The Rojak Pot

For those who don’t understand Malay, here is the translated comic strip :

Alvin Tan Uses Quran As Toilet Paper - The Rojak Pot

Needless to say, many people are calling for him to be killed, even decapitated by the IS (Islamic State), etc. and there sure were plenty of “Fuck you!” type of insults. For the sake of playing the devil’s advocate, I will respectfully disagree with them.


I’m Insulted!

You and thousands of other Malaysians. The question though is – why should YOU be insulted?

Sure, the Quran is a holy book to Muslims in Malaysia and around the world, but it is still just a book. Did he weaken your aqidah, your faith when he smeared his poop on it? Was Islam mortally weakened by his act, like Superman is weakened by kryptonite?

The simple answer is NO.

If you feel insulted, it is merely a reflection of your own insecurities about your religion and your God. After all, Allah is omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. He doesn’t need you, a puny human being, to defend Him… unless what you truly believe is that your God is weak and needs you to defend him.


Alvin Tan Insulted My Religion / God!

How does one offend a religion or God by simply smearing poop on a book? God is supposed to be omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, so logically he is not only aware of the “insult” but he was right next to Alvin Tan when he committed the “crime”. Yet nothing happened to Alvin.

What does that tell us? That God approved of his act? Or that God doesn’t really care? If God did not care enough to smite Alvin Tan on the spot for this “insult”, why should it be an affront to His religion or His followers?


I Will Kill Alvin Tan!

Congratulations! You have just proven Alvin Tan right when he opined that Islam is not a religion of peace, love and brotherhood, but a religion of violence and hatred.

Your reaction to this “religious insult” is actually a reflection of your upbringing and the values YOU picked and chose to adopt. That’s why not everyone agrees with you that he should be killed, ass-raped, decapitated, burned alive, etc.

In fact, many Muslims have chosen to counsel or ignore him instead of threatening bodily harm. What does that say about YOU?


What If He Smeared Shit On YOUR Religious Book?

Well, I wouldn’t bat an eye, because it’s just a book. What matters is not the physical book, but the message it conveys. That can never be destroyed as long as someone remembers it. Neither can it be desecrated as long as someone believes in it.


There Should Be Laws Against The Desecration Of The Quran

If we want to ban the desecration of the Quran, then we should also ban the desecration of every single book that is considered holy by anyone. This should extend all the way to the Satanic Bible, and whatever holy book is used by all sorts of fringe religions, even those that preach values and messages that contravene the Quran. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.


Desecrating The Quran Will Provoke The Muslims Against The Chinese

IMHO, this demonstrates your poor opinion of Muslims. In your mind, Muslims are easily provoked into attacking those who disagree with them.

Of course, there are Muslims who are easily provoked, but that’s human nature prevalent in people of any religion. We should give credit to the many Muslims who did not threaten him with bodily harm.


Where Is The Evidence?

How do we know Alvin Tan really desecrated the Quran with his faeces? Is that single picture of the Quran with something brown smeared on it sufficient evidence? Perhaps the mere accusation or admission is sufficient evidence? Or do we require 4 witnesses?

Everyone who screamed “Sacrilege!” when the comic strip first appeared was only jumping to conclusion. After all, it could have been chocolate, paint or just Photoshop. If that is really the case, then does his trolling of holier-than-thou Netizens still constitute an affront to any religion?

Alvin later declared that he actually smeared shit on the Quran, but do we know for sure he did what he said he did? He could be trolling you all with a false admission. If he later recants and admits he was just trolling, what then? Can you take back your death threats and insults?


Censorship Is NOT The Solution

There is no such thing as absolute freedom of speech. You can’t, for example, falsely shout “Fire!” in a crowded theatre because it is false and puts people’s lives at risk. But unless your speech is false and puts people’s lives at risk, it should be permitted even if it is offensive to some people.

Let’s be frank – practically any kind of speech we make will be offensive to some people. So censoring any kind of offensive speech is a slippery slope to the censorship of original thought.

Today, we may ban the desecration of a holy book. Tomorrow, someone in power might decide to ban all criticism of his/her religion. Who knows – eventually, only one interpretation of one religion will be allowed and you can either accept it or be punished with jail time or execution.


You Can Ignore Him, You Know…

I’m not saying that I agree with Alvin Tan. Neither am I saying that you should agree with him. It is your right to disagree with him, just as it is his right to insult your religion. Remember – he is not living in Malaysia, but in the United States, where free speech has far greater meaning and protection.

I personally don’t agree with some of the things he has said or done, but you won’t find me calling him names. I will just disagree or ignore him.

Those are the choices you can make too, other than calling him to be bodily harmed for his opinions, as disgusting or abhorrent as they may be to you.

Remember – ignoring a troll is the only way to defeat one! NEVER FEED THE TROLL! 😉


Post your comments here

User Review
5 (2 votes)

About The Author

Related posts


  1. Human Being

    Ok, so I read the whole thing, trying to find truth, or at least understand the act here, or your justifications.. and here’s what I have found..

    This person who made the act, who I shall not even acknowledge, is an idiot.. but why?
    1. There is absolutely no point to what he did.

    2. Holy books are holy because they are created by God, not people, that is why they are given the importance and level of sacredness,, and true we are to discuss and debate the various interpretations of these books, but only when if there’s a point, such the actual need to learn and understand God’s books of revelation i.e life’s instruction manual. Therefore, books or scriptures that promote satanism or other man-made religions are not holy, but merely excuses for people to do what they want. and yes, everyone is ‘free’ to follow and do what they want, and I highlight the word ‘free’ because it is still misconstrued by many.

    3. Freedom is not free, it has a price and a fine, or rather rules that define it, you can’t hurt or danger anything (living or not) because you are free! You can’t disrespect a group (a large one in this case) just because you think it is funny, or you wish to provoke people for Likes and a mention in cheap media. The USA is not a free country like it repeatedly keeps saying.. A look at their laws and news will prove to you why and how.

    4. Nowhere will you ever find Isslam or the Holy Qur’an in direct relation with violence. Nowhere. But what this idiot has done is indeed a form of violence.

    5. It is absolutely disrespectful, disgusting and therefore not funny to show faeces, and it is not of a manner of a musslim to even look at his own, unless for health/medical reasons. Why because Isslam teaches one how to think and act for the care of one’s self and others.

    6. Musslims are strictly advised not to let Holy books, and this case the Holy Qur’an, inside the toilet/bathroom, as toilets are the dirtiest places, even if physically clean. and that is why Muslims can pray ANYWHERE on any ground, except inside a toilet/bathroom. So again, the idiot wasn’t making a point, and reading the Qur’an is not something he does, or a hobby as he puts it.

    7. It is clear that this idiot has opened fire on himself and should bear whatever consequences he is to face,, from the people, the law, and God.

    8. If he is a troll, and the best way is to ignore one, then why is the blog post made by this Dr. Adrian Wong in the first place? Why bring this publicly? Why share the disgusting and disrespectful images and even translate them to English for others to read? Why even tag Allah in the blog post tags, and tag him first?
    I believe he too has an agenda of some sort. and he did get his 5 minutes of fame, so congratulations-not.

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong

      Hello Human Being,

      I’m not justifying his actions. I’m defending his right to be offensive, and disagreeing with those who choose to rant online, call him names and/or threaten him with bodily harm.

      1. I would disagree with you that he’s an idiot. He posted that with a purpose. As he pointed out in a later post, that singular post attracted more than 2,000 people to Like his Facebook page. He did not have to pay Facebook to promote it like some bloggers do. If that was his purpose – he succeeded at it.

      2. I would, again, disagree with you. None of the holy books were directly written by God. They were either INSPIRED by God, or written by prophets who received the words of God. All of them, without exception, were written by MAN. Their holy status was also determined by MAN.

      That’s why many of us would not consider the Satanic Bible to be a holy book, even though it is considered holy by Satanists. If you want to be fair and protect holy books, then you must protect ALL of them, even if they contravene your favoured holy book.

      Your perception that books that promote Satanism are not holy merely reflects your upbringing and prejudices. If you were born into a Satanist family, it is more likely than not that you would consider the Satanic Bible to be holy.

      3. Don’t confuse blasphemy with hate speech. It is very easy to distinguish the two. The former attacks religion or religious beliefs, while the latter incites violence against other people.

      You CAN and SHOULD BE ALLOWED to disrespect any IDEA (which includes religious beliefs). Not because we want people to be offensive to each other, but because we must acknowledge that any kind of speech is offensive to someone else.

      I did not say that the US is a “free country”. If you believe I did, please quote where I said that, so I know what you are referring to. I believe I only said that Alvin is now residing in the US, where free speech has greater MEANING and PROTECTION.

      4. I would again disagree with you that there is nothing in the Quran that is directly related to violence, but that’s another topic for another day. I would disagree yet again with you that what he has done is a form of “violence”. How is that violence? Did his act harm a person? Who did he harm with his act?

      5. It is disgusting for most people, not just Muslims, to look at faeces. However, Alvin is not a Muslim, so your explanation that “Islam teaches one how to think and act for the care of one’s self and others” is, frankly, irrelevant. Let’s just agree that it was an offensive act.

      6. This is similar to no. 5. Yes, it may be wrong for MUSLIMS to bring the Quran into the toilet / bathroom, but he is not a Muslim so this is kind of irrelevant. Unless you are telling me that Syariah laws should be applied unto the non-Muslims? IMHO, there is no need to contort yourself into justifying your outrage. I agree with you that he was being intentionally offensive.

      7. I think it is clear that he knows that fact, and he did it intentionally. That comic strip took a fair bit of effort. What makes you think he will not face any consequences?

      8. Because I saw thousands of people sharing his post in outrage, while calling for him to be raped, tortured, killed, etc. If you check the time stamp, you would note that almost a day passed before I commented on this. I can ignore him, but that would only remove ONE PERSON from the equation.

      I took the time to write this article for two reasons – to defend his right to free speech, and to educate people that the best way to beat a troll is to ignore him/her. If I can convince JUST TWO people to ignore him (instead of cursing or threatening him, or even sharing his post), I would have been twice as successful as I would have been had I just ignored him.

      I don’t believe in hiding anything. I believe in exposing the truth and explaining it to people, so we can all RATIONALLY discuss the issue and come to a LOGICAL conclusion. That’s why I took the effort to translate it into English.

      You have to be less suspicious of people. Allah is tagged first because it starts with the letter A… Please blame the alphabetical order… #doh

    2. Thor

      TL;DR Nobody cares about Odin, Amon-Ra or Thor today. So why any different with any other deity, do some deities need special protection and 30% privilege, their followers always scream needing respect and all that, but their deity got no mana to throw lightning bolt at offenders (not only book desecrators but also corruption recipients), like that how to respect.

      1. MasDoel Pemerhati Lingkungan

        in the physical book of Mushaf there is the Al Qur’an and its content. Did you remember when for the first time Umar Bin Khattab RA. want to read the quran just before he convert to islam?. His sister ask him to clean his self first (wudhu) before touch it and read it.

  2. Ganesh

    “I’m not justifying his actions. I’m defending his right to be offensive, and disagreeing with those who choose to rant online, call him names and/or threaten him with bodily harm.”

    Ironic. You said you are defending his right to be offensive. But yet, you are against people’s right of being offensive towards him.

    Basically it’s tit for tat. No need to defend anybody in this matter.

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong

      Heh.. Nope. If you read my article CAREFULLY, you will notice that I did NOT ask anyone to stop criticising him. If you believe otherwise, please QUOTE ME? 🙂

      I only pointed out that OUR response is a reflection of OUR character, and that the best way to defeat a troll is to ignore it.

      1. jentayu

        Good. So i can call you a bastard. Your mum is a slut. And your father is a pimp. After all hey, i only insult your family. I dont cause any physical harm dont i? Also, your father and mother also human what. No different than other parents. Only you make them special. So dont layan me eh? Since you are too coward and ball-less who hide behind the freedom of expression mantra. There’s a reason the word dignity been invented

        1. Dr. Adrian Wong

          Sure you can, and you just did that. Did you suddenly turn me into a bastard? Is my mother suddenly a slut, and my father a pimp?

          Nope. It just shows the world what kind of a person YOU are. 😀

          Obviously, dignity is a word you have very little use for, jentayu… 😉

      2. Ganesh

        I do agree with your last point that the best way to defeat a troll is to ignore it. At the same time, it is extremely difficult to hold yourself from being “explosive” in your disagreement, especially if the provocateur went overboard. For me, I don’t care if they abuse Alvin Tan with such words, since he invited it, knowing very well of the backlash. In fact, he wanted it, and got it.

  3. John Tan

    Adrian, you are too enamoured of Western ideals such as freedom of speech without thinking critically for yourself. Mutual respect for the beliefs of others is basic human decency which both Alvin and yourself seem to lack. You do not need to agree with these beliefs but it does not mean one should freely denigrate or insult them.

    It is a fallacious argument that ignoring insults is the only acceptable response. One can equally argue that ignoring an insult to your honor or family honor and is indeed a reflection of oneself as you say, but that it shows one had no honor or was a coward. Indeed, in the days of Voltaire, even Voltaire himself prepared 3 days for a duel with Rousseau over a verbal insult. And this was the man to whom the quote “I do not agree with what you say but I would defend to the death your right to say it” is attributed. Remember that this quote was said in the context of intellectual arguments and not personal insults.

    In a world which is far more complex today, there needs to be much more thoughtfulness on tolerance, mutual respect and not mindlessly provoking others. Your condoning of Alvin’s actions adds to the problem and reveals you to be just as thoughtless and self centered as he is.

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong

      How odd. I always felt that free speech is a universal right. Take a look at what Universal Declaration of Human Rights say about “freedom of speech” – 🙂

      Incidentally, you won’t find “mutual respect for the beliefs of others” listed as a human right… We all have the right to offend other people, and we all have the right to be offended.

      You are looking at this particular case and saying THIS is the reason why freedom of speech should be curtailed if it denigrates / insults other people’s beliefs. I’m defending his right to be offensive because I’m defending freedom of speech, period. I’m not saying that what he did was right.

      Whatever we say can be offensive or denigrating to someone else. If I say that the Paris terrorist attack proves that religion kills more people than it saves, that would be considered offensive / denigrating to many people. Are you going to therefore demand that I be censored? Or perhaps I should be threatened with death for offending your sensibilities?

      Even the fact that I am a kaffir is offensive to the more radical Islamists. Should I therefore convert to Islam to avoid giving offence to them? Where do we draw the line? Who decides what’s offensive and what’s not? You? I? ISIS/ISIL? Some religious leader? The Pope?

      This is why the Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes the right to FREE SPEECH and makes no mention of any need for mutual respect for anyone’s beliefs. You are free to believe that people should respect your beliefs, but it’s not basic human decency. Basic human decency is respecting other people’s right to make their own choices – right or wrong.

      You may think (again) that I’m defending him because I think he’s right. That’s the problem when people don’t read properly. Perhaps you can quote where I think he’s right in desecrating the Quran? I’m only defending his right to be offensive. Whether he’s right or wrong – that’s another topic. More importantly, any action – right or wrong – comes with consequences. He will have to live with those consequences – good or bad.


      Don’t confuse my defence of his right to free speech with my suggestion that ignoring him is the best way to defeat him. They are TWO DIFFERENT TOPICS. 😀

      Neither did I ever say that ignoring insults is the only acceptable way. Perhaps you would like to QUOTE ME?

      I merely pointed out that our response is a reflection of our character. I also pointed out that you can criticise him or ignore him. I never said that ignoring him is the only acceptable way. In fact, I pointed out that I either disagreed with him, or I ignored him.

      How is the (perceived) desecration of the Quran a PERSONAL INSULT? Pray tell me – did he mention anyone in his comic strip? It feels PERSONAL because you take it personally. You decided that it was a personal insult to you. It was your choice. He didn’t force you to feel insulted.

      Look at jentayu’s insult above. I chose not to take her insults personally. Frankly, it was hilariously childish, but see – this is just me. This is who I am. It was my choice not to take these kinds of insults personally, even though she DIRECTLY insulted me and my parents.

      There you go again – my “condoning of Alvin’s actions”. WHERE did you see me condone his actions? Please… QUOTE ME? 😀

      John, no offence, but before you reply…. please, PLEASE READ CAREFULLY what I write. I have never, EVER CONDONED what he did. Just because you formed this idea in your mind does not make it true. LOL! 😀

      If you want to be politically-correct and avoid all criticism of anyone or anything in the name of tolerance, please go on right ahead. I would actually applaud you. I’m not saying you are wrong. I’m just sorry I can’t be like you and stop speaking my mind honestly and openly.


      1. John Tan

        Adrian, read your own post thoroughly. It is a common theme in your responses to others that we have not read your post properly and that is a poor defense. It is crystal clear that you promulgate ignoring Alvin as the only appropriate response. It is also clear that you condone rather then condemn his actions in the interests of free speech. I see no evidence of any criticism of his actions. Show me otherwise from your post.

        The UN like many international organizations is controlled by the West as it is a fact of world history that they shaped the post-war order, you would be naive to think otherwise. Free speech is not absolute but should be tempered with wisdom. Believing it is absolute as you do makes you no better than others who believe in their own absolutes like the fundamentalist jihadists. You are peas in a pod, both intolerant of others with different opinions and thinking it is fair game to attack others with different beliefs. Your opinion is the only correct one, there are no nuances or shades or grey.

        Intolerance, even in the name of free speech benefits no one and it is absolute attitudes like these that prevent compromise and lead to war and human suffering. Learn wisdom, stop aping the West and start to think for yourself. All you have written is simply a tired regurgitation of ideas you have read elsewhere from Western news media and blogs. You proudly call yourself a doctor but do not seem to have much capacity for independent thought or analysis – too much memorize and repeat in school perhaps?

        1. Dr. Adrian Wong

          John, it is a common theme because many people DO NOT bother to read carefully. If you disagree, please QUOTE ME where you claim I “condoned” his act.

          It is crystal clear that you assumed I was condoning his act of desecrating the Quran when all I did was defend his right to free speech. I have pointed out time and time again that he was being deliberately offensive, and that I didn’t agree with his act.

          But I can’t help it if you choose to ignore all that, and continue believing that I’m condoning it. I’m not the problem. You are. But if you believe I’m lying, please… QUOTE ME?

          Here we go again – the UN is controlled by the West. Funny how you ignore the fact that China (hardly a Western nation by any standard we care to use) has vetoed a number of UN resolutions to the West’s “inconvenience”. If you want to peddle your conspiracy theories, please take them somewhere else.

          The only reason why the UN has come up in this conversation is because of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Some facts on the UNDHR :

          1. It was drafted by 18 representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from ALL regions of the world.
          2. Forty eight countries signed it, of which thirty five (73%) are from Asia, Africa and South America.
          3. Three of BRIC countries – China, Brazil, India are signatories.
          4. The only Western nation in the BRIC group, Russia, refused to sign it.
          5. Quite a number of other Western nations did not sign it – mostly ex-Soviet Bloc states.

          So the UNDHR is not a “tool of the West”, as you alluded; but quite representative of the world. The only reason why you insist that it is a tool of the West is because it didn’t “jive” with your opinion.

          You may not like it, but it is an indisputable fact that the UNDRH includes the right to free speech but NOT the right not to be offended. If you think there is a better universal declaration of human rights, please tell us what it is, and who has ratified it. Thank you.

          I think it’s hilarious for you to say that I’m INTOLERANT of other people with different opinions, when you are the one criticising my opinion. Did I ban you from criticising my opinions? Did I call you names? Did I threaten you with bodily harm for disagreeing with me? Please… 🙂

          Yes, I strongly believe in my own opinions, just like you strongly believe in your own. That’s the only reason why we are even debating this with each other. To deny otherwise would be false modesty or an attempt to be deceitful – your choice.

          Please don’t confused “intolerance” with “offensive”. Alvin’s post was OFFENSIVE but it was NOT “INTOLERANT”. He did not deny or hinder Muslims in their ability to practice Islam. Neither did he preach hatred or intolerance towards any Muslim. He only demonstrated his lack of respect for the Quran by (allegedly) desecrating it with his faeces. That is the very definition of being offensive… but he was certainly NOT being intolerant.

          It is also rich of you to preach about absolute attitudes when you are demanding that we all (including me) must adopt your (intolerant) views of Alvin’s offensive antics. We actually both agree that what he did was wrong. The only difference is I would not deny him the right to do it because that is what free speech is all about.

          Here is the compromise – you carry on believing that no one has the right to offend other people, and I will carry on believing that we all have the right to offend other people. I have never demanded that you (or anyone else) must accept my viewpoint, and neither should you. That would be intolerant of us. 😉

          Oh yeah, sure… what I’ve written is a “tired regurgitation of ideas” I’ve read somewhere. Perhaps you can enlighten us with an example? Preferably after you finish quoting me where you (falsely) claimed that I condoned his actions.

          I proudly call myself a doctor because I earned the title, and because I stand by my words. That’s why I use my real name, my real email address and my real title. I don’t hide behind fake email addresses and what is probably a pseudonym.

          Whether I have any capacity for independent thought and analysis, I will leave it to my readers to judge for themselves. You are, of course, most welcomed to your opinions.

          Good day, John (if that’s your real name). 😀

          1. John Tan

            Just as fundamentalist jihadists believe that their beliefs are absolute, so too do you believe that your belief of freedom of speech is absolute and that is your religion.

            It is no point debating with someone about their religion because reason and logic is mixed with faith so it is a waste of breath having this debate.

            Worship your religion, it is your right but just be aware that you are guilty of exactly the same intolerance that you so flippantly accuse others of. Like you like to say, what you write reveals the type of person you are, in this case a close minded person incapable of open and rational discussion. Also one who lacks basic human decency and manners like consideration for fellow men.

            This is the first time I have seen your blog and it will also be the last time as it shows no capacity for second order deeper analysis and critical thinking.

            Not sure where you got your medical degree from but it sure wasn’t Harvard.

          2. Dr. Adrian Wong

            LOL! There you go again – making another false claim. Since when did I say I believe in absolute freedom of speech? It’s getting really tiring to repeat myself.

            I’ve said time and time again – ABSOLUTE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS NOT DESIRABLE. No matter how many times you insist otherwise, that’s not going to change. If you disagree – QUOTE ME.

            Hah! There you go again – calling me intolerant when you are the one hurling all sorts of false accusations and insults, just because I refuse to agree with your viewpoint. That is the very definition of the word HYPOCRISY, John.

            I will leave it to our readers to decide for themselves who is the one who is closed minded and incapable of open and rational discussion. 🙂

            As they say, it takes one to know one, so I know for sure you were NOT from Harvard. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. 🙂

          3. John Tan

            Sorry to burst your bubble on proving what you know for sure to be true wrong yet again. Actually, I am from Harvard, that’s why I know you are not because you are not in the alumni directory.

            Your level of analytical thinking shows the level of maturity of someone who has not really seen the world and so has a lack of confidence in challenging conventional Western thinking.

            Plus, with all your vaunted fighting for freedom of speech, you disabled my right of reply to your last post. It is clear You do not practice what you preach.

            Btw, it was amusing to see you get all riled up by my insults. This was intentional and to make my point. Despite your support of Alvin and your condescension towards people who were offended (see your multiple posts deriding those who express offense as being a bad reflection of who they were), you react the same way to insults. This is unsurprising and a normal human reaction which I wanted to provoke and demonstrate.

            I have nothing personal against you but was piqued by your attitude towards those who expressed offense and to show you the gap in your logic which you were unaware of. Needless provocation, especially on a person’s hottest buttons (ego and pride in thinking in your case and religion in the case of Muslims) creates strong emotions and reactions that can pull apart a society. What good freedom of speech if Malaysia becomes a sectarian conflict zone like Syria, Iraq or Libya? It can easily happen in a multi-racial society, just look at history.

            Alvin is simply trying to provoke threats to himself to strengthen his asylum claim of threats to personal safety. To grossly insult the religion of millions in the most vile of fashions for one’s own aims is the height of selfishness. Invoking free speech doesn’t make an action correct. Using one’s intelligence against society is an abuse of this gift.

            Ultimately, you have to decide if you support, condone or condemn his actions. You may choose to ignore it as an overt reaction but at the end you intellectually either support, condone or condemn these actions.

            So, let’s go on record here and not waffle or make any more excuses – what is your stand?

          4. Dr. Adrian Wong

            Oh, back for more? Come now… you promised to leave, didn’t you? Breaking your word so soon? Come on… 😀

            Sure, you are from Harvard. I’m from Yale. Maybe we even met during one of our football games? No? Yeah, didn’t think so. /s

            If you are really from Harvard, then standards have really suffered at your alma mater. Anyone can easily find out in just 5 minutes where I studied, etc. Instead of doing that, you checked your alumni directory? What on Earth makes you think I’m a Harvard grad in the first place? #facepalm

            Funny, I “disabled” your right of reply to my last post but yet here you are, replying to it? And you claim to be from Harvard. Oh, the shame… the shame… 😀

            I’ll leave it to the readers to decide who is the one who lacks the logic and the facts here. But don’t worry. You remain anonymous, because like the coward you are, you hide behind a pseudonym and fake email addresses.

            It is ironic for a Harvard-educated man like you to use Syria, Iraq and Libya as an excuse for suppressing freedom of speech. It shows your ignorance of historical facts. Let’s not even go into your analytical skills.

            None of those countries collapsed because they had freedom of speech. In fact, Syria, Iraq and Libya were and still are countries with very little freedom of speech. These are FACTS, not opinions. By your logic, the more freedom of speech is restricted, the safer it will be. Obviously, the three examples you gave actually prove you wrong.

            In addition, you actually noted that the conflicts are SECTARIAN in nature. That means you are at least aware that the conflicts within Syria, Iraq and Libya are not between different races but different religious sects (Sunni vs Shia) of the same ethnicity and culture.

            How is that equivalent to Malaysia with its multicultural society and history of peace and tolerance? With the exception of May 13, there has been no racial riots; and we have never had any sectarian violence between the Sunni and the Shias, or the Catholics vs. the Protestants.

            Is it possible that some people can be riled up by religious and racial intolerance to commit acts of violence here in Malaysia? As the Low Yat riot shows – yes. But the same riot also shows that this is a very small minority. A subsequent planned protest petered out and failed.

            Perhaps you have a more pessimistic view of the Malays and Muslims here in Malaysia. I don’t. As I concluded in my second article on Alvin’s Quran desecration :

            The idea that we must have racial unity or religious conformity is absurd. We are all different people with different ideas and opinions, even if we are of the same race or believe in the same creed. The idea that we must all be 100% in unison for something, and against something else, is nonsensical.

            We can have vastly different ideas, opinions and beliefs and still live together in peace and harmony. How? By simply understanding that in return for the freedom to say, opine and believe anything we want, we must accept that everyone else is entitled to the SAME RIGHTS.

            So feel free to disagree. Feel free to debate any issue. Feel free to expound your own ideas and opinions. But if we can’t come to an agreement, let us all at least agree to disagree. As Illy Muzliza pointed out, Allah will “handle” things in the Hereafter. Go in peace.

            Heh… Come on now. If you are truly a Harvard-grad, you would know that that is simply NOT true. Alvin does NOT need to post anything controversial to strengthen his asylum claim. I’ve already pointed this out to jimmyk above. Please read and educate yourself on US asylum requirements @

            You are right that he’s being selfish, not because of his asylum case, but mostly to get free publicity for his porn flick. You are also right that just because it’s free speech, it doesn’t mean he’s right in doing it. But that’s the point of free speech – whether for good or for bad, he gets to make the choice. Not us.

            I’ve gone on the record umpteen times already. I will repeat it once again in point form since you don’t seem to comprehend me in full sentences :

            1. I do not support Alvin’s action in desecrating the Quran.
            2. I support his right to do so anyway, because it’s free speech.
            3. Posting that comic strip as free speech does not preclude / protect him from consequences.
            4. Similarly, my defence of his right to free speech does not preclude / protect him from consequences.

            As you can see, nothing has changed. I only chopped them up into point form for your easier understanding. 🙂

          5. John Tan

            Maybe you don’t read English too well. First sentence of US asylum immigration page says it may be granted because of fear of persecution.

            Of course it strengthens his case if he can claim fear of physical harm. You obviously don’t understand the US system well as from your words it looks like you have never lived here. If you disagree, write in to the INS for a clarification.

            Your knowledge of history is also appallingly deficient. Ask your parents or grandparents about May 13. Don’t just read about it in a book. Chinese and Malays were going at each other with choppers and parangs. Malaysia can revert back if there is no mutual respect and accommodation. Look at Low Yat, it can get worse if mutual provocations continue and to what end? This is not a game or hoity poity pie in the sky over TWG tea. Have a grip on realpolitik. Libya and Iraq are not better off today for improved freedom of speech. Ask the man on the street if you have friends from these countries. Freedom of speech must come with personal responsibility.

            Again, a pseudo intellectual who apes the West but lacks the ability to think independently. Go out and see the world if you can. Not as a tourist but actually live in different countries.

            I said I would not continue reading your blog and I have not. Am only responding to this specific post. Hence, no need to share my email with you. As for Harvard, ask any Harvard grad if you know one if Out of Town News is one of the first things one sees at school. You can’t google this so only insiders know.

            Cheerio, it has been fun poking you to demonstrate you react in exactly the same manner you denigrate others for.

          6. Dr. Adrian Wong

            John Tan, if you actually bothered to read beyond the first sentence, you would realise that :

            1. An Asylum Officer will interview him and decide if he’s eligible for asylum. If the AO cannot make the decision, he will kick it up to an Immigration Judge.

            2. If either the Asylum Officer or the Immigration Judge decides that he is INELIGIBLE, then he is placed into removal proceedings and DEPORTED.

            3. Now, this is the important part – the asylum interview has to be conducted within 60 days of the asylum claim being filed. In fact, the entire proceeding is supposed to conclude within 180 days of the claim being filed. That’s roughly 6 months.

            Alvin Tan applied for asylum in the United States sometime in September 2014. At that time, he was in the midst of THREE sedition cases. That formed the basis for his asylum application. That should have been processed within 30 days with a judgement within 180 days.

            It’s now mid-November 2015 – roughly 14 months since his asylum application. Since he is still in the United States, I think we can pretty much surmise that his asylum has been approved. Since you are in the United States, why don’t you call up the INS and ask them? 😉

            But assuming his case for asylum was only postponed and not approved, he still has TWO sedition cases pending (a third case was dropped in February). Does he need a third sedition case to “strengthen” his asylum case?

            If he did, why didn’t he do it between February and now? Why wait until after he released his new porn flick? Some food for thought.

            Hah… You claim my knowledge of history is deficient from a casual mention of May 13? Please, check your arrogance at the door and READ carefully. I never dismissed it as a racial riot. I only pointed out that there has been no racial riots since May 13. Are you disputing that? If you are, please tell us – what racial riots have there been in Malaysia since May 13?

            Hellooooo… What MUTUAL provocation are you talking about? There was no “MUTUAL” provocation. It was merely a case of a thief getting caught, and his friends coming back for revenge. That got co-opted by some ultra Malays into creating a false narrative to rile up the Malays to protest against the Chinese.

            The Chinese did not provoke them. They provoked themselves. You call that “MUTUAL PROVOCATION”??? ROTFL! #SoMuchFail

            Have a grip on yourself, and stop being Chicken Little. The sky is not falling down. If you don’t believe, get some Malay friends. Talk to them. See for yourself if they have any desire to chop at you with their fearsome parangs, or behead you with a kitchen knife, just because someone else in the United States did something offensive to a book that matters a lot to them.

            Since when was Libya and Iraq liberated for greater freedom of speech? Hey, stop staying in fantasy land… The strife in their lands has nothing to do with how much free speech they have. You can take away ALL of their free speech and it still wouldn’t stop the violence. Stop making things up. #doh

            I’m going to guess that this is where you tell us you have lived in those countries too. Just like you went to Harvard. Out of Town News? You don’t need to graduate from Harvard to know it, and yes, you can Google it. It’s a tourist attraction… #doh

            Oh, I’m not actually interested in your email, John. I’m merely pointing out your cowardice, and your dishonesty. But as I’ve said, don’t fret. No one is going to hunt you down and kill you for what you have posted even if you share your real email address or real name.

            In fact, I thank you for the entertainment. If you are truly a Harvard grad, then my friend, you have made me a VERY HAPPY man today! 😀

  4. Muhammad

    At least he didn’t kill anyone like those terrorist in the Bangkok bombings, the Russian plane bombing and the recent Paris Bombings. I wouldn’t mention who did those

  5. AMT

    Hey dad, why you are so stupid to understand freedom of speech?
    Don’t angry dad, it is you who taught that I have the right to speak my mind honestly and openly. How could I be raised such a stupid illiterate father like you?! Don’t angry dad , I am your son and it is always right for me to offend you and you can offend me too!!

    We are difference from animals not only in terms of mental development but we still do have a FEELING. If freedom of speech is able to raise our community to be more civilized and more respect to each other. Well let say YES to this idea.

    Communication could cause tension if not delivered in a right way. Don’t forget to include FEELING to this idea, because we are communicating among human being.

    Rather than communicate freely why not EDUCATE our-self how to deliver our message without causing tension to the other? Yeah that is the main purpose of why we are having conversation/communication right? Delivering message and networking. All of us need help from the others. We always have the choice to speak with civilized attitude or vice versa.

    Communication is a mere tool like gun. Use it wisely or abuse it.

    Since you titled yourself “DR” I believe you are wise person. TQ

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong


      Thank you for proving my point. Your response shows us EXACTLY what kind of person you really are. 🙂

      You talk about feelings. Well, look up the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. You won’t find any reference to protecting anyone’s feelings, much less your delicate ones… 😀

      Just like you are entitled to offend me, I’m entitled to ignore the offence. It’s a choice we all make – whether to offend someone, whether to take offence, and of course – our reaction when we are offended.

      Alvin Tan chose to offend Muslims with his comic strip. I chose to defend his right to be offensive, even though I don’t agree with it. You chose to insult me because you think everyone is a Neanderthal who will get outraged at the slightest provocation. I chose to respond with civility, instead of hostility.

      Ultimately, what we do is our choice. You don’t get to blame your lack of manners on Alvin. What he did was offensive, but it doesn’t give you a free pass to be offensive as well, particularly when you think it’s wrong. We have a word for that – HYPOCRISY. 😉

      If you want to educate Alvin Tan about how to better deliver his message, I suggest you message him directly. I personally don’t agree with what he did, so there’s no point telling me about civilised discourse. More so since you have so ably demonstrated your lack of ability to do so. LOL… 😀

      No, I didn’t “title” myself Dr. I EARNED that title. You can earn your Dr. title too by finishing medical school. 😉

      Thank you! 🙂

  6. Maximus87

    Agree with your reasoning to and extent. However to try and convey that muslims shouldn’t and has no basis for being insulted is wrong. What does it take to “insult someone?

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong

      Everyone has the right to feel insulted. But no one has the right to deny others the right to insult.

      The problem, as I pointed out, is who determines what an insult is? For some people, merely disagreeing with their viewpoint is an insult.

      So, everyone should have the right to insult, just as everyone has the right to feel insulted. We just have to agree to disagree, or discuss the issue like adults.

  7. Saleem

    Hi Dr Wong i would relish to discuss about freedom of speech with you as soon that i ‘m back visiting Alvin from the states.

    1. Dr. Adrian Wong

      Making threats from the safety of your chair using an kafir-designed and kafir-manufactured computer on kafir-designed Internet?

      Please stop making a mockery of your religion. Is it a religion of peace or war? Make up your mind.

  8. Pingback: The Quran Page That Alvin Tan Smeared With Faeces

Have something to say? Share it with us!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: