Discrimination against Malays in the private sector is real, lets deal with it

The DAP is spewing all sort of racist innuendos to pit the Malays against the Chinese in their undying quest for political supremacy, the latest, they are now saying that Malays will find it difficult to find employment in the private sector as they are not able and lacking in quality.

I would not want to spoil this Lim's happiness as he and his merry friends obviously still lives in a coconut shell of racism, so I have only one small word for Lim when he said Malays lack in quality:

Here is a piece by one of my favorite Columnist, Shamsul Akmar taken from the NST:

Discrimination in the private sector

Shamshul Akmar

CONTENTIOUS ARGUMENT: It’s highly presumptuous to claim the private sector’s refusal to employ Bumiputeras is because of their lack of quality

THERE are several ways for Malays/Bumiputeras to react to reports quoting economist Dr Lim Mah Hui as saying that the private sector had not been keen to employ them because they are not able and lacking in quality.

Lim, a member of the DAP-led Penang government think tank, reportedly said this when debunking Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar, who had contended that the private sector had not given much opportunity to Bumiputeras.

First, Bumiputeras can get all riled up, demand Lim to apologise and if he refuses, ostracise and label him with unsavoury tags. Or they can counter what he had said by pointing out that his statement is racist, condescending, stereotypical, a generalisation, unfounded and without basis, and unfitting to have been uttered by someone with academic credentials.

A report in an English daily on Sept 18 titled "Discrimination when hiring is rife, say job seekers" could shed light on the issue and provide points to ponder as to why Lim was so quick to conclude the issue with a condescending attitude towards Bumiputeras.

The report, among others, highlighted a study conducted by Universiti Malaya senior lecturer in development studies department Lee Hwok Aun and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia research fellow Muhammed Abdul Khalid, which showed that racial discrimination, at least, is very much prevalent in the private sector.

The report stated they were only able to conduct the study in the private sector with Lee saying the results showing Chinese applicants had an upper hand, was expected.

"I wanted to step back and examine the issue empirically and credibly," the report quoted Lee.

The study involved the distribution of resumes of fictitious Malay and Chinese candidates to real job advertisers and comparing the number of callbacks candidates of each race got.

In his analysis, Lee was quoted as saying: "The result of the experiment showed that in the private sector, race mattered. Chinese applicants are much more likely than Malay applicants to be called for an interview. Quality also matters, but much less so."

There are a lot of other details in the report. Suffice to say Lee, in the report, pointedly said, "Quality also matters, but much less so."

The academic, however, had a caveat: "We cannot confidently evaluate these arguments without further study. Emphatically, we must not be hasty to blame the discrimination we detect on malevolent motives and racial stereotyping, prejudice or bigotry."

Based on the research Lee had done, it would have been highly presumptuous on the part of Lim to make such a sweeping conclusion that the refusal of the private sector to employ Bumiputeras is because of the community's lack of quality.

Then what may have prompted Lim to say thus? Is it because he had done a study on the subject and the study is conclusive?

Lim may want to come out and prove that his remarks were not spawned from some deep-seated anti-Malay/Bumiputera sentiment but rather from his own findings that may help enlighten the lack in quality among the Bumiputeras, including the policy makers.

While he is at it, one thing seems to be conclusive, as all three -- Lim, Wahid and Universiti Malaya's Lee -- agree there is a lack of Bumiputera participation in the private sector and it is not from the lack of want on the part of the community but rather the refusal of the private sector to take them.

In short, if, all this while, it is merely suspicions or conjectures when raising issues about the lack of Bumiputera participation in the private sector, especially when such opinions may have come from the Bumiputeras themselves, now that it had come from the likes of Lim, such views can be deemed as fact.

If that is a fact, the debate now is why (there is lack of Bumiputera participation) and how (to increase their participation). If Lim's reason is the lack of quality, then the discrimination is not discrimination as merit is of essence. But the advocates of the New Economic Policy and affirmative action will argue that quality will be achieved with opportunities.

The argument put forth by Lim about quality is contentious, especially when he pointed his fingers at the civil servants, the majority being Bumiputeras, as examples of the lack in quality and incapability in producing results. Lest he forgets, the country enjoyed a double digit growth for almost a decade until the financial crisis of 1997/98.

In other words, the affirmative action was in full measure and the civil service shaped the nation's economic policies. The majority of the civil servants then were still Bumiputeras. For that, there is no necessity for the Bumiputeras to be apologetic for the affirmative action to the likes of Lim and others.

Then again, there will be the Malay/Bumiputera apologists who will argue that they are not against the affirmative action but rather the implementation. Their arguments are ambiguous and at best apologetic, not wanting to put forth what they actually want. The easiest way out is to say that the affirmative action had benefited only the Umnoputras.

Without doubt Umno members, as other Bumiputeras, had benefitted from it. But so did the Malay/Bumiputera apologists.

In fact, if observed closely, these Malay/Bumiputera apologists are actually highly successful.

Their opinions and views are very much sought after by those anti-affirmative action non-Bumiputeras to lead in politics, non-governmental organisations, academic institutions and the media.

Or maybe, they are the ones Lim is referring to as lacking in quality. And wisdom is one quality stooges will never have.

Discrimination against Malays in the Private Sector is real, let us deal with it up close and personal.

A closing word on the DAP:

'That is why for our country to live in peace and harmony then we must first join hand to finish off DAP. Only then the real Unity can be achieved'

SYA source here.

Let PPSMI be bygone but its spirit come alive in our Universities - Dr Airil Yasreen Mohd Yassin

'I strongly believe that the spirit of PPSMI should not be completely abandoned because it is an undeniable fact that the body of knowledge of mathematics and science, hence engineering for that matter, has evolved so deep, so wide and has gone through a revolution so fast, that their acquirement can only be best done by updating our reading on books and scientific articles written in English. The days of the Germans, Japanese, French, Koreans and Dutch to write their latest books and scientific findings in their mother tongue have basically long gone"

Dr. Aireel Yasreen Mohd Yassin

Dr Airil Yasreen Mohd Yassin is a senior lecturer and computational mechanicist at the Faculty of Civil Engineering, UTM Johor Bahru.

Let PPSMI be bygone but its spirit come alive in our Universities - Dr Airil Yasreen Mohd Yassin

OCTOBER 04, 2013

I wrote this article as a response to Tun Mahathir’s recent comment on National Education Blueprint 2013-2025, as reported in Malaysian Insider on October 1, 2013.

I was a strong supporter of PPSMI but as a government officer, it is my duty to implement national policies hence my acceptance for its abolishment and my present support for MBMMBI.

However, I strongly believe that the spirit of PPSMI should not be completely abandoned because it is an undeniable fact that the body of knowledge of mathematics and science, hence engineering for that matter, has evolved so deep, so wide and has gone through a revolution so fast, that their acquirement can only be best done by updating our reading on books and scientific articles written in English. The days of the Germans, Japanese, French, Koreans and Dutch to write their latest books and scientific findings in their mother tongue have basically long gone. Even if they write it, most of us still cannot read their mother tongue, can we?

Based on this, I would like to suggest that the spirit of PPSMI to be brought into a new realm, that is into local academia. At first, such a suggestion might sound trivial because we have the perception already that English has been the lingua franca of our academia especially with the internalization of our universities where almost in every class we would have international students. I would say no to this in the spirit of PPSMI.

In the spirit of PPSMI, mathematics and science are not about calculation and facts memorizing but they are mental constructs; they are ideas and concepts just like politics, philosophy, history and humanities. So as mental constructs, mathematics and science must be understood in words and delivered in a storytelling manner where symbols and numbers are only there to assist with the deliverance and the understanding.

Math and science must be properly argued and reasoned. However, the sources for such arguments and reasoning are embedded in the body of writing within textbooks and scientific articles which sufficiency, elegancy and relevancy, in turn, depend on the authors. Great professors and researchers author great materials but nowadays the fact is, almost all of them are authored in English for greater readers and viewers.

So, the difficulties faced by our university's students, researchers and even teachers in reading "between the lines", in grasping the arguments and reasoning and to follow the "storyline" of books and scientific articles are what PPSMI was supposed to solve.

I myself had the same difficulties when I first arrived at Imperial College London for my PhD. I thought I was smart enough because I got a master from UTM only to realize that I knew nothing as far as the fundamentals required for a world-class research pursuit. I was forced to read the books all over again only to find out how were difficult actually the arguments of mathematics and scientific principles to be understood and obviously, to have language barrier definitely did not help, it only worsened the condition. As my independent learning initially was slow, I was forced to go around asking my seniors to explain to me what the meaning of this and that (not literal meaning as we have dictionary for this) to the extent one day, one of my senior said to me, "Airil, Malays are not ugly but stupid.” I swear to God he said this but I didn't buckle, they could say whatever they like as long as they taught me the knowledge. At that very moment, I made a pack with myself; there will be not a single day without knowledge for me.

After I came home six years ago and started to teach and conduct researches with the Malaysian students, I then saw it happened all over again. I watched how the students failed to read books and journal articles thus failed to understand it. Yes, they could do the calculations, but without reading the storytelling written in the materials, they could never have the proper understanding which without it, they could never produce anything good enough, worthy enough to provide the country with innovations required in establishing the much spoken sustainable economy.

Since it was not even an option for them not to understand, my research students went through the hardship of sleepless night of reading back the basics and took appreciably longer time to graduate. At my end, it took me to be besides them for appreciable hours revising all over again the basics of mathematics and science to the extent I read and explained to them words by words in my attempt to impart the skills of independent learning in them.

None of this would be necessary if our students were made guilty to skip the storytelling of the books, not encouraged to focus only on the simplistic lecture notes and not trained to go straight to the examples and drilled themselves with it for the sake of exams, as soon they stepped into the university. Instead, they would have understood the knowledge and produced worthy scientific output as well as innovations much quicker. In the world that is exponentially changing; to be quick but legit is the most important virtue of a person and a society. With my students, after all the hardships, we finally succeeded in producing engineering software that is equivalent to the foreign ones. Almost 200 unit have been sold at less than quarter the price of the foreign ones. Such an achievement only highlights the capability of Malaysian in being innovative and economically competitive, provided that we are accomplished by proper learning process.

Therefore, the recovery from our present malady would have been quickened by PPSMI but since it has been abolished, let its spirit come alive in our universities. The spirit of PPSMI is about making domestic changes, it is about domestic mass production of local world-class scientists and their scientific and innovative products. We send about ten per cent of our best brains to overseas but the rest remain. While the lucky ten per cent have the luxury of listening to the lecture of professors which knowledge bear their name, the remaining ninety per cent must resort to books for better understanding and they have to read them alone. The spirit of PPSMI is about allowing those that remain in the country to read their books lonely but quickly.

Thus, the spirit of PPSMI is about the new strategy, a special recipe injected after the strategy of sending and awaiting those sent to overseas to come back has brought us to a stagnant state (if not lagged) due to the fact that those around us have picked up a greater pace and momentum. They don’t call IT Revolution and Information Boom for nothing. While others are speeding up, the spirit of PPSMI should have been the reason for us to have a chance at overtaking those already ahead of us.

I therefore hope that this compromise of letting PPSMI be bygone and its spirit come to alive in our universities will be well accepted even by those fought for the abolishment. I hope they will not against it by positing the same old argument asking why the Japanese, the Mainland Chinese, the Koreans and other English non-speaking countries like Germany are using their mother tongue at their universities.

The people of these advanced societies are in the positioned of using their own language because, as many have not realized, they were in the same pedestal with the English speaking people in pioneering the modern mathematics and sciences.

How can we put the Japanese and us in the same pedestal when they have constructed their warplane, the Zero, independently during the 30's and 40's at time our forefathers still fishing with the net in the Selat Melaka? They had Shimura-Taniyama conjecture in the 50's, the conjecture used to proof Fermat's Last Theorem, to stress my point.

And if we look at the mainland Chinese, they have flocked into Cambridge and Oxford as early as the 19th century, leave alone their 5000 years old civilization and the Koreans, being sandwiched by these two great nations would then be influenced by them both culturally and intellectually.

On the point of the Germans, great scientists were Germans, from the time of Leibniz (contemporary of Newton) in the 17th century until now. Yes, there were times when they translated Arabic articles into Latin then into their language and now resorting back to English for scientific publications. But this only highlighted the domestic events taken place in Germany, events that shaped their culture, their mother tongue. It highlighted the dynamic of Germany's domestic.

But this was the time when there was no globalization, this was the time when everybody, the English, the Germans, the Dutch and the French were taking pace almost at the same time and size, and this was also the time when the superpower, the Abbasiyah, was crumbling down. In other words, this was the time of "no rushing".

But the spirit of PPSMI is about now, it is about the strategy that takes into account that the world is exponentially changing. Just about a decade ago we seized to use typewriter and had bulky low ram and small hard disk computer on our desk which could not even play movie on it but today we have computer in the palm of our hand and we are seeing Apple suing Samsung who are happened to be Koreans and we are also seeing China is building their own space station out of anger after being neglected by the international community in the development of the existing ISS.

It should not be a wonder to us why the world we live in is governed by these advanced societies for they were and still are the pioneers of sciences and technologies. It should come to us as no surprise just by looking at the world’s rank of their universities at time ours are stuck at 200-300 places. What the rank manifests is the rate of understanding and the mastery of mathematics, science and engineering and it is apparent that we still have a long way to go. But there are no cutting corners and short cuts; we must pass through the path of the greats, which is by acquiring the purest understanding of the subject matters but pass this path quick because as I said, we don’t have the luxury of those in the enlightenment era; there was no globalization back then.

On the argument that we should do translations, which part of the statement that we have international students in every class, that we don’t understand? Which part of the statement that the body of knowledge has evolved so deep, so wide and gone through revolution so quick that the available books are ten folds greater than the number of our translators, leave alone the facts that almost every day there will be new scientific findings published in English, that we don’t understand? Which part of the statement that the world is exponentially changing that awaiting for translation is not an option because our students must read their book now, quick and lonely, that we don’t understand?

So below is the list of actions our academia should take in letting the spirit of PPSMI to come alive in our universities.

1. All lectures must fully be in English. The reasons for this are two folds, to make the students to become familiar with the scientific phrases, to be found in textbooks and to prepare them for future encounter and engagement in scientific discussions and communications. Listening is a very important learning skill.

2. All lectures must use worldly established standard textbooks as major learning materials. Teacher’s lecture notes, if any, must be treated as secondary materials to include books authored by local teachers even if they are written in English unless it is shown that the quality and magnitude of the books able to meet the standard of the universal ones.

3. It is compulsory for the students to read the whole storytelling within the textbooks and no skip to the examples.

4. It is compulsory for the lecturers to describe the whole storytelling to include the philosophy of the subject matters, the history, the reasoning, mathematical derivation from first principles, the related physical laws, principle and assumptions as well as the state of the arts. Like the students, the lecturers should not skip to final equations, given tables and established procedures and of course, no skip to examples.

As a summary, mathematics and sciences are mental constructs thus must be delivered and understood in words and in a storytelling manner, through good teachers or through good books. However, as far as independent learning is concerned, whilst we cannot have our teachers at all times, we can always have our books. This was what PPSMI all about but since it has been abolished, why don’t we let its spirit come alive in a new realm that is our academia; the place where PPSMI should have mattered in the first place. - October 4, 2013.

Article sourced from TMI here.

Is the end nigh for the name DAP?

When the DAP successfully struck out an injunction bid by one of its members to hold their CEC Election in a Special Congress last Sunday the learned Judge among others said:

"The plaintiff is asking the court to question the party's standing order for the party to call the polls via the National Congress. I think this is a matter which the court cannot do."

She said the word “decision” stated in Section 18 (c) of the Act should be given a wide and liberal meaning.

"It means that DAP may face the possibility of being deregistered by holding the polls via a Special Congress, instead of a National Congress, but that is up to RoS (Registrar of Societies) and not for the court to speculate what would be or should be."

Source here

The entire DAP leadership was in full gear throwing nonsense at the ROS right after the second CEC Elections probably hoping that the ROS would be intimidated, which I think is a futile and immature thing to do as ROS only came in the picture and let us be clear about this...only when DAP members themselves complained. Read on.. a report from The Star:

DAP barking up the wrong tree, says ROS

"PETALING JAYA: The Registrar of Societies (ROS) says DAP is barking up the wrong tree as the party’s dispute was with its members, and not with the agency.

An ROS spokesman said it was DAP members who were dissatisfied with the leadership as they believed that the party constitution had been breached.

“We are merely acting on complaints lodged by DAP members. We received not one but many complaints,” he said, stressing that the dispute did not involve ROS.

He said this when asked to comment on DAP chairman Karpal Singh’s threat to take ROS to court for allegedly oppressing the party.

The ROS spokesman said the agency too could take action against the party on various grounds.

“But we want to help resolve this matter. If laws are interpreted according to perception, there would be no end to it,” he said.

He also called on DAP leaders to respect and observe their own party constitution.

“They can’t act as if they are not bound by rules,” he said.

On July 30, ROS directed DAP to hold fresh polls following allegations of discrepancies in the polls held in December last year.

ROS’ subsequent advice to hold fresh polls in a national congress and provide 10-week notice to branches fell on deaf ears.

DAP held fresh polls in a special congress on Sunday after giving delegates three weeks’ notice.

The ROS spokesman said they would wait for DAP’s report on its special congress and fresh CEC polls before deciding on the next course of action.

The spokesman also rebutted claims by DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and special congress chairman Anthony Loke that ROS had refused to meet up with them to discuss the dispute.

“No government office shuts its doors on the rakyat. If they want to come and discuss they are most welcome to do so,” he said."

Yes apparently ROS advise to the DAP was to follow its own Constitution i.e to hold a National Congress and give 10 weeks notice to branches, which the DAP leadership conveniently defied and instead held a Special Congress giving only three weeks notice for the 2nd CEC Election.

Now we wait for the 'new' DAP CEC officials to report to the ROS, to see what ROS's action will be, lets remember the learned judge said:

"It means that DAP may face the possibility of being deregistered by holding the polls via a Special Congress, instead of a National Congress, but that is up to RoS (Registrar of Societies) and not for the court to speculate what would be or should be."

It would be interesting to see what ROS will decide to do within its powers, could it de-register the DAP for defying its own Constitution, lets not speculate, lets just wait.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day

'Sepatutnya dalam masyarakat kita, kita tak suka jadikan orang kita ini, orang yang selalu bergantung kepada kerajaan dan tak mahu membuat kerja'

Tun Dr. Mahathir

Saya terbaca Gomen ada perancangan untuk memberi wang lagi kepada rakyat Malaysia  melalui BR1M bagi tahun 2014. Walaupun tujuan BR1M ini amat murni ia itu untuk menolong rakyat Malaysia yang dikategorikan dalam gulungan tak berkemampuan, saya berpendapat bahawa BR1M ini hanyalah bersifat sementara dan tidak akan dapat menyelesaikan masaalah pokok ia itu membantu orang yang betul-betul daif dan miskin. Bak pepatah Cina yang berikut:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. 

Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

.......patutlah difahami. 

Lagi baik peruntukan BR1M ini di gunakan untuk memberi latihan(living skills) kepada gulungan yang daif dan miskin supaya mereka boleh mendapat tambahan punca rezeki keluarga dengan berniaga atau menawarkan perkhidmatan harian yang diperlukan.

Saya sangat bersetuju dengan pendapat Tun Mahathir:

BR1M tak perlu diteruskan, kata Dr M

PETALING JAYA - Bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad hari ini berkata Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) tidak perlu diteruskan dalam Belanjawan 2014, dan ini sekali gus mengurangkan kebergantungan rakyat kepada kerajaan.

Kerajaan sebaliknya perlu mencari jalan untuk melatih golongan kurang berkemampuan itu dengan sesuatu kebolehan supaya dapat menjadi sumber pendapatan mereka, katanya kepada pemberita selepas berucap di majlis Program Bicara Petang Bersama Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad di sini hari ini.

"Sepatutnya dalam masyarakat kita, kita tak suka jadikan orang kita ini, orang yang selalu bergantung kepada kerajaan dan tak mahu membuat kerja.

"Apa yang kita dapat secara percuma tidak akan dihargai sebab itu walaupun banyak BR1M diberi," katanya sambil menambah: "Kalau betul-betul daif, miskin dan tak berupaya barulah boleh diberi bantuan."

Saya harap Gomen ambil perhatian teguran bernas dari Tun Mahathir, saya rasa ada banyak lagi cara lain untuk meraih undi untuk PRU14 akan datang.

Chin Peng: A fanatic who would stop at nothing to achieve his goals

Kumar Ramakrishna is Associate Professor and Head of the Centre of Excellence for National Security at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University. A historian by background, he has written extensively on the Malayan Emergency.

Chin Peng: A fanatic but no hero - Kumar Ramakrishna

SEPTEMBER 30, 2013

The death of Ong Boon Hua alias Chin Peng, the controversial leader of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), on September 16 in Bangkok at the age of 89, has generated a great deal of debate about his historical role.

Former British and Malaysian officials, soldiers and policemen who fought against him during the long counter-insurgency campaign known to posterity as the Malayan Emergency from 1948 to 1960, regarded him as a menace to society, in a war that cost some 11,000 lives.

His supporters counter that, without Chin Peng, Malaya would never have achieved independence from British colonial rule. They argue that the Emergency was a war after all, and hence it was no surprise that atrocities occurred.

Hence, they want to remember Chin Peng as a nationalist hero, a wily guerrilla strategist on a par with his great Communist contemporaries, Mao Zedong in China or Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam. Chin Peng’s commitment to upholding the “dignity of man” should be honoured, they say.

To be fair, Chin Peng was an extremely shrewd leader. Joining the CPM as a teenager in the late ’30s following the Japanese invasion of China, he rose quickly through the ranks. By mid-1943, due to heavy CPM losses during the Japanese Occupation, he found himself holding the dual appointment of State Committee Secretary in Perak and commander of the CPM’s Malayan People’s Anti-Japanese Army (MPAJA) 5th Regiment.

Following the end of the war in 1945, after CPM Secretary-General Lai Tek was unmasked as a British agent, Chin Peng stepped into the breach. In March 1947, at the ripe young age of 23, he was elected Secretary-General.

Serious analytical mistakes

So, Chin Peng was a highly capable young man. This did not mean he possessed sound judgment, however. His relative inexperience meant he made serious analytical mistakes.

First, he assumed — wrongly — that just because the rural Chinese population had been supportive during the Occupation, they would always be so. In fact, by 1948 when the Emergency began, economic recovery had begun and nobody wanted to get involved in yet another conflict.

Second, Chin Peng disastrously de-emphasised political education of the strategically important rural Chinese in favour of coercive tactics to secure compliance from them. Because he assumed that they would naturally be on the CPM’s side, he took any recalcitrance as a sign not of flawed thinking but of treachery deserving of the severest punishment.

Because the Communists had what historian JH Brimmell called an “elastic definition of treachery”, almost anyone became a suspect. Hence, CPM terrorism appeared not just horrifying but also indiscriminate.

In Johor, guerrillas shot dead a Chinese squatter, hacked his wife to death with a parang, set their hut alight and threw their eight-year-old daughter into the flames. In Perak, Chin Peng’s men hammered a nail through a Chinese girl’s head. At Pantai Seremban, two young men were battered to death by guerrillas wielding cangkuls.

Even captured guerrillas admitted that the tortures were “too horrible for description”, while a late 1952 police report noted that this “senseless cruelty” was typical of “hundreds of similar incidents” throughout the country.

This is precisely why at the Baling Peace Talks in December 1955, Singapore Chief Minister David Marshall asked Chin Peng what he was fighting for. When the CPM chief replied the “dignity of man”, Marshall replied caustically that employing violence to secure public compliance with an ideology they did not want was not compatible with the “dignity of man”. Tellingly, Chin Peng’s only response was that they had different outlooks and he was not going to argue about it.

Meeting Chin Peng

I met Chin Peng once. In June 1998 in London, where I was working on my doctoral thesis on the Emergency. The BBC had put together a documentary for the 50th anniversary of the Emergency and brought him out to meet academics and peruse records as he was hoping to write his memoirs.

He was 74 then, had a strong handshake, an amiable air about him and a remarkable memory. There were only five of us: Three history professors, a BBC producer and me. I came away from that three-hour meeting with the enduring impression that Chin Peng was a “true believer” in Eric Hoffer’s sense of the term: A fanatic who would stop at nothing to achieve his goals.

I distinctly recall how he told me then — years after the end of the fighting and following formal cessation of hostilities with Malaysia in 1989 — that the Asian financial crisis then ravaging Southeast Asia was a chance for the CPM to regroup.

Little wonder that the legendary Malaysian government psychological warfare expert CC Too always maintained, with trademark sarcasm, that the Communists could never be trusted and that they were “a gang of half-educated, swollen-headed, power-mad adolescent demagogues trying to take over the country”.

The actual record

Chin Peng was no Mao Zedong. Historian and journalist Brian Crozier over 40 years ago concluded that Chin Peng contributed nothing to Communist theory.

The CPM — lest it be forgotten by today’s starry-eyed romantics — never stood a chance of winning in Malaya, partly because of their own massive doctrinal missteps but also because of other major reasons.

First, they never succeeded in winning the strong support of the large Malay population; second, they never secured Chinese Communist support, unlike the North Vietnamese a decade later; third, they lacked wireless communications and could not coordinate their operations efficiently.

And the final reason — after initial missteps of their own, the British colonial authorities began to calibrate their own use of firepower; greatly strengthened their intelligence operations; honed food denial operations to a fine art; and developed a potent psychological warfare programme that broke the CPM’s back by the end of the ’50s.

Ultimately, even Malayan independence, which was what Chin Peng ostensibly took to the jungles for, was achieved peacefully by August 1957 through negotiations between Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman and London. To say that Chin Peng’s actions were vital to the attainment of Malayan self-determination and dignity is flawed on two counts.

First, closer British strategic alignment with the anti-colonial United States as the Cold War began meant that Malayan decolonisation was on the cards anyway. 

Second, David Marshall had a fundamental point: If Chin Peng was truly fighting for the dignity of man, then his means had to accord with that end. The historical record shows that this was patently not the case.

In 1998, when I asked a senior Malaysian academic colleague if she wanted to meet Chin Peng, her response said it all: “No. That b****** was responsible for the deaths of some of my family members”.

Certainly, Chin Peng was a capable, savvy leader who sincerely believed in his cause. But as social psychologist Roy Baumeister observed, one of the roots of evil is precisely such fanatical belief. It is this type of belief that produced the 9/11 attacks in the United States, the October 2002 Bali bombings and the recent Westgate Mall attack in Kenya.

Chin Peng was a sincere man, but he was sincerely wrong. Now more than ever, moral clarity is needed in the way we judge historical figures. We owe at least that to future generations. — Todayonline.com, September 30, 2013.

Remember 29th September 2013, the day that decided PR's fate in PRU14

Truth be told:

"RoS acted on the complaints of several disgruntled members who claimed the December election was not properly conducted after the party announced that a tabulation glitch had resulted in the wrong candidate being elected to the CEC."

The Registrar of Societies gave the DAP a second chance to call for a new CEC Elections, which DAP did yesterday on 29th September 2013 after calling the ROS all sort of ungentlemanly names.

The DAP delegates did not dissapoint UMNO who played the race card successfully against them last election by electing a non Malay CEC. Well, they tried very hard to put up Zairil Khir Johari as a Malay candidate but we Malays are not easily fooled ya.

The second CEC Election could have been a wonderful opportunity for the DAP to show to Malaysians that they really are not anti-Malay as what UMNO has been portraying them all these years, but they squandered that opportunity big time. Worse they tried to pass off Zairil who is the step son of the late Khir Johari as a Malay who got elected into the CEC.... DAP Chinese think Malays are stupid people or what? Malays maybe faulted with their take it easy tidak apa attitude but are not stupid people OK, please read here.

Lim Guan Eng can try his best to brow beat the ROS into submitting to them but the DAP led Pakatan Rakyat had been dealt a terrible blow on 29 September 2013, that's the day that the Malays in Malaysia are shown the middle finger by the DAP delegates, yes Malays are worth only 50sen in the DAP. 

There is no way a DAP led Pakatan Rakyat can occupy Putrajaya without the support of the Majority Malays. Pakatan Rakyat fate in PRU14 is now effectively sealed, no second coming of the Chinese Tsunami can help the Pakatan Rakyat then. 

PAS better watch out, best to start talking to UMNO and do it nicely if you want to be part of the Federal Gomen.

Additional Read:
DAP wins bid to proceed with fresh election on Sunday. Excerpts:

"The greenlight to proceed was given after the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today allowed the application by party secretary-general Lim Guan Eng to strike out a suit and an injunction by former Ladang Paroi DAP branch vice-chairman A. David Dass, who claimed that members were not given 10 weeks' notice to hold the election.

Rosnaini said the decision to hold fresh polls ultimately lies with the party.

"The plaintiff is asking the court to question the party's standing order for the party to call the polls via the National Congress. I think this is a matter which the court cannot do."

She said the word “decision” stated in Section 18 (c) of the Act should be given a wide and liberal meaning.

"It means that DAP may face the possibility of being deregistered by holding the polls via a Special Congress, instead of a National Congress, but that is up to RoS (Registrar of Societies) and not for the court to speculate what would be or should be."

I have a question...

What do we tell a Malaysian who.....

Does not want to speak Bahasa Melayu;

DO NOT want to sing the national anthem when asked, and refuses to stand if the national anthem is being sung;

Only selectively respects the Perlembagaan, 

DO NOT respect The DYMM Raja-Raja Melayu,

Think Chin Peng is a hero.

What do we tell them?

Contest for Ketua Pemuda UMNO,will it be a Khairy or Akhramsyah win?

Updated 26.09.2013:

A must read post by blogger Sri Tri Buana on the dangers of UMNO diverting to a liberal party:
excerpts:

'Presiden UMNO sememang sudah kebetulan liberal. Tiga naibnya, adalah orang-orang Presiden. Jawatan Ketua Pemuda perlu dimenangi oleh penyandang, bukan hanya kerana beliau liberal tapi bercita-cita untuk meliberalkan Pemuda. KJ sudah mengeluarkan kenyataan dibawahnya, Pemuda UMNO akan menjadi centrist, bukan right wing lagi.

Ini menghapuskan sama sekali peranan tradisi Pemuda UMNO yang selama ini instument 'check and balance' dan golongan pendesak. Jika dahulu, kerajaan melupakan agenda Melayu, Pemuda akan bangkit mendesak menyedarkan kerajaan. 

KJ sebenarnya minta Pemuda menjadi geek, nerds yang lembik untuk berlawan dengan DAP dan PKR yang lebih jantan dijalanan. Sayap lawan sayap tapi Pemuda UMNO lebih berminat mengira projek dan kereta mewah.

Kemewahan melembikkan mereka. 

Sekadar catatan, bukan liberal per se itu tidak elok cuma, perlu ingat, UMNO adalah parti orang Melayu. Parti Bersatu Sabah pun tahu menjaga kepentingan Kadazan, adakah kita mahu parti yang mendakwa parti Melayu ini menjaga kepentingan 'lain-lain'? 

Justeru UMNO makin hanyut dari perjuangan asal maka cambah NGO Melayu seperti Perkasa. Jangan kerana dek terlalu ghairah ingin mejadi 'liberal' nanti, dalam PRU ke 14, UMNO sendiri sudah tidak diterima oleh orang Melayu. Perlu ingat, sudah dua pilihanraya sejak KJ muncul dalam UMNO, BN tidak mendapat 2/3 lagi.'

Blogger Sri Tri Buana read in full here

Original Post:

I am happy to observe that there will be five candidates for the coveted Ketua Pemuda UMNO post:

1. Khairy Jamaluddin
2. Irwan Ambak,
3. Syed Rosli Syed Harman Jamalullail
4. Karim Ali
5. Akhramsyah Sanusi

Not too long ago, I lamented the situation where there  were no challengers against the incumbent, Khairy Jamaluddin as I do not see Pemuda UMNO under Khairy or before that Hishamuddin  as being the pressure group it once was. Pemuda UMNO has lost its oomph, and the rot started when Hishamuddin was Ketua Pemuda (I remembered the kris incident where Hishamuddin later apologised after the March 2008 election) and unfortunately when Khairy became Ketua Pemuda he was more interested in being a populist, still is I think.

Anyway of the five candidates I think only 2 stands out and worth mentioning namely Khairy the Oxford graduate and Arkamsyah who graduated from the very prestigious Imperial College, London. 

The Incumbent Khairy, the liberalist:

Relative unknown Akhramsyah the conservative:

UMNO is a conservative party, its support base are Conservative Malays who voted in numbers for UMNO and rescued BN from certain defeat by the loose DAP,PKR,PAS coalition in May 2013. I do not think in the long run that people with liberal views in UMNO should be allowed to flourish as UMNO itself is a conservative party, that is UMNO's core strength which will endear it to the  conservative Malays. If UMNO goes liberal, how is it different from PKR then?

With incumbency and a Minister's post on Khairy's side, it will be an uphill task for Akhramsyah to deny Khairy one more term as Ketua Pemuda. But then again man can plan, but ALLAH decides and perhaps this could be the year of the giant slayer.

I hope the election is a clean one unlike the previous three cornered fight and my money is on Akhramsyah to slay Khairy in the UMNO election next month.

The UMNO VP race is going to be really hot

Nampaknya pertandingan untuk jawatan Naib Presiden UMNO amat sengit, ada enam calon yang bukan calang-calang orangnya, baguslah demokrasi masih subuh dalam UMNO.

1. Zahid Hamidi
2. Hishamuddin Husssein
3. Shafei Apdal
4. Ali Rustam
5. Isa Samad
6. Mukriz Mahathir

Of the six it seems the incumbents are forming a tag team though they are not admitting it, but a picture tells a thousand words kan:

The VP will be an important post to win as Muhyiddin at 65 look likely to end his political career before the GE14 in 2018. Those who win the VP will have a direct shot at the Timbalan Presiden post and with it the post of Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Expect some fireworks friends, I hope the best men will win the VP post it matters not their age as long as they are healthy and of sound mind and let us have a clean election, jangan main duit OK.

Ingat Cakap Mantan Presiden UMNO Dr. Mahathir yang banyak menaikkan Malaysia kita:

'Percayalah apabila pemimpin yang kita pilih adalah perasuah, mereka tidak akan teragak-agak menjual bangsa pun. Ingatlah negara kita dahulu lebih besar tetapi kerana duit ia sudah jadi kecil. Ia akan jadi lebih kecil lagi jika perasuah memimpin negara ini.'

'Kita harus akui bahawa UMNO sekarang tidak lagi dipercayai oleh ramai orang Melayu. Sebab itu mereka menubuhkan ratusan badan bukan kerajaan (NGO). Jika mereka mempunyai banyak pilihan, UMNO sudah kalah Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-13. Tetapi janganlah ahli UMNO, pemimpin UMNO percaya walau apa pun yang dilakukan mereka, kerana tidak ada pilihan lain maka UMNO tetap akan menang. Kalau UMNO dipimpin perasuah, parti lawan akan ternampak lebih baik'

Dr. Mahathir Mohamed

My money though is on these 3 UMNO men to win:

1. Zahid Hamidi

2. Mukhriz Mahathir

3. Ali Rustam

But good luck to all, manusia merancang, ALLAH yang menentukan.....

Time now for MCA to decide whether they are with BN or against BN

'If Umno does not wish Najib Razak to go down in history as the last Malaysian Prime Minister to have come from the party, then Umno members must demand that MCA be held accountable for its media mouthpiece backstabbing the BN.'

Blogger Helen Ang

Time now for MCA to decide whether they are with UMNO or against UMNO:

PERBEZAAN ANTARA SINAR HARIAN DAN THE STAR

Abu mayat Chin Peng: MCA, Pemuda Umno berbeza pandangan

MCA members jump ship

The MCA failed miserably to deliver the Chinese votes for BN in GE13 and with GE14 coming soon in 4 years time, MCA sure could not deliver the votes if they allow the paper they owned , The Star, to wallop UMNO and the BN day in day out in the days, months and years to come and in fact some MCA leaders are publicly agreeing to Opposition's political stance especially on issues considered sensitive in this country. 

The fact is the MCA with its paper TheStar is now a liability to BN in its battle to win the next PRU14. 

UMNO as the dominant party in BN should look closely at MCA and demand that MCA and its paper toe the BN line or else!