Here is the maiden speech by Azmin Ali as PKR Timbalan Presiden, read:
Azmin attacks Najib, rejects Malay supremacy
1. Azmin Ali showed his total ignorance of our system of Government which is modelled on the Westminster system where the Prime Minister is an MP who has the support of the majority group in Parliament. His tongue twisting devisive description of PM Najib elevation to Prime Minister is indeed pathetic as it offending to right thinking Malaysians. Najib became Prime Minister when he was elected unopposed as Presiden of UMNO which is the biggest party in the majority BN coalition and that is a fact.
2. If there are any argument it should be the position of Opposition leader held by Anwar Ibrahim which rightly belong to Lim Kit Siang because the DAP has the highest number of MPs in the loose Pakatan coalition. By Azmin's standard then he must ask Anwar to step down and allow Lim Kit Siang to become Opposition Leader immediately. Azmin Ali talks nonsense.
3. The position of the unelected and not constitutionally recognised de-facto leader of PKR, Anwar Ibrahim is a big question mark on the democratic election process of the PKR, lets not even begin to talk about the complaints of abuse, cheating and fraud in the PKR election where LESS than 25% of the questionable PKR member numbers of 400,000 went to vote. Azmin Ali the PKR crusader should address this problem in PKR first above anything else.
4. Ketuanan Melayu is a word made famous only after Anwar Ibrahim was let out of jail, it has never been used by UMNO during the 22 years that Dr Mahathir was UMNO President nor was it used by Dollah Badawi as a political cry. The only people harping on Ketuanan Melayu nowadays are the PKR, PAS and DAP folks who are trying to rejuvenate Ketuanan Melayu so that they can demonise UMNO and make the Chinese and Indians resent UMNO more. Prove: PKR President and now its Timbalan Presiden are again raising the spectre of Ketuanan Melayu to spook the non Malays. A closer look at the UMNO BN led Government policies suggest otherwise, every body benefits from the BN Government policies and PM Najib promotes 1 Malaysia, NOT Ketuanan Melayu.
5. In a nutshell, the last PKR convention has nothing to offer the Rakyat except its loud self proclaimed devotion to Anwar Ibrahim who after being released from jail after serving a six years sentence for abuse of power when he was Deputy PM is now facing another charge of sodomizing his young PKR (ex)assistant, hmm, so much for God's gift to Malaysia isn't it.
6. Azmin Ali's questionable election victory and his style of politics will only be canon fodder for UMNO and BN, he is no orator like Anwar Ibrahim as his latest uninspiring speech showed. PKR will be decimated in the next election, Selangor MB Khalid Ibrahim should have competed against Azmin, he will lose his MB post and Pakatan will lose their jewel in the crown because of his hesitation.
Monday, 29 November 2010
Very Good News from the Gomen, "Pirated DVD buyers let off"
I am in Chittagong, Bangladesh at the moment finally having some time to post from the comforts of my hotel room. Apart from the internet connectivity which is quite satisfactory the food here is great if you like it hot and spicy, the green chilli padi here is a killer. The people here are generally friendly especially if they find out that you are Malaysian.
Anyway I heard the Malaysian Government had come to their senses; from the NST:
Pirated DVD buyers let off
KUALA LUMPUR: The proposal to penalise those who buy pirated DVDs, VCDs and CDs will not be seeing the light of day after all.
Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob told the New Sunday Times that the proposal, which was mooted by the industry, had been shot down because the 'public feels the move is too harsh'.
"The people think the proposal to amend the Copyright Act to this effect is too punitive. They fear the enforcement of the amendment.
“They are concerned about misuse of power during enforcement.
Read more here.
The decision is timely, other wise our Penjara will be filled to the brim with Malaysians who I am sure at one time or the other had inadvertently bought a pirated DVD or two for their Mak, Ayah and children and friends.
Malaysia have enough Laws to counter DVD piracy, what we need is good honest well organised enforcement agency specifically for pirate goods, one which is not corrupted by money offered by the piracy crime lord who are highly organised and very, very well funded.
We have now a severe critical situation where even the Malay and other local movies and songs are pirated and sold openly for a fraction of the already low published legal price. If these situation is not contained our local movie and song industry will soon die, killed by piracy no matter how much money the Government give to help the industry. Yes, definitely its not right to punish the gullible and naive consumer until the enforcement have really done their job well without fear or favor.
Anyway I heard the Malaysian Government had come to their senses; from the NST:
Pirated DVD buyers let off
KUALA LUMPUR: The proposal to penalise those who buy pirated DVDs, VCDs and CDs will not be seeing the light of day after all.
Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob told the New Sunday Times that the proposal, which was mooted by the industry, had been shot down because the 'public feels the move is too harsh'.
"The people think the proposal to amend the Copyright Act to this effect is too punitive. They fear the enforcement of the amendment.
“They are concerned about misuse of power during enforcement.
Read more here.
The decision is timely, other wise our Penjara will be filled to the brim with Malaysians who I am sure at one time or the other had inadvertently bought a pirated DVD or two for their Mak, Ayah and children and friends.
Malaysia have enough Laws to counter DVD piracy, what we need is good honest well organised enforcement agency specifically for pirate goods, one which is not corrupted by money offered by the piracy crime lord who are highly organised and very, very well funded.
We have now a severe critical situation where even the Malay and other local movies and songs are pirated and sold openly for a fraction of the already low published legal price. If these situation is not contained our local movie and song industry will soon die, killed by piracy no matter how much money the Government give to help the industry. Yes, definitely its not right to punish the gullible and naive consumer until the enforcement have really done their job well without fear or favor.
Friday, 26 November 2010
Chinese MPs slam Ridhuan Tee, kesian Dr. Tee
Wow, there are a lot of hyper sensitive Malaysian Chinese politicians out there. Seems they are out for Dr. Ridhuan Tee's blood for saying that that non-Malay-speaking Malaysians and the “ultra kiasu” will be the stumbling block to the government’s transformation programmes.
Really? its that bad? I do not think so, because Dr Tee's consistent message to his brethrens has always been "Dimana Bumi dipijak Disitu Langit dijunjung", unless of course your loyalty to Malaysia though cannot be questioned, is only surpassed by your loyalty to your ethnicity. Lets read the report from one of my more favourite news portal, my comments will be in bold green:
Chinese MPs slam Ridhuan Tee’s ‘publicity stunt’
By Boo Su-Lyn November 26, 2010
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 26 — Chinese lawmakers accused Utusan Malaysia columnist Dr Ridhuan Tee Abdullah of using his Chinese identity to attack the non-Malay communities.
Tee had said that non-Malay-speaking Malaysians and the “ultra kiasu” will be the stumbling block to the government’s transformation programmes.
“He (Tee) is trying to seek cheap publicity by using his identity as a Chinese to whack the non-Malays so he can get more prominence in Utusan Malaysia,” Selangor executive councillor Teresa Kok (picture) told The Malaysian Insider today.[Typical DAP, those they cannot intimidate they disparage]
“People who cannot speak fluent Bahasa (Malaysia) are not lesser than those who can speak Malay. We are all Malaysians,” added the Seputeh MP.[Who is talking about superiority here, DAP either disparage the messenger or divert the issue. I thought DAP lifelong supremo Lim Kit Siang say he is Malaysian First and Chinese Second..should't that mean being able to speak the National Language fluently?]
Tee is a prominent Chinese Muslim who has consistently courted controversy with his strident views on race relations.[ Read Dr Tee's views with a open heart not through a narrow tunnel vision]
The columnist also stressed that non-Malays should absorb the country’s policies, such as Article 152 and Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, into their own lifestyle rather than resist them.
Article 152 states that Malay is the national language while Article 153 outlines the special position of the Malays and Bumiputeras.
The National Defence University lecturer used what is his favourite term to describe anything and anyone who does not share his beliefs or who questions Malay rights — “ultra kiasu”. The word “kiasu” comes from the Hokkien dialect meaning “too proud to lose”.
Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, however, pointed out that Article 8 guaranteed equality before the law.
“Perhaps Dr Ridhuan Tee should also read Article 8 that guarantees equal treatment under the law,” said Pua.[Yes, perhaps this young YB Cambridge graduate should not cherry pick but read and understand the whole Perlembagaan]
“Ridhuan Tee has to read the Constitution as a whole document, rather than just picking out one or two clauses that is suited to his ultra bigoted and extremist views,” added the DAP national publicity secretary.[Its the other way round, that is exactly what you are doing Tony]
Echoing Pua’s views, Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong told Tee to look at the Constitution holistically.
“It (the Federal Constitution) must be seen in total,” he said. [Exactly YB Wee and YB Tony, perhaps both of you are the ones who needs to read the perlembagaan in total, read also the history of how the Perlembagaan was written]
Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi labelled Tee a “dangerous” person for allegedly intensifying racial and religious tension.
“He’s assumed a pattern in the Umno media where he is stoking a lot of friction, tension and misunderstanding between different races and religions. He is a dangerous person underneath that context,” said Ooi.
“We have been trying the last 53 years to forge national unity and he is doing the reverse,” he added.
[Ya right, first timer MP Ooi have a read of your Supreme Leader Leader speech here]:
[referred from blog: Pure Shiite]
On Chinese Malaysian Losing their citizenchip
Press Statement by DAP Organising Secretary and Parliamentary Candidate for Bandar Melaka, Mr. Lim Kit Siang, on 21st April 1969: read here,
Mr. Koh Kim Leng is at liberty to institute whatever legal proceedings, but I will not withdraw a single word that I have said
Mr. Koh Kim Leng and Alliance politician are very fond of issuing threats because they do not have reason, argument and facts to match the DAP’s reasons and arguments.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng has again resorted to threats against me. In a statement yesterday, Mr.Koh Kim Leng accused me of distorting his speech at the Alliance rally at Hereen Street, where he said that the Chinese will lose their citizenship if they vote for the opposition.
Mr. Koh now explains that what he meant was that if he and the Alliance candidates lose, and the PMIP wins, then the Chinese will lose their citizenship.
This is Mr. Koh’s present explanation of his speech made at Hereen Street on April 14. I reject his explanation. I am satisfied that Mr. Koh Kim Leng has blatantly threatened the Chinese in Malaysia that if they don’t vote for the Alliance and himself, they stand to lose their citizenship. I have said that this is downright blackmail, and a most shameful act, and I stand by every word I have said.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng has threatened that unless I withdraw what I have said on this issue, he will institute legal proceedings.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng is at liberty to institute whatever legal proceeding he want, but I will not withdraw a single word, because when we in the DAP speak, we weigh every word and sentence, and we don’t behave like Alliance leaders and politicians, who say the most foolish things which they live to regret later.
I had said that I believe that Mr. Koh Kim Leng is fully capable of advocating the removal citizenship of Chinese if he loses his election, because in 1960, he was one of the authors of the Abdul Rahman Talib Report, which is the Alliance master plan to destroy Chinese schools, language and culture. My views are unchanged.
There are many more but suffice to say that they are all of the same tone.....
Refer below his detention order under the ISA 2 months after the May 13 event.....
STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 11(2)(b) ISA, 1960.
NAME OF DETAINEE: LIM KIT SIANG.
GROUNDS ON WHICH THE ORDER OF DETENTION IS MADE:
Since July, 1968, you, Lim Kit Siang, have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in Malaysia in that in the several speeches you have made since the date you have deliberately and intentionally roused intense communal feelings thereby promoting feelings of hostility between different races in Malaysia and causing suspicion and disunity to grow between them.
ALLEGATIONS OF FACTS:
1) On the 27th July 1968, at a DAP public rally at Tanjong Malim, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government policy on Education by telling your audience that the policy was designed to achieve and eventual extermination of Chinese newspapers, Chinese schools and Chinese languages. Such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malay in this country.
2) On the 24th August 1968, at a public rally at Slim River, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government’s policy on language by telling your audience that a tourist poster with the Malay wordings “speak the National language only” clearly illustrated the one language policy of the government and that the dubbing of English, Chinese and Tamil T.V. films with Malay was unfair to the other races as their languages were not being given equal status such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malays in this country.
3) On the 7th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at 24 milestone, Sg. Besi road, Kuala Lumpur, and on 21st. September 1968, at Sungei Way new Village Selangor, on both these occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the MCA had instead of striving for the rights of the Chinese Language and Education in fact assisted the government in suppressing the Chinese Language as evidenced by the Non-recognition of Nanyang University project. The speeches are evidence of a deliberate misinterpretation of actual facts and had resulted in generating suspicion and animosity between the Malays and the Chinese in Malaysia and thereby creating a feeling of tension and racial hatred.
4) On the 29th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at Batu Pahat, Johore, on 2nd November 1968, at Lawan Kuda Bahru, Gopeng, Perak, and on 26th January 1969, at Jalan Yow, Pudu, Kuala Lumpur, on these three occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the alliance’s policy was a “racialist policy” as the Alliance had given more privileges to Bumiputras in University education and that there were first and second class citizens – the Bumiputras being first class citizens, and that the awards of honour such as P.P.M, are not worth anything because they were given to men in the streets and that P.P.M. stands for “ PELAN PELAN MATI”. By these utterances you had deliberately distorted the actual Government policies and by doing so you had generated racial tension, hatred and disharmony in the country.
5) On 12th, Feb 1969, at a DAP public rally held at Jalan Lengkongan Brunei, Kuala Lumpur, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was showing discrimination between the various races in examination entry to University of Malaya, employment and in the distribution of land and that special privileges were being given to the Malays. By these utterances you deliberately distorted the Government policies and thereby causing suspicion and animosity between the various races.
6) On 13th May 1969, at a public rally held at Kampong Ayer, Kota Kinabalu, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was trying to have a Malay Malaysia by dividing the people into bumiputras and non-bumiputras, that “the Malays were first class Bumiputras” and that the Government was carrying out a policy of “Malaysiation” of Sabah whereby all top post were held by the Malays. You also stirred anti-Malay and anti-Islamic religious feelings by telling your audience that the Government was pursuing the policy of exploitation by Malays of other races and that the Government by holding an International Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur had intended to send Malaysian citizens to die in the Middle East in order to capture Jerusalem for the Muslim World. By this speech you had made dangerous statements of a communal nature there by fostering communal resentment fear and apprehension amongst sections of the public in Sabah.
By direction,
Sign:
b/p SETIA USAHA,
KEMENTERIAN HAL EHWAL DALAM NEGERI,
MALAYSIA.
DATE: 11 JULY 1969
[So DAP wannabee politicians and leaders, tolong jangan cakap tak serupa bikin, your arrogance offends many right thinking Malaysians. The DAP politics has not changed much since then. Begin by NOT saying that you are trying to forge national unity for the last 53 years as the DAP came into being only after PAP left Malaysia in 1967 and has done virtually nothing to forge unity since3]
I have met many Chinese and Indian friends, they are Malaysians who like Dr. Ridhuan Tee, they lived the peribahasa "Mana Bumi DiPijak Disitu Langit Dijunjung", their loyalty to Malaysia surpasses their loyalty to their ethnicity. Malaysia is a multicultural nation we have to have a unifying Language to move forward as one nation, they understand the urgency of the matter. I hope the ultra kiasus will change their mind too.
Really? its that bad? I do not think so, because Dr Tee's consistent message to his brethrens has always been "Dimana Bumi dipijak Disitu Langit dijunjung", unless of course your loyalty to Malaysia though cannot be questioned, is only surpassed by your loyalty to your ethnicity. Lets read the report from one of my more favourite news portal, my comments will be in bold green:
Chinese MPs slam Ridhuan Tee’s ‘publicity stunt’
By Boo Su-Lyn November 26, 2010
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 26 — Chinese lawmakers accused Utusan Malaysia columnist Dr Ridhuan Tee Abdullah of using his Chinese identity to attack the non-Malay communities.
Tee had said that non-Malay-speaking Malaysians and the “ultra kiasu” will be the stumbling block to the government’s transformation programmes.
“He (Tee) is trying to seek cheap publicity by using his identity as a Chinese to whack the non-Malays so he can get more prominence in Utusan Malaysia,” Selangor executive councillor Teresa Kok (picture) told The Malaysian Insider today.[Typical DAP, those they cannot intimidate they disparage]
“People who cannot speak fluent Bahasa (Malaysia) are not lesser than those who can speak Malay. We are all Malaysians,” added the Seputeh MP.[Who is talking about superiority here, DAP either disparage the messenger or divert the issue. I thought DAP lifelong supremo Lim Kit Siang say he is Malaysian First and Chinese Second..should't that mean being able to speak the National Language fluently?]
Tee is a prominent Chinese Muslim who has consistently courted controversy with his strident views on race relations.[ Read Dr Tee's views with a open heart not through a narrow tunnel vision]
The columnist also stressed that non-Malays should absorb the country’s policies, such as Article 152 and Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, into their own lifestyle rather than resist them.
Article 152 states that Malay is the national language while Article 153 outlines the special position of the Malays and Bumiputeras.
The National Defence University lecturer used what is his favourite term to describe anything and anyone who does not share his beliefs or who questions Malay rights — “ultra kiasu”. The word “kiasu” comes from the Hokkien dialect meaning “too proud to lose”.
Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua, however, pointed out that Article 8 guaranteed equality before the law.
“Perhaps Dr Ridhuan Tee should also read Article 8 that guarantees equal treatment under the law,” said Pua.[Yes, perhaps this young YB Cambridge graduate should not cherry pick but read and understand the whole Perlembagaan]
“Ridhuan Tee has to read the Constitution as a whole document, rather than just picking out one or two clauses that is suited to his ultra bigoted and extremist views,” added the DAP national publicity secretary.[Its the other way round, that is exactly what you are doing Tony]
Echoing Pua’s views, Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong told Tee to look at the Constitution holistically.
“It (the Federal Constitution) must be seen in total,” he said. [Exactly YB Wee and YB Tony, perhaps both of you are the ones who needs to read the perlembagaan in total, read also the history of how the Perlembagaan was written]
Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi labelled Tee a “dangerous” person for allegedly intensifying racial and religious tension.
“He’s assumed a pattern in the Umno media where he is stoking a lot of friction, tension and misunderstanding between different races and religions. He is a dangerous person underneath that context,” said Ooi.
“We have been trying the last 53 years to forge national unity and he is doing the reverse,” he added.
[Ya right, first timer MP Ooi have a read of your Supreme Leader Leader speech here]:
[referred from blog: Pure Shiite]
On Chinese Malaysian Losing their citizenchip
Press Statement by DAP Organising Secretary and Parliamentary Candidate for Bandar Melaka, Mr. Lim Kit Siang, on 21st April 1969: read here,
Mr. Koh Kim Leng is at liberty to institute whatever legal proceedings, but I will not withdraw a single word that I have said
Mr. Koh Kim Leng and Alliance politician are very fond of issuing threats because they do not have reason, argument and facts to match the DAP’s reasons and arguments.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng has again resorted to threats against me. In a statement yesterday, Mr.Koh Kim Leng accused me of distorting his speech at the Alliance rally at Hereen Street, where he said that the Chinese will lose their citizenship if they vote for the opposition.
Mr. Koh now explains that what he meant was that if he and the Alliance candidates lose, and the PMIP wins, then the Chinese will lose their citizenship.
This is Mr. Koh’s present explanation of his speech made at Hereen Street on April 14. I reject his explanation. I am satisfied that Mr. Koh Kim Leng has blatantly threatened the Chinese in Malaysia that if they don’t vote for the Alliance and himself, they stand to lose their citizenship. I have said that this is downright blackmail, and a most shameful act, and I stand by every word I have said.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng has threatened that unless I withdraw what I have said on this issue, he will institute legal proceedings.
Mr. Koh Kim Leng is at liberty to institute whatever legal proceeding he want, but I will not withdraw a single word, because when we in the DAP speak, we weigh every word and sentence, and we don’t behave like Alliance leaders and politicians, who say the most foolish things which they live to regret later.
I had said that I believe that Mr. Koh Kim Leng is fully capable of advocating the removal citizenship of Chinese if he loses his election, because in 1960, he was one of the authors of the Abdul Rahman Talib Report, which is the Alliance master plan to destroy Chinese schools, language and culture. My views are unchanged.
There are many more but suffice to say that they are all of the same tone.....
Refer below his detention order under the ISA 2 months after the May 13 event.....
STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 11(2)(b) ISA, 1960.
NAME OF DETAINEE: LIM KIT SIANG.
GROUNDS ON WHICH THE ORDER OF DETENTION IS MADE:
Since July, 1968, you, Lim Kit Siang, have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in Malaysia in that in the several speeches you have made since the date you have deliberately and intentionally roused intense communal feelings thereby promoting feelings of hostility between different races in Malaysia and causing suspicion and disunity to grow between them.
ALLEGATIONS OF FACTS:
1) On the 27th July 1968, at a DAP public rally at Tanjong Malim, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government policy on Education by telling your audience that the policy was designed to achieve and eventual extermination of Chinese newspapers, Chinese schools and Chinese languages. Such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malay in this country.
2) On the 24th August 1968, at a public rally at Slim River, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government’s policy on language by telling your audience that a tourist poster with the Malay wordings “speak the National language only” clearly illustrated the one language policy of the government and that the dubbing of English, Chinese and Tamil T.V. films with Malay was unfair to the other races as their languages were not being given equal status such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malays in this country.
3) On the 7th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at 24 milestone, Sg. Besi road, Kuala Lumpur, and on 21st. September 1968, at Sungei Way new Village Selangor, on both these occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the MCA had instead of striving for the rights of the Chinese Language and Education in fact assisted the government in suppressing the Chinese Language as evidenced by the Non-recognition of Nanyang University project. The speeches are evidence of a deliberate misinterpretation of actual facts and had resulted in generating suspicion and animosity between the Malays and the Chinese in Malaysia and thereby creating a feeling of tension and racial hatred.
4) On the 29th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at Batu Pahat, Johore, on 2nd November 1968, at Lawan Kuda Bahru, Gopeng, Perak, and on 26th January 1969, at Jalan Yow, Pudu, Kuala Lumpur, on these three occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the alliance’s policy was a “racialist policy” as the Alliance had given more privileges to Bumiputras in University education and that there were first and second class citizens – the Bumiputras being first class citizens, and that the awards of honour such as P.P.M, are not worth anything because they were given to men in the streets and that P.P.M. stands for “ PELAN PELAN MATI”. By these utterances you had deliberately distorted the actual Government policies and by doing so you had generated racial tension, hatred and disharmony in the country.
5) On 12th, Feb 1969, at a DAP public rally held at Jalan Lengkongan Brunei, Kuala Lumpur, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was showing discrimination between the various races in examination entry to University of Malaya, employment and in the distribution of land and that special privileges were being given to the Malays. By these utterances you deliberately distorted the Government policies and thereby causing suspicion and animosity between the various races.
6) On 13th May 1969, at a public rally held at Kampong Ayer, Kota Kinabalu, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was trying to have a Malay Malaysia by dividing the people into bumiputras and non-bumiputras, that “the Malays were first class Bumiputras” and that the Government was carrying out a policy of “Malaysiation” of Sabah whereby all top post were held by the Malays. You also stirred anti-Malay and anti-Islamic religious feelings by telling your audience that the Government was pursuing the policy of exploitation by Malays of other races and that the Government by holding an International Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur had intended to send Malaysian citizens to die in the Middle East in order to capture Jerusalem for the Muslim World. By this speech you had made dangerous statements of a communal nature there by fostering communal resentment fear and apprehension amongst sections of the public in Sabah.
By direction,
Sign:
b/p SETIA USAHA,
KEMENTERIAN HAL EHWAL DALAM NEGERI,
MALAYSIA.
DATE: 11 JULY 1969
[So DAP wannabee politicians and leaders, tolong jangan cakap tak serupa bikin, your arrogance offends many right thinking Malaysians. The DAP politics has not changed much since then. Begin by NOT saying that you are trying to forge national unity for the last 53 years as the DAP came into being only after PAP left Malaysia in 1967 and has done virtually nothing to forge unity since3]
I have met many Chinese and Indian friends, they are Malaysians who like Dr. Ridhuan Tee, they lived the peribahasa "Mana Bumi DiPijak Disitu Langit Dijunjung", their loyalty to Malaysia surpasses their loyalty to their ethnicity. Malaysia is a multicultural nation we have to have a unifying Language to move forward as one nation, they understand the urgency of the matter. I hope the ultra kiasus will change their mind too.
Farewell Tun Lim Chong Eu, RIP
I regret to say that even though Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu is a very familiar name but I have not made any effort to know this man, when he died recently Dr. Mahathir wrote about the Late Dr Lim Chong Eu:
1. We know that we must all leave this life one day. But knowing the inevitabilty of death cannot stop us from grieving over the passage of a great man, no matter how long he may have lived.
2. As a nationalist, as a friend, as a compatriot, I feel saddened by the passage from this life of Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu.
3. Except for Tun Razak, Tun Lim contributed most to the formation of the National Front, the coalition which succeeded the Alliance, ruled and developed Malaysia until today. He responded postively to the proposal by Tun Razak to rejoin the coalition for the good of Malaysia. He rose above many of the grievances which had led him to leave the MCA, to become a junior partner even though he had been victorious. He was content to be just a Chief Minister of Penang.
4.It was as a Chief Minister that he made Foreign Direct Investment a by-word in Malaysia and perhaps in the world. He brought the first foreign investments in electronics to Penang. It was the best thing for overcoming unemploymnet which had plagued Malaysia till then.
5. It was he who made the Penang the centre for the transformation of Malaysia into an industrial nation. Towards this end he was tireless, almost single-handedly contacting and persuading foreign industrialists to invest in the new electronics industry. So successfull was he that very quickly Penang was short of workers and other states benefitted from his effort at creating employment.
6. I worked closely with Tun Lim and always found him open to proposals on the development of Penang and Malaysia. When he lost in the 1990 elections, it came as a shock to me. I had thought that the people of Penang would remember his services and overcome partisan sentiments. But I suppose I was hoping for far too much.
7. Malaysia, and I dare say Penang, has lost a great leader with the passing away of Tun Dr Lim Ching Eu.
read the rest here.
My sincere condolences to the family of the late Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu. He was indeed a great Malaysian.
I hope the new history syllabus for SPM will highlight the late Tun's contributions to our nation. Lets not wait for someone to die before his contributions to the nation are finally given recognition.
1. We know that we must all leave this life one day. But knowing the inevitabilty of death cannot stop us from grieving over the passage of a great man, no matter how long he may have lived.
2. As a nationalist, as a friend, as a compatriot, I feel saddened by the passage from this life of Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu.
3. Except for Tun Razak, Tun Lim contributed most to the formation of the National Front, the coalition which succeeded the Alliance, ruled and developed Malaysia until today. He responded postively to the proposal by Tun Razak to rejoin the coalition for the good of Malaysia. He rose above many of the grievances which had led him to leave the MCA, to become a junior partner even though he had been victorious. He was content to be just a Chief Minister of Penang.
4.It was as a Chief Minister that he made Foreign Direct Investment a by-word in Malaysia and perhaps in the world. He brought the first foreign investments in electronics to Penang. It was the best thing for overcoming unemploymnet which had plagued Malaysia till then.
5. It was he who made the Penang the centre for the transformation of Malaysia into an industrial nation. Towards this end he was tireless, almost single-handedly contacting and persuading foreign industrialists to invest in the new electronics industry. So successfull was he that very quickly Penang was short of workers and other states benefitted from his effort at creating employment.
6. I worked closely with Tun Lim and always found him open to proposals on the development of Penang and Malaysia. When he lost in the 1990 elections, it came as a shock to me. I had thought that the people of Penang would remember his services and overcome partisan sentiments. But I suppose I was hoping for far too much.
7. Malaysia, and I dare say Penang, has lost a great leader with the passing away of Tun Dr Lim Ching Eu.
read the rest here.
My sincere condolences to the family of the late Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu. He was indeed a great Malaysian.
I hope the new history syllabus for SPM will highlight the late Tun's contributions to our nation. Lets not wait for someone to die before his contributions to the nation are finally given recognition.
Thursday, 25 November 2010
Nazri Aziz says SPRM fights corruption and is not the enemy
Nazri Aziz is a Minister on the opposite extreme of the "Rakyat Emotional Meter" some love him and some just hates his guts there is no in between, whatever one would say about Nazri the fact is he shoot straight from the mouth. In his war of words against Utusan Malaysia he wrote an unprecedented open letter to the newspaper which ended with the words "Yes I am a Malaysian first, Malay next. Does any bigot have a problem with that?".
Today the 25th of November 2010 he shoot point blank at the Chinese Media for potraying the SPRM as the bad guy in the Teoh Beng Hock case. I must add that it is not only the Chinese media but also the Chinese Chauvinist Party DAP who are in the forefront of the campaign to disparage the SPRM and without irrefutable proof are accusing SPRM of murder. Read here.
MACC not the bad guy, says Nazri
By Melissa Chi November 25, 2010(MI)
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 25 — Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz has blamed the Chinese media for portraying the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) as the bad guy in the Teoh Beng Hock case.
The minister in the Prime Minister’s Department said MACC was a body set up to fight corruption; it was not the enemy. He was speaking at the Media Appreciation and MACC 2010 Jingle Launch at The Legend Hotel.
“The way it was reported in the media was as if MACC was the enemy because it has caused Teoh Beng Hock’s death,” Nazri said. That was the impression now imprinted among the Chinese community.
He said even some members of the Bar Council — of Chinese descent — had publicly spoken out against the MACC.
“I’d like to clarify that MACC’s job is not to murder,” he said. “Teoh Beng Hock is a witness . . . we would have taken good care of him, feed him medicine should he even cough, make sure he is in good health because he is our key witness . . . is important for us to charge the accused.
“But the reports portrayed MACC as the society’s enemy, especially by the Chinese press. The media should give MACC the benefit of the doubt.”
Teoh, 30, was found dead on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam on July 16 last year after he was interrogated overnight by the MACC in connection with suspected abuse of state funds by Selangor lawmakers. The Selangor MACC headquarters was then located on the 14th floor of the building.
Teoh, then political secretary to Selangor state executive councillor Ean Yong Hian Wah, had been interrogated from July 15 evening to July 16 morning, on allegations that his boss had misused state funds.
The ongoing inquest into his death has grabbed national headlines and has been a hot topic on online social networks. Video clips of DPP Datuk Abdul Razak Musa demonstrating the act of self-strangulation have gone viral, with the rock-star look spotted by Thai forensic expert Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand and her witty remarks in court, and new evidence turning up.
Nazri said corruption was the enemy, not the MACC, and the agency would need the help of the media to curb corruption.
He said the media should not only focus on those who were bribed, for example, government servants, but also the “businessmen” who offered the bribes.
That is correct Minister Nazri, the act of bribery is WRONGFUL FOR THE GIVER (the businessman who wants to get things done faster, the ordinary guy who just hate to pay the fine at the police station) AND THE TAKER (anybody in position of power and authority), both could be charged under the Penal Code.
By the way accusing the SPRM of murder without proof in public is a serious wrong, how come Lim Guan Eng's investigation is taking a long time?
Today the 25th of November 2010 he shoot point blank at the Chinese Media for potraying the SPRM as the bad guy in the Teoh Beng Hock case. I must add that it is not only the Chinese media but also the Chinese Chauvinist Party DAP who are in the forefront of the campaign to disparage the SPRM and without irrefutable proof are accusing SPRM of murder. Read here.
MACC not the bad guy, says Nazri
By Melissa Chi November 25, 2010(MI)
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 25 — Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz has blamed the Chinese media for portraying the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) as the bad guy in the Teoh Beng Hock case.
The minister in the Prime Minister’s Department said MACC was a body set up to fight corruption; it was not the enemy. He was speaking at the Media Appreciation and MACC 2010 Jingle Launch at The Legend Hotel.
“The way it was reported in the media was as if MACC was the enemy because it has caused Teoh Beng Hock’s death,” Nazri said. That was the impression now imprinted among the Chinese community.
He said even some members of the Bar Council — of Chinese descent — had publicly spoken out against the MACC.
“I’d like to clarify that MACC’s job is not to murder,” he said. “Teoh Beng Hock is a witness . . . we would have taken good care of him, feed him medicine should he even cough, make sure he is in good health because he is our key witness . . . is important for us to charge the accused.
“But the reports portrayed MACC as the society’s enemy, especially by the Chinese press. The media should give MACC the benefit of the doubt.”
Teoh, 30, was found dead on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam in Shah Alam on July 16 last year after he was interrogated overnight by the MACC in connection with suspected abuse of state funds by Selangor lawmakers. The Selangor MACC headquarters was then located on the 14th floor of the building.
Teoh, then political secretary to Selangor state executive councillor Ean Yong Hian Wah, had been interrogated from July 15 evening to July 16 morning, on allegations that his boss had misused state funds.
The ongoing inquest into his death has grabbed national headlines and has been a hot topic on online social networks. Video clips of DPP Datuk Abdul Razak Musa demonstrating the act of self-strangulation have gone viral, with the rock-star look spotted by Thai forensic expert Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand and her witty remarks in court, and new evidence turning up.
Nazri said corruption was the enemy, not the MACC, and the agency would need the help of the media to curb corruption.
He said the media should not only focus on those who were bribed, for example, government servants, but also the “businessmen” who offered the bribes.
That is correct Minister Nazri, the act of bribery is WRONGFUL FOR THE GIVER (the businessman who wants to get things done faster, the ordinary guy who just hate to pay the fine at the police station) AND THE TAKER (anybody in position of power and authority), both could be charged under the Penal Code.
By the way accusing the SPRM of murder without proof in public is a serious wrong, how come Lim Guan Eng's investigation is taking a long time?
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
MUST READ: An interview with one of Malaysia's eminent citizen Professor Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim
One of my most favourite Malaysian Professor Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim was recently interviewed by the FreeMalaysiaToday team. I have read Prof Khoo's writing about sports and football in the now defunct All-Sports magazine I think way back in the mid 1970s, its such a joy reading his featured column on sports generally but football in particular. I did not realise that he was and still is a historian then. The good Professor are the few souls in Malaysia who understands and lived the Malay peribahasa "Dimana bumi dipijak disitu langit dijunjung".
Please read the FMT interviews here:
The Last Historian
excerpts:
“What has happened to today's generation? In my day, we were always told that any statements we made had to be logical and based on empirical evidence. These criteria apparently aren't necessary today.”
“Bloggers especially talk absolute rubbish! They think they are very clever and that they have the right to say anything they want. We're getting more people like this who don't talk sense anymore. It isn't possible to debate with them.”
“Don't talk about history unless you have done meticulous research. Otherwise, fact and fiction will merge like it is happening now.”
He also underlined the urgent need for history teachers to be specially trained to understand history beyond the realm of school textbooks.
“Hold special courses for them and rope in experienced teachers to run these courses,” he said. “And strive to get history teachers who are truly passionate about history. Those who teach for the sole purpose of exams are of no use.”
At this point, Khoo leaned forward, his eyes bright. The proposal by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin to make history a compulsory pass subject in the SPM by 2014 has greatly heartened him.
“You don't know how I felt when he said that,” he said earnestly, pressing one hand to his chest. “For years I've been telling the government not to let history die. This move is so important.”
“I get very frightened when I hear young people talk today. They are so ignorant of the past. And this leads them to blame the innocent. Like politicians who insist that the British brought the Chinese into Malaysia and caused trouble.”
“But it was the Chinese tauke who brought in the Chinese. They don't even know that! And the non-Chinese have no idea that most Chinese in fact supported the national party and were anti-communists. This ignorance is what caused the racial riots of 1945.”
Khoo, who has lived through two racial riots, spoke of his fear for the country's future if it stayed on this path. He predicted that the next generation would wrestle with an identity crisis brought on by their growing inability to differentiate between nationality and ethnicity.
He categorically stated that when a person becomes a citizen of a particular country, his full loyalty should be directed towards that country. But Malaysians, he said, pledged their loyalty to their ethnicity instead.
“The first English school in this country was the Penang Free School. Many assumed it was called that because the students didn't have to pay school fees but actually it was because any child from any ethnicity was free to enrol there.”
Khoo observed that one fault of the British was the kindness they extended to the people of Malaya in granting them free rein to establish their position as citizens. This freedom eventually led to a strong Chinese influence which the British were unable to control.
It was just before the war, Khoo said, when the High Commissioner wrote to the colonial office suggesting that the time had come to anglicise the Chinese. But then the war erupted and the idea was abandoned.
In his real career, Khoo himself made history by being the first lecturer of his department to use Bahasa Malaysia as a medium of instruction in 1965. At the time, this was considered a historic achievement by a non-Malay academician.
But despite carving history and living through major historical events, many things still surprise him today. One of it is the younger generation's continuous obsession with change.
“In those days we said yes to change if it was for the better and not just for the sake of doing things differently,” he said. “But the younger generation believes that if something has worked well for a long time, then it can't be used any longer and needs to be changed. And we have no idea where we are headed.”
“People think history means appreciating the past for its own sake. But we study history in order to understand the present. History becomes meaningful when we observe society and its problems today, ask how we have become this way and search for answers in the past.”
“I am the last historian in the country,” he uttered. “And I couldn't influence anyone to be my successor. I have a very sad life.”
read the full interview here in the FMT.
Professor Khoo said he have a very sad life, on the contrary I think he has led a fantastic and full life as a model Malaysian citizen and an academician, whose writings and thoughts have shaped many minds. The nation is indebted to him for his treasure trove of knowledge in Malaysia's history, he even speaks more fluent Malay than the ordinary Malay, anyway 1000times better than our self proclaimed "Malaysian first Chinese Second" citizen Mr Lim Kit Siang.
The Professor is the few good wise men in Malaysia.
Please read the FMT interviews here:
The Last Historian
excerpts:
“What has happened to today's generation? In my day, we were always told that any statements we made had to be logical and based on empirical evidence. These criteria apparently aren't necessary today.”
“Bloggers especially talk absolute rubbish! They think they are very clever and that they have the right to say anything they want. We're getting more people like this who don't talk sense anymore. It isn't possible to debate with them.”
“Don't talk about history unless you have done meticulous research. Otherwise, fact and fiction will merge like it is happening now.”
He also underlined the urgent need for history teachers to be specially trained to understand history beyond the realm of school textbooks.
“Hold special courses for them and rope in experienced teachers to run these courses,” he said. “And strive to get history teachers who are truly passionate about history. Those who teach for the sole purpose of exams are of no use.”
At this point, Khoo leaned forward, his eyes bright. The proposal by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin to make history a compulsory pass subject in the SPM by 2014 has greatly heartened him.
“You don't know how I felt when he said that,” he said earnestly, pressing one hand to his chest. “For years I've been telling the government not to let history die. This move is so important.”
“I get very frightened when I hear young people talk today. They are so ignorant of the past. And this leads them to blame the innocent. Like politicians who insist that the British brought the Chinese into Malaysia and caused trouble.”
“But it was the Chinese tauke who brought in the Chinese. They don't even know that! And the non-Chinese have no idea that most Chinese in fact supported the national party and were anti-communists. This ignorance is what caused the racial riots of 1945.”
Khoo, who has lived through two racial riots, spoke of his fear for the country's future if it stayed on this path. He predicted that the next generation would wrestle with an identity crisis brought on by their growing inability to differentiate between nationality and ethnicity.
He categorically stated that when a person becomes a citizen of a particular country, his full loyalty should be directed towards that country. But Malaysians, he said, pledged their loyalty to their ethnicity instead.
“The first English school in this country was the Penang Free School. Many assumed it was called that because the students didn't have to pay school fees but actually it was because any child from any ethnicity was free to enrol there.”
Khoo observed that one fault of the British was the kindness they extended to the people of Malaya in granting them free rein to establish their position as citizens. This freedom eventually led to a strong Chinese influence which the British were unable to control.
It was just before the war, Khoo said, when the High Commissioner wrote to the colonial office suggesting that the time had come to anglicise the Chinese. But then the war erupted and the idea was abandoned.
In his real career, Khoo himself made history by being the first lecturer of his department to use Bahasa Malaysia as a medium of instruction in 1965. At the time, this was considered a historic achievement by a non-Malay academician.
But despite carving history and living through major historical events, many things still surprise him today. One of it is the younger generation's continuous obsession with change.
“In those days we said yes to change if it was for the better and not just for the sake of doing things differently,” he said. “But the younger generation believes that if something has worked well for a long time, then it can't be used any longer and needs to be changed. And we have no idea where we are headed.”
“People think history means appreciating the past for its own sake. But we study history in order to understand the present. History becomes meaningful when we observe society and its problems today, ask how we have become this way and search for answers in the past.”
“I am the last historian in the country,” he uttered. “And I couldn't influence anyone to be my successor. I have a very sad life.”
read the full interview here in the FMT.
Professor Khoo said he have a very sad life, on the contrary I think he has led a fantastic and full life as a model Malaysian citizen and an academician, whose writings and thoughts have shaped many minds. The nation is indebted to him for his treasure trove of knowledge in Malaysia's history, he even speaks more fluent Malay than the ordinary Malay, anyway 1000times better than our self proclaimed "Malaysian first Chinese Second" citizen Mr Lim Kit Siang.
The Professor is the few good wise men in Malaysia.
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
Why Malaysian Chinese do not want to join our Angkatan Tentera Malaysia - Salah Gomen juga?
Of the many excuses for not joining the Malaysia Armed Forces the excuse which appeared in mysinchew.com takes the cake in pathetic excuse when this obviously "chauvinist I am superior" guest writer not only belittle the Government but also insult the majority of this country while singing the now mandatory praise to the city state down South, Singapore. Read:
Why Malaysian Chinese do not want to join the military
Such is the wonders of cyberspace, such insults won't go unanswered for very long though, so here is Blogger Bujai of Just Read blog with his replies, which I reproduced in full (without permisssion) here:
They are pointing fingers at the government, accusing the present Malay leadership of being bias not to accept the non-Malays into the public service, and of course 'tak cukup makan' if they join the army (making Singapore as a comparison).
MYSinchew.com guest writer Koon Yew Yin, an engineer, a corporate figure and a well-known philanthropist wrote that "the sense of patriotism is a complex one but it does not include supporting your country and your government all the time. It can include supporting your country but not the government of the day, especially when that government is perceived to engage in policies and programmes that treat you as second class citizens.
"Unfortunately, the Malaysian Chinese do not feel that the current government has treated them fairly or deserves their loyalty. They have come to the point when they are now saying “Go and do your own killing”.
(My argument - Second class citizens? In countries all over the world, any second class citizens are not as rich as the Chinese in Malaysia. In fact, second-class citizens are not allowed to dominate the economy. So, who are the second class citizens in Malaysia?)
He went on: "I concede that there may be other reasons to explain the Chinese reluctance to join the military but these have nothing to do with the lack of patriotism. There is a Cantonese saying “Hoi chai mu tong ping, hoi chai mu cho kait”. Literally it means that the “good son does not become a soldier and good wood does not become sandals”.
"Perhaps this deep seated cultural aversion to the military also explains why Chinese youth are reluctant to join the military. However, a fair, just and widely admired government and equitable policies can overcome such cultural complexes."
(What equitable policies and what cultural complexes? Is it by amending the Federal Constitution for the non-Malays to become Prime Ministers or to have a special ministerial portfolio in-charge of the non-Malays?)
"Let’s not forget that the courageous defence to the Japanese takeover of Malaya in the Second World War was mainly put up by the Chinese who paid for their patriotism to the country with countless lives and other sacrifices. Let’s also not forget that the emergency was won with Chinese blood and that the majority of Chinese rallied round a non-communist government. The historical evidence is clear that when their country is in danger and they are fighting for a cause they believe in, Malaysian Chinese are not lacking for patriotism."
(The Japs were after the Chinese. They hated the Chinese in their colonialisation scheme. Any country they went, they would look out for the Chinese first. In Malaya then, the Chinese were their victims. The Malays did not kill or attack the Chinese but helped them, instead. So, the Chinese had to defend themselves... is that patriotism? Why must you rekindle the past? Again, if I may ask, for what reason did their ancestors come to Malaya a long time ago? To defend the country?)
He also said: "Hundreds of thousands of patriotic non-Malays are trying daily in vain to get employment in the government services. That is why so many non-Malays immigrate to find better countries to live in. Many have gone to work in nearby Singapore which incidentally is doing much better than us as a result of this non-Malay exodus."
(Come on laaaa.... they are not keen to join the public sector for its low wages. Nothing's wrong with that. The Malays are OK with it. As the Chinese are good traders and prefer to do business, especially after the late 1970s when we first moved into industrialisation programme).
"Patriotism in Malaysia – if you are a non-Malay -- does not find you work in the government service or pay your bills. It does not ensure a bright and equitable future for your children. Umno leaders – rather than mourning and groaning -- should appreciate the fact that millions of non-Malays continue to be loyal and patriotic to the country despite the many reasons for not doing so."
(Let me give you this Malay saying - di mana bumi dipijak, di situ langit dijunjung. Since we are citizens of this country, we must abide and respect the laws. Or, shall I remind you of what I wrote recently about the Chinese? That they are good in business, they help in boosting Malaysia's economic growth. In that sense, the Malays have long accepted the fact that the Chinese who are citizens of Malaysia are free to do what they want to and will live with it. The Malays will defend the country to enable the non-Malays to get rich and in prospering themselves. I am also of the opinion that the Chinese will only be interested to join the army and defend a country where they form the majority. In the United States, Canada, Australia and other countries where they form a 'bigger-minority', they are still not keen to join the armed forces!. Singapore used to be 'not a Chinese territory' but they now control the armed forces because they are the majority. So, dont make Singapore a comparison!)
Anyway very well said Blogger Bujai. Read the full blog post here.
While we should never accuse a fellow citizen for lack of patriotism because for one reason or the other they do not want to join the armed forces, we do not need sorry "syok sendiri" excuses such as that written by the guest writer in MySinchew, I dare say that such perverse arrogance offends many Malaysian of ALL races who proudly served in the Malaysian Armed Forces for that matter the Polis and the Civil Service.
Why Malaysian Chinese do not want to join the military
Such is the wonders of cyberspace, such insults won't go unanswered for very long though, so here is Blogger Bujai of Just Read blog with his replies, which I reproduced in full (without permisssion) here:
They are pointing fingers at the government, accusing the present Malay leadership of being bias not to accept the non-Malays into the public service, and of course 'tak cukup makan' if they join the army (making Singapore as a comparison).
MYSinchew.com guest writer Koon Yew Yin, an engineer, a corporate figure and a well-known philanthropist wrote that "the sense of patriotism is a complex one but it does not include supporting your country and your government all the time. It can include supporting your country but not the government of the day, especially when that government is perceived to engage in policies and programmes that treat you as second class citizens.
"Unfortunately, the Malaysian Chinese do not feel that the current government has treated them fairly or deserves their loyalty. They have come to the point when they are now saying “Go and do your own killing”.
(My argument - Second class citizens? In countries all over the world, any second class citizens are not as rich as the Chinese in Malaysia. In fact, second-class citizens are not allowed to dominate the economy. So, who are the second class citizens in Malaysia?)
He went on: "I concede that there may be other reasons to explain the Chinese reluctance to join the military but these have nothing to do with the lack of patriotism. There is a Cantonese saying “Hoi chai mu tong ping, hoi chai mu cho kait”. Literally it means that the “good son does not become a soldier and good wood does not become sandals”.
"Perhaps this deep seated cultural aversion to the military also explains why Chinese youth are reluctant to join the military. However, a fair, just and widely admired government and equitable policies can overcome such cultural complexes."
(What equitable policies and what cultural complexes? Is it by amending the Federal Constitution for the non-Malays to become Prime Ministers or to have a special ministerial portfolio in-charge of the non-Malays?)
"Let’s not forget that the courageous defence to the Japanese takeover of Malaya in the Second World War was mainly put up by the Chinese who paid for their patriotism to the country with countless lives and other sacrifices. Let’s also not forget that the emergency was won with Chinese blood and that the majority of Chinese rallied round a non-communist government. The historical evidence is clear that when their country is in danger and they are fighting for a cause they believe in, Malaysian Chinese are not lacking for patriotism."
(The Japs were after the Chinese. They hated the Chinese in their colonialisation scheme. Any country they went, they would look out for the Chinese first. In Malaya then, the Chinese were their victims. The Malays did not kill or attack the Chinese but helped them, instead. So, the Chinese had to defend themselves... is that patriotism? Why must you rekindle the past? Again, if I may ask, for what reason did their ancestors come to Malaya a long time ago? To defend the country?)
He also said: "Hundreds of thousands of patriotic non-Malays are trying daily in vain to get employment in the government services. That is why so many non-Malays immigrate to find better countries to live in. Many have gone to work in nearby Singapore which incidentally is doing much better than us as a result of this non-Malay exodus."
(Come on laaaa.... they are not keen to join the public sector for its low wages. Nothing's wrong with that. The Malays are OK with it. As the Chinese are good traders and prefer to do business, especially after the late 1970s when we first moved into industrialisation programme).
"Patriotism in Malaysia – if you are a non-Malay -- does not find you work in the government service or pay your bills. It does not ensure a bright and equitable future for your children. Umno leaders – rather than mourning and groaning -- should appreciate the fact that millions of non-Malays continue to be loyal and patriotic to the country despite the many reasons for not doing so."
(Let me give you this Malay saying - di mana bumi dipijak, di situ langit dijunjung. Since we are citizens of this country, we must abide and respect the laws. Or, shall I remind you of what I wrote recently about the Chinese? That they are good in business, they help in boosting Malaysia's economic growth. In that sense, the Malays have long accepted the fact that the Chinese who are citizens of Malaysia are free to do what they want to and will live with it. The Malays will defend the country to enable the non-Malays to get rich and in prospering themselves. I am also of the opinion that the Chinese will only be interested to join the army and defend a country where they form the majority. In the United States, Canada, Australia and other countries where they form a 'bigger-minority', they are still not keen to join the armed forces!. Singapore used to be 'not a Chinese territory' but they now control the armed forces because they are the majority. So, dont make Singapore a comparison!)
Anyway very well said Blogger Bujai. Read the full blog post here.
While we should never accuse a fellow citizen for lack of patriotism because for one reason or the other they do not want to join the armed forces, we do not need sorry "syok sendiri" excuses such as that written by the guest writer in MySinchew, I dare say that such perverse arrogance offends many Malaysian of ALL races who proudly served in the Malaysian Armed Forces for that matter the Polis and the Civil Service.
An American bribe that stinks of appeasement by Robert Fisk
President Obama's capitulation to both the Israel Lobby in the US and the Israel PM Netanyahu is complete, with the billions being offered to Israel just to buy a few months of illegal Israeli Settlement freeze. With the US in "being humiliated mode" when faced with Israel and the Israel Lobby, Palestinians can just kiss goodbye to a state of their own, do not even bother to attend the peace talks, it is just delaying the inevitable.
The Palestinians might as well throw in the towel and apply en-masse to become Israeli citizens, they stand a better chance to get International support if they are resisting Israeli Apartheid and demand that Jerusalem or Al Quds be governed directly under the United Nations so that the historic city religious heritage for Judaism, Christianity and Islam are protected by an international authority.
Robert Fisk: An American bribe that stinks of appeasement
Saturday, 20 November 2010
In any other country, the current American bribe to Israel, and the latter's reluctance to accept it, in return for even a temporary end to the theft of somebody else's property would be regarded as preposterous. Three billion dollars' worth of fighter bombers in return for a temporary freeze in West Bank colonisation for a mere 90 days? Not including East Jerusalem – so goodbye to the last chance of the east of the holy city for a Palestinian capital – and, if Benjamin Netanyahu so wishes, a rip-roaring continuation of settlement on Arab land. In the ordinary sane world in which we think we live, there is only one word for Barack Obama's offer: appeasement. Usually, our lords and masters use that word with disdain and disgust.
Anyone who panders to injustice by one people against another people is called an appeaser. Anyone who prefers peace at any price, let alone a $3bn bribe to the guilty party – is an appeaser. Anyone who will not risk the consequences of standing up for international morality against territorial greed is an appeaser. Those of us who did not want to invade Afghanistan were condemned as appeasers. Those of us who did not want to invade Iraq were vilified as appeasers. Yet that is precisely what Obama has done in his pathetic, unbelievable effort to plead with Netanyahu for just 90 days of submission to international law. Obama is an appeaser.
The fact that the West and its political and journalistic elites – I include the ever more disreputable New York Times – take this tomfoolery at face value, as if it can seriously be regarded as another "step" in the "peace process", to put this mystical nonsense "back on track", is a measure of the degree to which we have taken leave of our senses in the Middle East.
It is a sign of just how far America (and, through our failure to condemn this insanity, Europe) has allowed its fear of Israel – and how far Obama has allowed his fear of Israeli supporters in Congress and the Senate – to go.
Three billion dollars for three months is one billion dollars a month to stop Israel's colonisation. That's half a billion dollars a fortnight. That's $500m a week. That's $71,428,571 a day, or $2,976,190 an hour, or $49,603 a minute. And as well as this pot of gold, Washington will continue to veto any resolutions critical of Israel in the UN and prevent "Palestine" from declaring itself a state. It's worth invading anyone to get that much cash to stage a military withdrawal, let alone the gracious gesture of not building more illegal colonies for only 90 days while furiously continuing illegal construction in Jerusalem at the same time.
The Hillary Clinton version of this grotesquerie would be funny if it was not tragic. According to the sharp pen of the NYT's Roger Cohen, La Clinton has convinced herself that Palestine is "achievable, inevitable and compatible with Israel's security". And what persuaded Madame Hillary of this? Why, on a trip to the pseudo-Palestine "capital" of Ramallah last year, she saw the Jewish settlements – "the brutality of it was so stark" according to one of her officials – but thought her motorcade was being guarded by the Israeli army because "they're so professional". And then, lo and behold, they turned out to be a Palestinian military guard, a "professional outfit" – and all this changed Madame's views!
Quite apart from the fact that the Israeli army is a rabble, and that indeed, the Palestinians are a rabble too, this "road to Ramallah" incident led supporters of Madame, according to Cohen, to realise that there had been a transition "from a self-pitying, self-dramatising Palestinian psyche, with all the cloying accoutrements of victimhood, to a self-affirming culture of pragmatism and institution-building". Palestinian "prime minister" Salam Fayyad, educated in the US so, naturally, a safe pair of hands, has put "growth before grumbling, roads before ranting, and security before everything".
Having been occupied by a brutal army for 43 years, those wretched, dispossessed Palestinians, along with their cousins in the West Bank who have been homeless for 62 years, have at last stopped ranting and grumbling and feeling sorry for themselves and generally play-acting in order to honour the only thing that matters. Not justice. Certainly not democracy, but to the one God which Christians, Jews and Muslims are all now supposed to worship: security.
Yes, they have joined the true brotherhood of mankind. Israel will be safe at last. That this infantile narrative now drives the woman who told us 11 years ago that Jerusalem was "the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel" proves that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has now reached its apogee, its most treacherous and final moment. And if Netanyahu has any sense – I'm talking abut the Zionist, expansionist kind – he will wait out the 90 days, then thumb his nose at the US. In the three months of "good behaviour", of course, the Palestinians will have to bite the bullet and sit down to "peace" talks which will decide the future borders of Israel and "Palestine". But since Israel controls 62 per cent of the West Bank this leaves Fayyad and his chums about 10.9 per cent of mandate Palestine to argue about.
And at the cost of $827 a second, they'd better do some quick grovelling. They will. We should all hang our heads in shame. But we won't. It's not about people. It's about presentation. It's not about justice. It's about "security". And cash. Lots of it. Goodbye Palestine.
Read the full article here.
The Palestinians might as well throw in the towel and apply en-masse to become Israeli citizens, they stand a better chance to get International support if they are resisting Israeli Apartheid and demand that Jerusalem or Al Quds be governed directly under the United Nations so that the historic city religious heritage for Judaism, Christianity and Islam are protected by an international authority.
Robert Fisk: An American bribe that stinks of appeasement
Saturday, 20 November 2010
In any other country, the current American bribe to Israel, and the latter's reluctance to accept it, in return for even a temporary end to the theft of somebody else's property would be regarded as preposterous. Three billion dollars' worth of fighter bombers in return for a temporary freeze in West Bank colonisation for a mere 90 days? Not including East Jerusalem – so goodbye to the last chance of the east of the holy city for a Palestinian capital – and, if Benjamin Netanyahu so wishes, a rip-roaring continuation of settlement on Arab land. In the ordinary sane world in which we think we live, there is only one word for Barack Obama's offer: appeasement. Usually, our lords and masters use that word with disdain and disgust.
Anyone who panders to injustice by one people against another people is called an appeaser. Anyone who prefers peace at any price, let alone a $3bn bribe to the guilty party – is an appeaser. Anyone who will not risk the consequences of standing up for international morality against territorial greed is an appeaser. Those of us who did not want to invade Afghanistan were condemned as appeasers. Those of us who did not want to invade Iraq were vilified as appeasers. Yet that is precisely what Obama has done in his pathetic, unbelievable effort to plead with Netanyahu for just 90 days of submission to international law. Obama is an appeaser.
The fact that the West and its political and journalistic elites – I include the ever more disreputable New York Times – take this tomfoolery at face value, as if it can seriously be regarded as another "step" in the "peace process", to put this mystical nonsense "back on track", is a measure of the degree to which we have taken leave of our senses in the Middle East.
It is a sign of just how far America (and, through our failure to condemn this insanity, Europe) has allowed its fear of Israel – and how far Obama has allowed his fear of Israeli supporters in Congress and the Senate – to go.
Three billion dollars for three months is one billion dollars a month to stop Israel's colonisation. That's half a billion dollars a fortnight. That's $500m a week. That's $71,428,571 a day, or $2,976,190 an hour, or $49,603 a minute. And as well as this pot of gold, Washington will continue to veto any resolutions critical of Israel in the UN and prevent "Palestine" from declaring itself a state. It's worth invading anyone to get that much cash to stage a military withdrawal, let alone the gracious gesture of not building more illegal colonies for only 90 days while furiously continuing illegal construction in Jerusalem at the same time.
The Hillary Clinton version of this grotesquerie would be funny if it was not tragic. According to the sharp pen of the NYT's Roger Cohen, La Clinton has convinced herself that Palestine is "achievable, inevitable and compatible with Israel's security". And what persuaded Madame Hillary of this? Why, on a trip to the pseudo-Palestine "capital" of Ramallah last year, she saw the Jewish settlements – "the brutality of it was so stark" according to one of her officials – but thought her motorcade was being guarded by the Israeli army because "they're so professional". And then, lo and behold, they turned out to be a Palestinian military guard, a "professional outfit" – and all this changed Madame's views!
Quite apart from the fact that the Israeli army is a rabble, and that indeed, the Palestinians are a rabble too, this "road to Ramallah" incident led supporters of Madame, according to Cohen, to realise that there had been a transition "from a self-pitying, self-dramatising Palestinian psyche, with all the cloying accoutrements of victimhood, to a self-affirming culture of pragmatism and institution-building". Palestinian "prime minister" Salam Fayyad, educated in the US so, naturally, a safe pair of hands, has put "growth before grumbling, roads before ranting, and security before everything".
Having been occupied by a brutal army for 43 years, those wretched, dispossessed Palestinians, along with their cousins in the West Bank who have been homeless for 62 years, have at last stopped ranting and grumbling and feeling sorry for themselves and generally play-acting in order to honour the only thing that matters. Not justice. Certainly not democracy, but to the one God which Christians, Jews and Muslims are all now supposed to worship: security.
Yes, they have joined the true brotherhood of mankind. Israel will be safe at last. That this infantile narrative now drives the woman who told us 11 years ago that Jerusalem was "the eternal and indivisible capital of Israel" proves that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has now reached its apogee, its most treacherous and final moment. And if Netanyahu has any sense – I'm talking abut the Zionist, expansionist kind – he will wait out the 90 days, then thumb his nose at the US. In the three months of "good behaviour", of course, the Palestinians will have to bite the bullet and sit down to "peace" talks which will decide the future borders of Israel and "Palestine". But since Israel controls 62 per cent of the West Bank this leaves Fayyad and his chums about 10.9 per cent of mandate Palestine to argue about.
And at the cost of $827 a second, they'd better do some quick grovelling. They will. We should all hang our heads in shame. But we won't. It's not about people. It's about presentation. It's not about justice. It's about "security". And cash. Lots of it. Goodbye Palestine.
Read the full article here.
Just wondering what PKR stands for now after Zaid Ibrahim's ouster.
The end of the much maligned PKR elections and the many ongoing demonstrations by dissatisfied PKR members against the way that the elections were handled are overshadowed by one single fact, and that is Anwar Ibrahim who refuses to go through the party election process but insist to become PKR leader known as Ketua Umum is now accepted as the ultimate leader of PKR by PKR "constitutionally" elected office bearers who are mostly Anwar's chosen candidates. With PKR President Wan Azizah his wife, Timbalan President Azmin his protege even the highest elected VP Nurul Izzah his daughter, Anwar's domination of PKR is not only complete it takes on a cult like proportion.
All these being achieved despite the fact that Anwar Ibrahim is undergoing a second sodomy trial which is not going very well against him, his unfulfilled promise to take over the Government on 16 Sept 2008 and many other unfulfilled promises and also he has until now showed that he has anything better to offer to Malaysians.
Yes, I think PKR with its focus only and only on Anwar Ibrahim to put him up the pedestal to become Malaysia's next Prime Minister as evidenced by this invitation for support, showed that PKR is dangerously becoming not a political party but a cult movement, by its extreme devotion to one person, Anwar Ibrahim.
I am quite certain that PAS and DAP leaders are watching with much anxiety on the happenings in PKR especially now that Zaid has been ousted from the party. A cult movement sure cannot help the loose Pakatan coalition on their self proclaimed journey up the long and winding road to Putrajaya.
Here are Common Properties of Potentially Destructive and Dangerous Cults.
-The cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to the leader's wishes and roles. There is no appeal outside of his or her system to greater systems of justice. For example, if a school teacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, appeals can be made. In a cult, the leader claims to have the only and final ruling on all matters.
-The cult's leaders tend to be charismatic, determined, and domineering. They persuade followers to drop their families, jobs, careers, and friends to follow them. They (not the individual) then take over control of their followers' possessions, money, lives.
-The cult's leaders are self-appointed, messianic persons who claim to have a special mission in life. For example, the flying saucer cult leaders claim that people from outer space have commissioned them to lead people to special places to await a space ship.
-The cult's leaders center the veneration of members upon themselves. Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and leaders of genuinely altruistic movements keep the veneration of adherents focused on God, abstract principles, and group purposes. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love, devotion, and allegiance on themselves.
-The cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of the behavior of its members. Cults are likely to dictate in great detail what members wear, eat, when and where they work, sleep, and bathe-as well as what to believe, think, and say.
-The cult tends to have a double set of ethics. Members are urged to be open and honest within the group, and confess all to the leaders. On the other hand, they are encouraged to deceive and manipulate outsiders or nonmembers. Established religions teach members to be honest and truthful to all, and to abide by one set of ethics.
-The cult has basically only two purposes, recruiting new members and fund-raising. Established religions and altruistic movements may also recruit and raise funds. However, their sole purpose is not to grow larger; such groups have the goals to better the lives of their members and mankind in general. The cults may claim to make social contributions, but in actuality these remain mere claims, or gestures. Their focus is always dominated by recruiting new members and fund-raising.
-The cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel, and instituting the only viable system for change that will solve life's problems or the world's ills. While claiming this, the cult then surreptitiously uses systems of psychological coercion on its members to inhibit their ability to examine the actual validity of the claims of the leader and the cult. Read more here.
I do not know, but rather leave it to readers to judge PKR and its Defacto Leader/Ketua Umum whether it is a cult movement or a political party. For sure, a cult movement only serves the Leader but never the nation or its citizens.
Whatever it is the voters who voted for PKR in March 2008 because they were voting against BN will in all probability vote for BN again the next time round, not because BN has reformed but PKR has grown to be a scary alternative with nothing to convince people that they can govern properly when even their first election is a total mess full of manipulations and downright cheating.
PKR is really dissapointing, giving it too many Parliamentary and State seats in March 2008 is like the Malay Peribahasa."bagai kera dapat bunga, mereka tidak pandai menghargai barang berharga ia itu UNDI RAKYAT MALAYSIA".
All these being achieved despite the fact that Anwar Ibrahim is undergoing a second sodomy trial which is not going very well against him, his unfulfilled promise to take over the Government on 16 Sept 2008 and many other unfulfilled promises and also he has until now showed that he has anything better to offer to Malaysians.
Yes, I think PKR with its focus only and only on Anwar Ibrahim to put him up the pedestal to become Malaysia's next Prime Minister as evidenced by this invitation for support, showed that PKR is dangerously becoming not a political party but a cult movement, by its extreme devotion to one person, Anwar Ibrahim.
I am quite certain that PAS and DAP leaders are watching with much anxiety on the happenings in PKR especially now that Zaid has been ousted from the party. A cult movement sure cannot help the loose Pakatan coalition on their self proclaimed journey up the long and winding road to Putrajaya.
Here are Common Properties of Potentially Destructive and Dangerous Cults.
-The cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to the leader's wishes and roles. There is no appeal outside of his or her system to greater systems of justice. For example, if a school teacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, appeals can be made. In a cult, the leader claims to have the only and final ruling on all matters.
-The cult's leaders tend to be charismatic, determined, and domineering. They persuade followers to drop their families, jobs, careers, and friends to follow them. They (not the individual) then take over control of their followers' possessions, money, lives.
-The cult's leaders are self-appointed, messianic persons who claim to have a special mission in life. For example, the flying saucer cult leaders claim that people from outer space have commissioned them to lead people to special places to await a space ship.
-The cult's leaders center the veneration of members upon themselves. Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and leaders of genuinely altruistic movements keep the veneration of adherents focused on God, abstract principles, and group purposes. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love, devotion, and allegiance on themselves.
-The cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of the behavior of its members. Cults are likely to dictate in great detail what members wear, eat, when and where they work, sleep, and bathe-as well as what to believe, think, and say.
-The cult tends to have a double set of ethics. Members are urged to be open and honest within the group, and confess all to the leaders. On the other hand, they are encouraged to deceive and manipulate outsiders or nonmembers. Established religions teach members to be honest and truthful to all, and to abide by one set of ethics.
-The cult has basically only two purposes, recruiting new members and fund-raising. Established religions and altruistic movements may also recruit and raise funds. However, their sole purpose is not to grow larger; such groups have the goals to better the lives of their members and mankind in general. The cults may claim to make social contributions, but in actuality these remain mere claims, or gestures. Their focus is always dominated by recruiting new members and fund-raising.
-The cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel, and instituting the only viable system for change that will solve life's problems or the world's ills. While claiming this, the cult then surreptitiously uses systems of psychological coercion on its members to inhibit their ability to examine the actual validity of the claims of the leader and the cult. Read more here.
I do not know, but rather leave it to readers to judge PKR and its Defacto Leader/Ketua Umum whether it is a cult movement or a political party. For sure, a cult movement only serves the Leader but never the nation or its citizens.
Whatever it is the voters who voted for PKR in March 2008 because they were voting against BN will in all probability vote for BN again the next time round, not because BN has reformed but PKR has grown to be a scary alternative with nothing to convince people that they can govern properly when even their first election is a total mess full of manipulations and downright cheating.
PKR is really dissapointing, giving it too many Parliamentary and State seats in March 2008 is like the Malay Peribahasa."bagai kera dapat bunga, mereka tidak pandai menghargai barang berharga ia itu UNDI RAKYAT MALAYSIA".
Monday, 22 November 2010
The National: Will Suu Kyi be allowed to shine, or fade away?
Another interesting article about the personality of the moment, Myanmar's very own Iron Lady Aung San Suu Kyi:
Will Suu Kyi be allowed to shine, or fade away?
Faisal al Yafai (The National)
Last Updated: Nov 20, 2010
With her elegant looks, political heritage and calm exposition of non-violence, she quickly found wide support. With her fluent English, Suu Kyi garnered support beyond Myanmar's borders. But not enough - with no external assistance from its neighbours or the West forthcoming, the movement could not defeat the generals, and the following month the military retook control of the country. Martial law was imposed and thousands of activists locked up.
Allying herself with the pro-democracy movement, Suu Kyi formed a political party, the National League for Democracy. When the junta called an election for 1990, the league swept the ballot, taking 392 of the 492 contested seats. But the junta refused to hand over power and Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest.
Since then, she has been the face of Myanmar's plight, a symbol of resistance over long years when it often seemed the world had forgotten the Myanmarese.
Her defiance, her simple request that the ballot should rule, has taken a considerable personal toll. She has spent 15 of the past 21 years under house arrest. Her husband was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1997, when Suu Kyi had been released from house arrest. The junta refused Aris a visa to enter Myanmar and Suu Kyi refused to leave, fearing the generals would not allow her to return. Aris died in 1999, having not met his wife for four years.
Having given so much for the cause, her release last weekend attracted massive international attention. For the Myanmarese, hearing her voice was hugely uplifting. Barely had the roadblock and barbed wire that sequestered her house in Yangon been lifted when the crowd surged forward to glimpse their hero. They came in their thousands to hear her speak a few words, to remind her they had waited for her.
In interviews after her release, Suu Kyi looked relaxed, happy but determined. She reached out to the military. "I would like them to be the people who have decided that our country has a right to certain standards of freedom, of security," she told the BBC. "I want them to be the heroes."
Yet there is a curious ambiguity about Suu Kyi's future. The Lady herself has not changed: the simplicity and the steel remain. Nor have the feelings of many ordinary Myanmarese changed: the crowds celebrating and the cars beeping horns would have left the generals in no doubt.
But perhaps the political situation has changed. Than Shwe, the general who sits atop the military junta that grips the country, has transformed himself into a simulacrum of a democrat by allowing recent multiparty elections. Whether he will resign and allow the victors to take power is unclear, with the United Nations yesterday condemning the election as "unfair".
What role will the generals allow for the Lady in this configuration? An easing of relations, a meeting - as Suu Kyi has requested - or a swift return to house arrest for Suu Kyi once the eyes of the world move on?
Only the generals know. But Suu Kyi's mind is made up; she has made clear she intends to keep working for democracy. It is the only path she knows. "Saints, it has been said, are the sinners who go on trying," she stated in her 1990 speech. "So free men are the oppressed who go on trying and who in the process make themselves fit to bear the responsibilities and to uphold the disciplines which will maintain a free society." Whatever happens in the world around her, it is certain the Lady will keep trying.
read the full article here.
Sure hope Anwar Ibrahim and his spinmasters stop trying to hijack Suu Kyi courageous fight for democracy to bolster his sagging image at home, such arrogance on Anwar's part will offend a lot of people, Myanmar and Malaysians alike.
Will Suu Kyi be allowed to shine, or fade away?
Faisal al Yafai (The National)
Last Updated: Nov 20, 2010
With her elegant looks, political heritage and calm exposition of non-violence, she quickly found wide support. With her fluent English, Suu Kyi garnered support beyond Myanmar's borders. But not enough - with no external assistance from its neighbours or the West forthcoming, the movement could not defeat the generals, and the following month the military retook control of the country. Martial law was imposed and thousands of activists locked up.
Allying herself with the pro-democracy movement, Suu Kyi formed a political party, the National League for Democracy. When the junta called an election for 1990, the league swept the ballot, taking 392 of the 492 contested seats. But the junta refused to hand over power and Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest.
Since then, she has been the face of Myanmar's plight, a symbol of resistance over long years when it often seemed the world had forgotten the Myanmarese.
Her defiance, her simple request that the ballot should rule, has taken a considerable personal toll. She has spent 15 of the past 21 years under house arrest. Her husband was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1997, when Suu Kyi had been released from house arrest. The junta refused Aris a visa to enter Myanmar and Suu Kyi refused to leave, fearing the generals would not allow her to return. Aris died in 1999, having not met his wife for four years.
Having given so much for the cause, her release last weekend attracted massive international attention. For the Myanmarese, hearing her voice was hugely uplifting. Barely had the roadblock and barbed wire that sequestered her house in Yangon been lifted when the crowd surged forward to glimpse their hero. They came in their thousands to hear her speak a few words, to remind her they had waited for her.
In interviews after her release, Suu Kyi looked relaxed, happy but determined. She reached out to the military. "I would like them to be the people who have decided that our country has a right to certain standards of freedom, of security," she told the BBC. "I want them to be the heroes."
Yet there is a curious ambiguity about Suu Kyi's future. The Lady herself has not changed: the simplicity and the steel remain. Nor have the feelings of many ordinary Myanmarese changed: the crowds celebrating and the cars beeping horns would have left the generals in no doubt.
But perhaps the political situation has changed. Than Shwe, the general who sits atop the military junta that grips the country, has transformed himself into a simulacrum of a democrat by allowing recent multiparty elections. Whether he will resign and allow the victors to take power is unclear, with the United Nations yesterday condemning the election as "unfair".
What role will the generals allow for the Lady in this configuration? An easing of relations, a meeting - as Suu Kyi has requested - or a swift return to house arrest for Suu Kyi once the eyes of the world move on?
Only the generals know. But Suu Kyi's mind is made up; she has made clear she intends to keep working for democracy. It is the only path she knows. "Saints, it has been said, are the sinners who go on trying," she stated in her 1990 speech. "So free men are the oppressed who go on trying and who in the process make themselves fit to bear the responsibilities and to uphold the disciplines which will maintain a free society." Whatever happens in the world around her, it is certain the Lady will keep trying.
read the full article here.
Sure hope Anwar Ibrahim and his spinmasters stop trying to hijack Suu Kyi courageous fight for democracy to bolster his sagging image at home, such arrogance on Anwar's part will offend a lot of people, Myanmar and Malaysians alike.
Sunday, 21 November 2010
Must Read: Up close with Rafidah Aziz
I always like to keep track of what our very own Iron Lady Rafidah Aziz has to say, even in "retirement" she never seemed to stop. I hope she does not retire completely, her words of advise are still in need. I am still wondering how Wanita UMNO could choose the uninspiring Sharizat over this formidable Wanita for their leader. Just look at Wanita UMNO now, its just a shell of what it used to be under Rafidah.
These are excerpts from the interview by the The Star's Cecilia Kok on 20th November 2010:
From day one that I joined the Government, I've always reminded myself that politics is of no definite tenure. It's not a contract, so one must be prepared as and when one gets dropped, Rafidah explains.The only regret (and one that had been widely reported before) for her, though, is that she was not informed earlier of such intention. If she had known earlier, she says she would have made way for someone else to contest the Kuala Kangsar constituency. It's no joke going through elections, she says of the gruelling work involved in the process.
Politics is a vocation. It is about service, not about making speeches. And it involves hard work. So unless one is prepared to sacrifice, one doesn't enter politics, she says. And for that reason too, Rafidah says she has never encouraged nor discouraged her children from joining politics. It's not something that people can encourage you to join. You must have it in you, otherwise it won't work, she says.
I don't like to be compared with anybody because I am what I am. Maybe we do share the same faade of exterior sternness or aggressiveness, but for me it's not just a facade, it's really me, she says. International leaders know too well that it's never easy to move this tough cookie, or to convince her to change her stance. My basic principle is this: I'm working for my country and its people, and I won't compromise my country's interest for anything, Rafidah explains.
Rafidah maintains that no matter how significant one's career is, it is important to maintain a balance between work responsibilities and the needs of one's family. It's a very simple thing to do, actually. When you are in the office, you devote wholeheartedly to your career. When you return home, you should just drop everything else and focus on your responsibilities and role in the family, Rafidah says.
She laments the fact that there is a lack of discipline and a rising social problem among the youths nowadays. Not meaning to sound rhetoric, but merely to emphasise the truth, Rafidah says: The young is our future... nations can go haywire' or into basket-case situations if their young do not lend support to nation-building. We have to grill into the minds of the young and find ways to guide them to the right path, she says.
Says Rafidah: I believe that as Malaysians, we all share the same destiny, so to me 1Malaysia is not just a concept, it's a reality. In that respect, it is understandable that she gets so upset when she talks about people who are just echoing 1Malaysia without explaining and understanding its true meaning. We won't get 1Malaysia by echoing what the PM (Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak) says. Neither will we get 1Malaysia by having logos printed on our t-shirts, Rafidah explains.
The PM has set the direction. The rest of us, please roll up our sleeves and do our bid to realise that vision, she adds, while voicing her concern over the rising number of politicians playing up racial issues to gain political mileage.
It also pains her heart to see some Malaysians criticising and condemning the Government to the foreigners. Our country is practically heaven. I know because I've travelled all over the world, she says.
Rafidah reckons that allegiance to the country and the semangat muhibbah are values that must be cultivated from young, but she stresses the importance of feeding the people the right information the truth about what the Government has done and what it has not done to prevent misunderstanding.
and the best comment yet from my favourite Iron Lady:
Look, we are a country (made up) of human beings, so do not expect 100% perfection. If anyone wants perfection, then please, die and go to heaven that's where perfection is, she jibes.
read the whole article here.
These are excerpts from the interview by the The Star's Cecilia Kok on 20th November 2010:
From day one that I joined the Government, I've always reminded myself that politics is of no definite tenure. It's not a contract, so one must be prepared as and when one gets dropped, Rafidah explains.The only regret (and one that had been widely reported before) for her, though, is that she was not informed earlier of such intention. If she had known earlier, she says she would have made way for someone else to contest the Kuala Kangsar constituency. It's no joke going through elections, she says of the gruelling work involved in the process.
Politics is a vocation. It is about service, not about making speeches. And it involves hard work. So unless one is prepared to sacrifice, one doesn't enter politics, she says. And for that reason too, Rafidah says she has never encouraged nor discouraged her children from joining politics. It's not something that people can encourage you to join. You must have it in you, otherwise it won't work, she says.
I don't like to be compared with anybody because I am what I am. Maybe we do share the same faade of exterior sternness or aggressiveness, but for me it's not just a facade, it's really me, she says. International leaders know too well that it's never easy to move this tough cookie, or to convince her to change her stance. My basic principle is this: I'm working for my country and its people, and I won't compromise my country's interest for anything, Rafidah explains.
Rafidah maintains that no matter how significant one's career is, it is important to maintain a balance between work responsibilities and the needs of one's family. It's a very simple thing to do, actually. When you are in the office, you devote wholeheartedly to your career. When you return home, you should just drop everything else and focus on your responsibilities and role in the family, Rafidah says.
She laments the fact that there is a lack of discipline and a rising social problem among the youths nowadays. Not meaning to sound rhetoric, but merely to emphasise the truth, Rafidah says: The young is our future... nations can go haywire' or into basket-case situations if their young do not lend support to nation-building. We have to grill into the minds of the young and find ways to guide them to the right path, she says.
Says Rafidah: I believe that as Malaysians, we all share the same destiny, so to me 1Malaysia is not just a concept, it's a reality. In that respect, it is understandable that she gets so upset when she talks about people who are just echoing 1Malaysia without explaining and understanding its true meaning. We won't get 1Malaysia by echoing what the PM (Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak) says. Neither will we get 1Malaysia by having logos printed on our t-shirts, Rafidah explains.
The PM has set the direction. The rest of us, please roll up our sleeves and do our bid to realise that vision, she adds, while voicing her concern over the rising number of politicians playing up racial issues to gain political mileage.
It also pains her heart to see some Malaysians criticising and condemning the Government to the foreigners. Our country is practically heaven. I know because I've travelled all over the world, she says.
Rafidah reckons that allegiance to the country and the semangat muhibbah are values that must be cultivated from young, but she stresses the importance of feeding the people the right information the truth about what the Government has done and what it has not done to prevent misunderstanding.
and the best comment yet from my favourite Iron Lady:
Look, we are a country (made up) of human beings, so do not expect 100% perfection. If anyone wants perfection, then please, die and go to heaven that's where perfection is, she jibes.
read the whole article here.
Singapore to overtake Malaysia as ASEAN's 3rd biggest economy end 2010 - Syabas to Singapore lets emulate its One School For All policy
It seems that Singapore by the end of 2010 will soon take over Malaysia's third spot of ASEAN's biggest economy, read:
S'pore set to surpass M'sia as South-east Asia's third-largest economy
Now, what does Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore has in common? Simple answer, they all have a one school system. They do not have state sponsored religious or vernacular school, they just have a one school for all system (albeit Singapore uses English as their main Language). With a One School For All/Satu Sekolah Untuk Semua system they have achieved a semblance of integration among the various races and found the desired unity that is required to have proper all round stability to propel a nation and its people forward.
Malaysia burdened by the colonial system which encourages racial segregation which unfortunately we still carry i.e the national and various vernacular schools which still encourages segregation of our children from young, discourages integration and make unity virtually out of reach.
Malaysia will be lagging further and further behind as we cannot focus on the Economy per se like other countries with the one school for all system, when we are still bickering about the difference between race, about having citizens who refuses to speak or refuses to learn the National Language and Bahasa Melayu even though they are born and bred here, about equity inbalance, about job discrimination in government and private sectors, about making police reports every time something "sensitive" is said in public.
So lets join in the campaign for SatuSekolahUntukSemua for our children and their children's sake, for integration and ultimately for unity.
S'pore set to surpass M'sia as South-east Asia's third-largest economy
I say congratulations to Singapore, their people worked hard for it and they deserved what they get. Besides Singapore, the first two biggest economy position in ASEAN are still occupied by Indonesia and Thailand.
Now, what does Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore has in common? Simple answer, they all have a one school system. They do not have state sponsored religious or vernacular school, they just have a one school for all system (albeit Singapore uses English as their main Language). With a One School For All/Satu Sekolah Untuk Semua system they have achieved a semblance of integration among the various races and found the desired unity that is required to have proper all round stability to propel a nation and its people forward.
Malaysia burdened by the colonial system which encourages racial segregation which unfortunately we still carry i.e the national and various vernacular schools which still encourages segregation of our children from young, discourages integration and make unity virtually out of reach.
Malaysia will be lagging further and further behind as we cannot focus on the Economy per se like other countries with the one school for all system, when we are still bickering about the difference between race, about having citizens who refuses to speak or refuses to learn the National Language and Bahasa Melayu even though they are born and bred here, about equity inbalance, about job discrimination in government and private sectors, about making police reports every time something "sensitive" is said in public.
So lets join in the campaign for SatuSekolahUntukSemua for our children and their children's sake, for integration and ultimately for unity.
Saturday, 20 November 2010
Anwar Ibrahim is NO Aung San Suu Kyi by Rachel Motte of The New Ledger
I am quitely confident that very many Malaysians including Zaid Ibrahim and very many PKR members who found out about the abuse in their Party's electoral process recently will by now agree with this article which was based on Anwar 's lightning trip to Australia to gather support and denigrate his home country not for his opposition party but for himself which he normally does before the start of the much delayed sodomy trial against him:
New Ledger | Anwar Ibrahim is no Aung San Suu Kyi
17 Nov 2010
By Rachel Motte
Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim is in Australia this week, speaking on social justice, democracy, and his own legal woes. He has also addressed the recent release of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese opposition politician, declaring that her release will mean nothing until she is permitted to take her place as the elected leader of Myanmar. Anwar has used Suu Kyi’s release to attract attention to his own political problems, arguing that Australia ought to speak out in the face of atrocities in both Myanmar and Malaysia:
“But I think they’re ill-advised if they proceed in this way…. I’m not suggesting that [the Australian government] should interfere, but they should express their views, they should promote civil society, as a vibrant democracy they’ve a duty…. But I think the issue of democracy, human rights, rule of law, they’re not something that you can just ignore. But I’m of course appreciative of the fact that Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd took time, and we had very, very useful discussions, some issues affecting both countries, and of course my personal predicament. But I always make it a point that they should extend the issue, the issue of freedom, human rights. It goes beyond Anwar’s personal case.”
The problem here is that “Anwar’s personal case” is very different from Suu Kyi’s, and Malaysia’s political landscape has little in common with Myanmar’s.
Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for “her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights”. Her father, Aung San, who negotiated Burma’s independence from the British Empire in 1947, was killed by his political rivals when Suu Kyi was only two years old. When her mother, a Burmese ambassador, died in 1989, Suu Kyi dedicated her life to fighting for democracy in Burma as her parents had done. She was active in Burma’s pro-democracy movement, and as a result was placed under house arrest in 1989; no charges were brought against her, and no trial occurred. Despite her confinement she won a landslide victory in the 1990 election, and would have become Prime Minister had the military not intervened.
Suu Kyi was released from house arrest just days ago, on November 13. During her confinement, which spanned fifteen of the past twenty-one years, she was usually separated from her family. She saw her husband, Michael Aris, only five times during the decade that preceded his death; even the intervention of such figures as U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annon and Pope John Paul II could not persuade her captors to allow Aris to join her. She was also separated from her two sons and lived in less than ideal physical conditions, sometimes without access to electricity.
Suu Kyi chose to live under these restraints rather than abandon her pro-democracy work; she was offered freedom in exchange for her leaving her country, but she refused.
If anyone has suffered for the cause of democracy, Suu Kyi has—yet Anwar Ibrahim, who has enjoyed the benefits of a trial, a team of lawyers, access to local, national, and international media outlets, his own political party, and the freedom to travel the globe, told Australians this week that “Australia needs to be more pronounced in its support for democracy… Otherwise you have a strong position on Burma, but not on the atrocities in Malaysia.”
Anwar is no Aung San Suu Kyi. Indeed, his actions as the co-founder of a front organization for the Global Muslim Brotherhood indicate that he is in fact opposed to the democratic ideals she has sacrificed so much for.
In the 1970’s and 1980’s, while Suu Kyi busied herself with the work that would later imprison her, Anwar served as a trustee for the World Assembly of Asian Youth. The Pew Forum describes the Assembly as being so intertwined with the Muslim Brotherhood that it is difficult to tell them apart.
In 2002, Suu Kyi took advantage of a brief respite from imprisonment to continue her work on behalf of Burmese freedom. Meanwhile, Anwar’s International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) was named in a class-action suit brought on behalf of 9/11 family and survivors against organizations that helped fund radical Islamism.
In 2007, when Suu Kyi made her first state media address in the four years since her then current confinement had begun, the Muslim Brotherhood named Anwar’s IIIT in a list of twenty-nine of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”
Though Anwar clearly equates his own political and legal troubles in Malaysia to the human rights abuses Suu Kyi has worked to end in Myanmar, no one else should.
Anwar and Suu Kyi may both be political opposition leaders in their respective nations, but their similarities end there.
If it need a Mat Salleh to convince Malaysians so be it, read the full article here.
New Ledger | Anwar Ibrahim is no Aung San Suu Kyi
17 Nov 2010
By Rachel Motte
Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim is in Australia this week, speaking on social justice, democracy, and his own legal woes. He has also addressed the recent release of Aung San Suu Kyi, the Burmese opposition politician, declaring that her release will mean nothing until she is permitted to take her place as the elected leader of Myanmar. Anwar has used Suu Kyi’s release to attract attention to his own political problems, arguing that Australia ought to speak out in the face of atrocities in both Myanmar and Malaysia:
“But I think they’re ill-advised if they proceed in this way…. I’m not suggesting that [the Australian government] should interfere, but they should express their views, they should promote civil society, as a vibrant democracy they’ve a duty…. But I think the issue of democracy, human rights, rule of law, they’re not something that you can just ignore. But I’m of course appreciative of the fact that Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd took time, and we had very, very useful discussions, some issues affecting both countries, and of course my personal predicament. But I always make it a point that they should extend the issue, the issue of freedom, human rights. It goes beyond Anwar’s personal case.”
The problem here is that “Anwar’s personal case” is very different from Suu Kyi’s, and Malaysia’s political landscape has little in common with Myanmar’s.
Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for “her non-violent struggle for democracy and human rights”. Her father, Aung San, who negotiated Burma’s independence from the British Empire in 1947, was killed by his political rivals when Suu Kyi was only two years old. When her mother, a Burmese ambassador, died in 1989, Suu Kyi dedicated her life to fighting for democracy in Burma as her parents had done. She was active in Burma’s pro-democracy movement, and as a result was placed under house arrest in 1989; no charges were brought against her, and no trial occurred. Despite her confinement she won a landslide victory in the 1990 election, and would have become Prime Minister had the military not intervened.
Suu Kyi was released from house arrest just days ago, on November 13. During her confinement, which spanned fifteen of the past twenty-one years, she was usually separated from her family. She saw her husband, Michael Aris, only five times during the decade that preceded his death; even the intervention of such figures as U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annon and Pope John Paul II could not persuade her captors to allow Aris to join her. She was also separated from her two sons and lived in less than ideal physical conditions, sometimes without access to electricity.
Suu Kyi chose to live under these restraints rather than abandon her pro-democracy work; she was offered freedom in exchange for her leaving her country, but she refused.
If anyone has suffered for the cause of democracy, Suu Kyi has—yet Anwar Ibrahim, who has enjoyed the benefits of a trial, a team of lawyers, access to local, national, and international media outlets, his own political party, and the freedom to travel the globe, told Australians this week that “Australia needs to be more pronounced in its support for democracy… Otherwise you have a strong position on Burma, but not on the atrocities in Malaysia.”
Anwar is no Aung San Suu Kyi. Indeed, his actions as the co-founder of a front organization for the Global Muslim Brotherhood indicate that he is in fact opposed to the democratic ideals she has sacrificed so much for.
In the 1970’s and 1980’s, while Suu Kyi busied herself with the work that would later imprison her, Anwar served as a trustee for the World Assembly of Asian Youth. The Pew Forum describes the Assembly as being so intertwined with the Muslim Brotherhood that it is difficult to tell them apart.
In 2002, Suu Kyi took advantage of a brief respite from imprisonment to continue her work on behalf of Burmese freedom. Meanwhile, Anwar’s International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) was named in a class-action suit brought on behalf of 9/11 family and survivors against organizations that helped fund radical Islamism.
In 2007, when Suu Kyi made her first state media address in the four years since her then current confinement had begun, the Muslim Brotherhood named Anwar’s IIIT in a list of twenty-nine of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends.”
Though Anwar clearly equates his own political and legal troubles in Malaysia to the human rights abuses Suu Kyi has worked to end in Myanmar, no one else should.
Anwar and Suu Kyi may both be political opposition leaders in their respective nations, but their similarities end there.
If it need a Mat Salleh to convince Malaysians so be it, read the full article here.
Must Read: Pertimbangan Talent Corporation by Dato' Salleh Majid
In a post in July 2010..Khazanah oh Khazanah and Talent Corp 70,000, among others I wrote:
"Now I hear one of the Khazanah Director/EPU Minister says that Talent Corp will be wooing 70,000 overseas Malaysians back with less bureaucracy and more perks? I wonder where these high paying people would be placed? The GLC's? and they get to have more pay doing the same job that the loyal Malaysians have been doing with lesser pay...that is a recipe for major industrial relations disasterlah. Why not selectively woo Malaysian or non Malaysian researchers and PH.D lecturers experts intheir field from overseas and recruit them to teach at the IPTAs. The rakyat will get better value for money.
One good lecturer makes 10 good post graduates students. One oversea young Malaysians recruited from overseas to the GLCs will make say 5 experienced and industrious local Malaysian Managers unhappy resulting in low morale and low production and very pissed off voters .
If you recruit 70,000 overseas Malaysian young guns they probably make 70,000 x 5 = 350,000 pissed of voters. That is not good for the ruling BN Government.
I do hope the Government realise what it is doing."
I suppose the powers that be have other things in mind when they thought of the Talent Corporation idea, anyway since then many prominent businessman and intelectuals had expressed their opinions about the not so good aspect of this Talent Corporation idea.
Today Datuk Salleh Majid, former President of Bursa Saham Malaysia wrote this excellent article which appeared in Utusan Malaysia and MI, the people in Government should sit up and read this:
Pertimbangan Talent Corporation
Oleh Saranan Salleh
PENUBUHAN Perbadanan Bakat (Talent Corporation) yang diumumkan oleh Perdana Menteri semasa pembentangan Rancangan Malaysia Kesepuluh (RMK-10) sememangnya sesuatu yang ditunggu pelaksanaannya.
Setakat ini tidak banyak yang diketahui tentang bentuk dan kerangka perbadanan ini selain bertujuan untuk memujuk rakyat Malaysia yang berkemahiran yang berhijrah keluar negara sama ada bekerja atau pun berniaga di luar negara.
Angka yang kita difahamkan ialah dalam lingkungan 300,000 orang rakyat Malaysia sedang bekerja di luar negara. Kita memerlukan dalam lingkungan 3.3 juta tenaga kerja untuk mencapai hasrat melaksanakan 131 projek titik kemasukan yang telah dihuraikan di bawah 12 Bidang Ekonomi Utama Nasional (NKEA) dalam Program Transformasi Ekonomi yang telah pun dilancarkan.
Ada beberapa perkara yang wajar diambil kira oleh pihak kerajaan dalam pembentukan Talent Corporation ini.
Utamanya ialah apakah kita sudah mempunyai suatu pangkalan maklumat tentang pakar dan tenaga mahir kita di dalam negara yang mungkin mempunyai kemahiran dan pengalaman setanding dengan mereka yang telah berhijrah keluar negara.
Misalnya, kita mempunyai ramai ahli profesional dan akademik yang telah berjaya dalam pelbagai bidang, malahan mencipta pelbagai inovasi yang menerima pengiktirafan daripada badan-badan luar negara.
Kedua, kerap kali pencapaian ahli akademik, profesional atau ahli sains kita ini jarang diberikan pengiktirafan oleh orang kita sama ada pihak awam mahu pun swasta. Oleh itu tidak hairanlah kalau orang kita bertembung dengan sesuatu di luar negara yang diiktiraf oleh kerajaan luar negara dan dijadikan seperti sesuatu lambang kemegahan negara tersebut. Bila ditanya siapa penciptanya. Jawapannya ialah orang Malaysia.
Walaupun andaian utama rakyat kita berhijrah keluar negara adalah kerana bayaran gaji atau peluang-peluang yang lebih lumayan, banyak lagi faktor lain yang membuatkan mereka ini sanggup meninggalkan tanah tumpah darah mereka dan mencuba nasib di tempat orang.
Faktor pendidikan untuk anak-anak sentiasa dikatakan sebagai alasan utama mereka yang membuat keputusan berhijrah keluar negara. Mereka melihat kurang tumpuan diberikan kepada pendidikan dalam bahasa Inggeris salah satu perkara yang dilihat meletakkan sistem pendidikan kita ketinggalan.
Tidak banyak yang dapat mereka lakukan selain daripada melahirkan protes mereka dengan membawa keluarga mereka berhijrah keluar negara.
Apa juga alasan utama kita dalam mengekalkan sistem pendidikan kita yang ada sekarang, tetapi kepada sesetengah mereka yang berhijrah, masa depan pendidikan anak-anak mereka adalah penting.
Kemudian kita bercakap pula tentang persekitaran dan budaya kerja yang terdapat dalam dalam pekerjaan sama ada di sektor awam atau di sektor swasta. Diskriminasi terhadap sesuatu golongan bangsa masih kekal. Kadang-kadang kita lihat dengan jelas hanya di jawatan teratas sahaja diketuai oleh sesuatu golongan tetapi di peringkat pengurusan dan pertengahan dikuasai oleh sesuatu golongan lain.
Oleh itu peluang untuk naik pangkat dan bonus selalunya terhad. Kadang kala syarat-syarat yang bertujuan untuk menafikan sesuatu golongan daripada memohon sesuatu pekerjaan seperti kefasihan bertutur dalam sesuatu bahasa ibunda orang lain terdapat dalam sektor swasta.
Tidah hairan jugalah kalau ada sesetengah syarikat termasuk syarikat antarabangsa yang gemar menawarkan skim pemisahan sukarela bagi anggota kerja yang telah berkhidmat beberapa tahun untuk berhenti supaya dapat diganti dengan orang baru yang gaji mereka lebih rendah. Alasan yang kerap diberi ialah keadaan ekonomi yang meleset.
Untuk memujuk mereka yang telah berhijrah keluar negara ini tentulah ada sesuatu pakej yang menarik bakal ditawarkan kepada mereka. Kita mengharapkan apa jua pakej yang bakal ditawarkan mengambil kira tahap kemahiran, kelayakan dan pengalaman ahli-ahli profesional, akademik dan mereka yang berkemahiran dalam negara kita supaya kita tidak menghadapi keadaan yang sama yang dihadapi oleh Taipeh dulu semasa tujuan mereka mengajak rakyat mereka yang berkemahiran untuk balik.
Suatu protes besar-besaran oleh mereka yang berkemahiran dari dalam negeri disebabkan terdapat suatu ruang perbezaan pakej yang luas antara mereka dari luar dan mereka dari dalam negeri yang mempunyai kelayakan dan pengalaman yang sama.
Mungkin pihak yang bertanggung jawab atas kejayaan Talent Corporation ini sudah memikirkan perkara-perkara yang sebegini, termasuklah siapa yang hendak dipujuk balik.
Faktor pemilihan utama tentulah tahap kemahiran. Misalnya dalam skala 1 sehingga 10 sesuatu angka secara objektif boleh diberikan ke atas tahap kemahiran orang yang ingin dipujuk balik itu. Tentulah dalam segala-galanya, ketelusan pemilihan menjadi kehendak utama.
Kita pun tidak mahu dalam keinginan untuk memujuk balik rakyat, kita lupa mereka yang telah pun melupuskan kerakyatan mereka. Apatah lagi hanya mereka daripada sesuatu golongan sahaja yang menjadi pilihan untuk dipujuk balik.
Disebabkan usaha ini begitu penting kepada masa depan negara, mungkin boleh difikirkan suatu soal-selidik diajukan kepada mereka yang telah dikenal pasti rakyat Malaysia yang berkemahiran tentang apakah yang menjadi faktor-faktor penting kepada mereka untuk kembali balik ke negara ini.
Jawapan-jawapan mereka ini perlu diteliti dan dilihat dari sudut apakah dapat dipenuhi oleh kerajaan atau tidak. Dalam merealisasikan hasrat ini gabungan awam dan swasta diperlukan dalam menggubal sesuatu pakej.
Apakah definisi bakat yang bakal digunakan? Tentulah apa jua bakat yang kita maksudkan mestilah padan dengan keperluan negara.
Terlalu banyak insiden yang mana kita difahamkan yang sesuatu bidang kemahiran itu diperlukan dengan jumlah yang begitu besar seperti IT, tetapi graduan kita yang berkelulusan IT tidak dapat memenuhi keperluan tersebut kerana apa yang mereka pelajari tidak selaras dengan keperluan industri. Begitu juga pakar-pakar yang bakal mengadili bakat yang diperlukan diharap tidak berat sebelah dalam pengadilan mereka.
read the rest of the article here which includes warning on the hot money coming into the present Bursa Saham.
Anyway while the Cabinet and Parliament is debating on Patriotism, shouldn't we be assesssing also the patriotism of an individual who works in Malaysia and one who have uprooted and left Malaysia for good to seek a better life for himself elsewhere in this world first before we decide to recruit these so called "Malaysian" Talent from overseas?
"Now I hear one of the Khazanah Director/EPU Minister says that Talent Corp will be wooing 70,000 overseas Malaysians back with less bureaucracy and more perks? I wonder where these high paying people would be placed? The GLC's? and they get to have more pay doing the same job that the loyal Malaysians have been doing with lesser pay...that is a recipe for major industrial relations disasterlah. Why not selectively woo Malaysian or non Malaysian researchers and PH.D lecturers experts intheir field from overseas and recruit them to teach at the IPTAs. The rakyat will get better value for money.
One good lecturer makes 10 good post graduates students. One oversea young Malaysians recruited from overseas to the GLCs will make say 5 experienced and industrious local Malaysian Managers unhappy resulting in low morale and low production and very pissed off voters .
If you recruit 70,000 overseas Malaysian young guns they probably make 70,000 x 5 = 350,000 pissed of voters. That is not good for the ruling BN Government.
I do hope the Government realise what it is doing."
I suppose the powers that be have other things in mind when they thought of the Talent Corporation idea, anyway since then many prominent businessman and intelectuals had expressed their opinions about the not so good aspect of this Talent Corporation idea.
Today Datuk Salleh Majid, former President of Bursa Saham Malaysia wrote this excellent article which appeared in Utusan Malaysia and MI, the people in Government should sit up and read this:
Pertimbangan Talent Corporation
Oleh Saranan Salleh
PENUBUHAN Perbadanan Bakat (Talent Corporation) yang diumumkan oleh Perdana Menteri semasa pembentangan Rancangan Malaysia Kesepuluh (RMK-10) sememangnya sesuatu yang ditunggu pelaksanaannya.
Setakat ini tidak banyak yang diketahui tentang bentuk dan kerangka perbadanan ini selain bertujuan untuk memujuk rakyat Malaysia yang berkemahiran yang berhijrah keluar negara sama ada bekerja atau pun berniaga di luar negara.
Angka yang kita difahamkan ialah dalam lingkungan 300,000 orang rakyat Malaysia sedang bekerja di luar negara. Kita memerlukan dalam lingkungan 3.3 juta tenaga kerja untuk mencapai hasrat melaksanakan 131 projek titik kemasukan yang telah dihuraikan di bawah 12 Bidang Ekonomi Utama Nasional (NKEA) dalam Program Transformasi Ekonomi yang telah pun dilancarkan.
Ada beberapa perkara yang wajar diambil kira oleh pihak kerajaan dalam pembentukan Talent Corporation ini.
Utamanya ialah apakah kita sudah mempunyai suatu pangkalan maklumat tentang pakar dan tenaga mahir kita di dalam negara yang mungkin mempunyai kemahiran dan pengalaman setanding dengan mereka yang telah berhijrah keluar negara.
Misalnya, kita mempunyai ramai ahli profesional dan akademik yang telah berjaya dalam pelbagai bidang, malahan mencipta pelbagai inovasi yang menerima pengiktirafan daripada badan-badan luar negara.
Kedua, kerap kali pencapaian ahli akademik, profesional atau ahli sains kita ini jarang diberikan pengiktirafan oleh orang kita sama ada pihak awam mahu pun swasta. Oleh itu tidak hairanlah kalau orang kita bertembung dengan sesuatu di luar negara yang diiktiraf oleh kerajaan luar negara dan dijadikan seperti sesuatu lambang kemegahan negara tersebut. Bila ditanya siapa penciptanya. Jawapannya ialah orang Malaysia.
Walaupun andaian utama rakyat kita berhijrah keluar negara adalah kerana bayaran gaji atau peluang-peluang yang lebih lumayan, banyak lagi faktor lain yang membuatkan mereka ini sanggup meninggalkan tanah tumpah darah mereka dan mencuba nasib di tempat orang.
Faktor pendidikan untuk anak-anak sentiasa dikatakan sebagai alasan utama mereka yang membuat keputusan berhijrah keluar negara. Mereka melihat kurang tumpuan diberikan kepada pendidikan dalam bahasa Inggeris salah satu perkara yang dilihat meletakkan sistem pendidikan kita ketinggalan.
Tidak banyak yang dapat mereka lakukan selain daripada melahirkan protes mereka dengan membawa keluarga mereka berhijrah keluar negara.
Apa juga alasan utama kita dalam mengekalkan sistem pendidikan kita yang ada sekarang, tetapi kepada sesetengah mereka yang berhijrah, masa depan pendidikan anak-anak mereka adalah penting.
Kemudian kita bercakap pula tentang persekitaran dan budaya kerja yang terdapat dalam dalam pekerjaan sama ada di sektor awam atau di sektor swasta. Diskriminasi terhadap sesuatu golongan bangsa masih kekal. Kadang-kadang kita lihat dengan jelas hanya di jawatan teratas sahaja diketuai oleh sesuatu golongan tetapi di peringkat pengurusan dan pertengahan dikuasai oleh sesuatu golongan lain.
Oleh itu peluang untuk naik pangkat dan bonus selalunya terhad. Kadang kala syarat-syarat yang bertujuan untuk menafikan sesuatu golongan daripada memohon sesuatu pekerjaan seperti kefasihan bertutur dalam sesuatu bahasa ibunda orang lain terdapat dalam sektor swasta.
Tidah hairan jugalah kalau ada sesetengah syarikat termasuk syarikat antarabangsa yang gemar menawarkan skim pemisahan sukarela bagi anggota kerja yang telah berkhidmat beberapa tahun untuk berhenti supaya dapat diganti dengan orang baru yang gaji mereka lebih rendah. Alasan yang kerap diberi ialah keadaan ekonomi yang meleset.
Untuk memujuk mereka yang telah berhijrah keluar negara ini tentulah ada sesuatu pakej yang menarik bakal ditawarkan kepada mereka. Kita mengharapkan apa jua pakej yang bakal ditawarkan mengambil kira tahap kemahiran, kelayakan dan pengalaman ahli-ahli profesional, akademik dan mereka yang berkemahiran dalam negara kita supaya kita tidak menghadapi keadaan yang sama yang dihadapi oleh Taipeh dulu semasa tujuan mereka mengajak rakyat mereka yang berkemahiran untuk balik.
Suatu protes besar-besaran oleh mereka yang berkemahiran dari dalam negeri disebabkan terdapat suatu ruang perbezaan pakej yang luas antara mereka dari luar dan mereka dari dalam negeri yang mempunyai kelayakan dan pengalaman yang sama.
Mungkin pihak yang bertanggung jawab atas kejayaan Talent Corporation ini sudah memikirkan perkara-perkara yang sebegini, termasuklah siapa yang hendak dipujuk balik.
Faktor pemilihan utama tentulah tahap kemahiran. Misalnya dalam skala 1 sehingga 10 sesuatu angka secara objektif boleh diberikan ke atas tahap kemahiran orang yang ingin dipujuk balik itu. Tentulah dalam segala-galanya, ketelusan pemilihan menjadi kehendak utama.
Kita pun tidak mahu dalam keinginan untuk memujuk balik rakyat, kita lupa mereka yang telah pun melupuskan kerakyatan mereka. Apatah lagi hanya mereka daripada sesuatu golongan sahaja yang menjadi pilihan untuk dipujuk balik.
Disebabkan usaha ini begitu penting kepada masa depan negara, mungkin boleh difikirkan suatu soal-selidik diajukan kepada mereka yang telah dikenal pasti rakyat Malaysia yang berkemahiran tentang apakah yang menjadi faktor-faktor penting kepada mereka untuk kembali balik ke negara ini.
Jawapan-jawapan mereka ini perlu diteliti dan dilihat dari sudut apakah dapat dipenuhi oleh kerajaan atau tidak. Dalam merealisasikan hasrat ini gabungan awam dan swasta diperlukan dalam menggubal sesuatu pakej.
Apakah definisi bakat yang bakal digunakan? Tentulah apa jua bakat yang kita maksudkan mestilah padan dengan keperluan negara.
Terlalu banyak insiden yang mana kita difahamkan yang sesuatu bidang kemahiran itu diperlukan dengan jumlah yang begitu besar seperti IT, tetapi graduan kita yang berkelulusan IT tidak dapat memenuhi keperluan tersebut kerana apa yang mereka pelajari tidak selaras dengan keperluan industri. Begitu juga pakar-pakar yang bakal mengadili bakat yang diperlukan diharap tidak berat sebelah dalam pengadilan mereka.
read the rest of the article here which includes warning on the hot money coming into the present Bursa Saham.
Anyway while the Cabinet and Parliament is debating on Patriotism, shouldn't we be assesssing also the patriotism of an individual who works in Malaysia and one who have uprooted and left Malaysia for good to seek a better life for himself elsewhere in this world first before we decide to recruit these so called "Malaysian" Talent from overseas?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)