What do the Malaysian Chinese want?

INTRODUCTION

Having failed to achieve total control in Indonesia after the fall of their stooge and protector, the late butcher tyrant president Suharto, the Chinese of South East Asia (the Kuomintang) have turned their sights on Malaysia in a bid to topple its Malay majority government.

The Chinese appear dissatisfied and annoyed with the status of Malays in a nation carefully nurtured and cultivated to its present stage of industrialisation by former Prime Minister Dr. Mahahtir Muhammed.

The Malays of Malaysia are in a majority comprising at least 60% of the population. They are the indigenous people of the country. The Indians (6%) and the Chinese who form the rest of the population are divided along race lines.

Whilst the Chinese were favoured in commerce and trade from the time of the British, a practice which continues to this day, the Indians consist mainly of a few professionals, small business people and the rest largely low paid labourers.

Singapore under its first Prime Minster had designs over Malaysia since its birth all those years ago. In his own words he had ‘dreamed all his adult life of a merger between the two states’. For what reasons he dreamed such a dream is now becoming clearer. The Chinese of Malaysia and Indonesia have great regard for the man. The Malays to a large part see him as a gate keeper of foreign interests (with good reason) and an abject and unmitigated racist.

LANDLESS SINGAPORE’S MALAY LAND GRAB

Singapore of late and with the assistance of the immediate past Prime Minister of Malaysia, Abdullah Badawi, engineered a coup whereby they conveniently renegotiated the supply of Malaysian water to Singapore on unrealistically favourable terms to Singapore, much to the detriment of Malaysia. All of this achieved without debate or disclosure of any real consequence from either side.

Mahathir, an obstacle to Singapore’s ambiitons in the peninsula, had left the stage. They were now free to engage in the politics of intimidation and division and had a ready made chameleon, a spineless, vain and incompetent leader in Badawi.

There was no need to gauge public opinion on something as vital as water or land as is characteristic of Singapore’s style of patrimony, its benevolent dictatorship which they call democratic government down there. Unaccountable and unresponsive to their people as always, self assured in their condescention of their subjects, they assisted Badawi to sell his country’s most precious asset to them for a song. And sell it Badawi did.

More dangerously, Badawi allowed Singapore’s state and private interests to acquire significant tracts of Malaysian land (the Johor corridor) for them to develop a massive industrial complex (proposal) using Singaporean and foreign investments channeled through Singapore and the use of imported Chinese labour from China.

The proposed development and its strategy gives Singapore de facto control over a significant land mass of Malaysia without it having a political mandate from Malaysians to run the area. Very smart, very dangerous. Perhaps the new lingua franca would also be Mandarin to cater for the imported Chinese (non Malay) labour they intend to bring in to create a sphere of an extension of the Pulau Batam experiment. Singapore off shore territory, Malaysia on lease in a Malay neutral cultural vacuum.

STEALTH

There has been no referendum on this re design of the boundaries of Malaysia nor even a cursory impact study of the consequences of such a significant transfer of ownership of land and a bud grafting of an entire new culture of Chinese onto Malay soil. No one has sought fit to seek approval and consents of Malaysia’s most important citizens, its Malay majority.

Nor have the finer terms of this sale or the results of any social or economic impact studies on its mainly Malay population been made public for the people it is most likely to effect to consider. There was no public discussion no consultations with effected groups and communities of any significance so to speak of. Nothing has been done for any meaningful public debate or input to be considered form the effected communities.

Badawi held hands with his Singaporean counterparts in what was clearly a purely commercial deal with political and social implications for Malaysians, especially its Malay population in a majority and to whom the land is inalienable being Tanah Melayu. This appears to be a repeat of the historic handing over of Singapore’s sovereignity to Britain for a pistol and a few trinkets to the Johor Sultanate by Britain all those years ago.

Badawi appears to have done a Habibie on Malaysia. Habibie we recall sold out East Timor to an Australian led force of former Marxist guerillas with Portuguese and Chinese backing under the pretext of a deteriorating security situation.

The security situation was created and nurtured at its inception with Australia’s assistance under Suharto aided then by Australia’s defence aid to Indonesia. East Timor was then carved out of Indoensia into a new independent state during mayhem engineered by the UN, Portugal and Australia.

So it now appears that internationa law does reccognise in its breach the take over of foreign lands not only through conquest but also by treaties that ignore the will of a majority. Necessity and bilateral economic agreements are mere camoflagues to lend a semblance of legitimacy and respectability to appropriation of other people’s land.

A SMEAR FOR DISTRACTION

The smear campaigns have begun. Most of it directed at the most likely candidate capable of galvanising Malay sentiment to tear up these arrangements and the stealthy occupation of Malay soil. Dr. Mahathir Muhammed appears willing to go all the wa on this one.

Singapore acutely aware of his potency in dismantling their plans for occupation by stealth is widely viewed as the source of Malay indignation and Chinese chauvinism in Malaysia. Its campaigns have been to stir the political landscape of Malaysia that has become so divisive and polarized provoked by statements from Singapore of late.

Malaysia’s Chinese are openly looking for Lee Kuan Yew type leadership not for his recorded achievements but for the fact the Chinese will dominate as they have done in Singapore. The Chinese like the Indians of Africa and Fiji are cultural chauvanists not willing to assimilate but to dominate at any cost.

The fact Mahathir has achieved more progress for Malaysia in less time with less pain inflicted on his people appears irrelevant to the Malaysian Chinese and sectors of its Indian comunities. So Mahathir appears now to be their target, the focus of their smear campaigns. Lest he further encourage the Malays to be assertive of their rights and put paid to the Singaporean occupation of a third of Malaysian soil Mahathir has become the pre occupaiton of Singapore and its local Malaysian Chinese supporters.

CULTIVATING A TYRANT-BRITAIN’S AND AUSTRALIA’S CULPABILITY

To achieve their domination of south east Asia and its people, the Koumintang Chinese of Asia have cultivated allies in the west. Through Blades, Alex Josey and other operatives of MI5 and the Special branch in Singapore, prior to independence in the 1950’s, Britain found a willing ally in a brilliant, charismatic, though ruthless and mercenary lawyer in Lee Kuan Yew. The rest as they say is history.

Britain set about cultivating Lee to be leader of an independent Singapore as an measured antidote to nationalism sweeping the region post world war 2. David Barr’s and Rev. James Minchin’s thesis on the man and his policies puts paid to the fiction of that all clean and straight modern day ruler.

Lee’s character flourished on the job. He was in his element supporting tyrants, butchers and undemocratic brutes of the region like Suharto and Marcos benefitting his island state in the process. The two tyrants in Marcos and Suharto were willing to exterminate their own people, paving the way to untold riches with blood, for mercenary Chinese merchants like the Bob Hassan’s and Lim Soei Liem who funded these tyrants, banking their ill gotten gains in Singapore to the delight of Lee and the local Chinese.

A SPY FOR A PRESIDENT

Its is not unusual for a country to appoint a war hero or decorated soldier to high office. Even to that of President. Israel did it with a number of their war heroes elevated to high office in gratitude for their service. But very few countries are known to have rewarded a foreign spy elevating him to such a position or to acknowledge his perfidy with such honour. Singapore did.

To reinforce the point I make about servitude and the interest of foreigners over and above those of Singaporeans or its Malays (its original inhabitants), Singapore appointed as its President an ASIO Spy (Australian Security Intelligence Organization) in SR Nathan.

SR Nathan’s cover as a spy for Australia was his position at head of RTS (Radio TV Singapore) for years whilst he served his masters in Canberra. Alex Josey served MI5 also in the same position previously. SR Nathan, now President of Singapore, assisted the Australian’s and British in their disinformation and propaganda campaigns directed mainly at Malays, Indians and that minority of honourable Chinese who campaigned for an open, independent and free state.

These Chinese were labeled by Lee and the foreigners he served as communists, terrorists, traitors, chauvinists, trouble makers and jailed for long periods without trial. SR Nathan’s appointment is clearly a celebration of the betrayal of Singaporeans and its Malays.

The question that is to be asked is this. Whose sovereignty and interests is it that is being protected by the Lee dynasty in Singapore then? In any other self respecting state a spy in the service of a foreign country would be executed or punished for being in the service of a foreign country against the interests of his own.

In Singapore a foreign spy was made president by a spy who became Prime Minister. Who does Singapore really belong to? who do its people serve? How long will its Malay population remain well fed birds in chauvinistic a Chinese cage?

MORE THAN MERE DOUBLE STANDARDS

“Having taken Japanese lessons since 1942 before Singapore was occupied, he worked as a Military Intelligence Officer to translate Allied wire reports for the Japanese, as well as being the English-language editor on the Japanese Hodobu (an information or propaganda department) from 1942 to 1943.”

Nothing unusual about the standards of political morality Singapore practices when one considers the convenience of opium and heroin money of the likes of Lo Sin Han. The Burmese warlord and drug king’s money when combined with the heady mix of the high morals of Singapore’s rulers is volatile and immoral.

Politics does indeed make some very strange bedfellows. Whilst Lo’s lowly and desperate drug mules are regularly hanged at Singapore’s Changi prison, that state willingly and happily helps Lo manage and launder his ill gotten drug money in commercial partnerships and joint ventures (Helen Vatsikopolous Dateline SBS 2002) through Tamasek.

At the same time whilst preaching security, order, law and good international relations, Charter industries of Singapore, the government owned small arms manufacturer sells to anyone willing to buy. That includes the explosives sold to the Tamil Tigers which they used to assassinate Rajiv Gandhi.

Lo’s army too is a beneficiary of arms manufactured and purchased from Charter industries as do many other clandestine and separatist groups in the region. That’s the morality of the white uniformed PAP who now stand in judgement of Mahathir and the Malays. This is high ground morality of the Chinese of the region who find the UMNO and NEP handouts so immoral and disturbing that they will support Lee in destabilsing Malaysia, in calling for Mahathir’s blood and in agitating for the abolishment of the NEP which the Chinese consider much more immoral than Guns, Drugs and blood money.

LEE’s SINGAPORE AND THEIR PERCEPTION OF MALAYS

Lee Kuan Yew thinks very little of a Malay who is independent and can think for himself. They irritate him. He is unashamedly on record espousing the theories of Nietzsche and Manu in a more distorted way when describing Malays and Indians in comparison to Chinese. His interpretation of Nitszche appears closer to that of Hitler’s interpretations of the concepts of untermenschen and ubermenschen than any others.

A self proclaimed student of genetics and avid believer in the politics of racial superiority, he conveniently places the Chinese squarely over their “inferior” Malay and Indian counterparts using apocryphal documents and theories to justify his pallid position. Why and how Lee believes in these theories of convenience ? David Barr’s thesis reveals the illusions behind the man and how he manufactures evidence in support of his theories shifting it and his position when it suits the occassion and the argument.

A perfect model for understanding Naom Chomsky’s “manufacturing consent”. Lee and his coeterie of bullies have never given up that idea that the federation is their territory. His conduct reveals the delusions of grandeur of the man and his beliefs in a near divine right to rule the area assisted by a willing sea of commercially astute but also ruthless cadre of settled Chinese in the region who act as his fifth coloumn.

Secondly and more importantly it is because of the crude assumption that Mahathir as a Malay could not possible have achieved what he did achieve in his years as a Prime Minister when someone as high profile and Chinese as the late Tan Siew Sin (former Malaysian Finance Minister) failed dismally in all his time at the helm to achieve even a fraction of what Mahathir managed.

THE MYTH OF LEE KUAN YEWS ECONOMIC GENIUS

Contrary to the popularly built up myth of Singapore being the result f Lee Kuan Yew’s genius which he constantly allows his media to spin about him, it was not Lee’s economic genius that made Singapore but that of Dutch economist Albert Winsemius. Lee was merely an enforcer of the designs of Britain and the other foreign investors in Singapore.

Lee shamelessly takes credit for Singapore’s economic successes to this day. Singapore could in truth be run by a combination of South American banana republic dictators and still turn out prosperous because it is a natural port situated at the confluence of the great sea lanes linking east and west north and south and no genius need plan for its prosperity. Certainly not Lee Kuan Yew. And his demise will prove that.

Without wanting to take too much away from Lee and the myths about his genius, the evidence shows that he clearly was a catalyst in a series of events that produced the outcomes that is Singapore today. In reality it was a combination of those factors of politics, position, need and greed both natural and human that conspired to create the island states success. Not the singular work of Lee Kuan Yew.

With Mahathir’s Malaysia the odds were stacked against the Malay. His successes were for most part the efforts of a singular mind. His methods equally Machiavellian but not brutal and inhumane. The odds against him innumerable and immeasurable. But being Malay those odds were even greater. Such achievement by a Malay is considered in the minds of mainly Chinese Malaysians and Singaporeans to be an impossibility. Therefore something had to be wrong and the rumour mill began to run.

THE SINGAPORE CHINESE MYTH

Singapore’s success has nothing to do with Chinese ingenuity, hard work, higher work ethics or superiority over the Malays in commerce. A confluence of vital security, strategic and commercial interests converge out of necessity and convenience at the point of that island state because of its position to make it what it is.

The ruling party of Singapore has a lot to do with a servile mindset that dominates their political landscape like the rusty old retainers of a forgotten colonial past. Minions who continue to serve their white masters dressed in those same white cotton outfits the British forced them wear in the colonial days to make them appear clean (knowing how dirty the Chinese could be physically, metaphorically and morally) when dealing with them. It was symbolic then as it is now. Purely symbolic.

BETRAYAL A SINGAPOREAN STAPLE

How could one forget the betrayal of trust the Sultan of Brunei placed in the late Khoo Teck Puat and Khoo’s theft of hundreds of millions of the Sultan’s money all under the full view of Singapore’s treasury officials who were the Sultan’s technical experts at the time?

From Phillipines to Brunei from Indonesia to Malaysia (his greater China) Lee and his Singapore believe that their economic model is a recipe for self righteous hegemony through the politics of money and the use of intimidation and mischief through Chinese merchants in the area.

Sadly for the delusional Lee that day will not come. Because like all dictators in history, he too will suddenly realise that he is human and fallible (or events ill remind him of the fact) and that not everyone can be bought through fear and intimidation, cleaner streets or better paid jobs. That’s why Lee Kuan Yew is in a hurry to leave as his legacy a Chinese dominated Malaysia, his lifelong dream.

MAHATHIR IS NO LEE AND NEVER ASPIRED TO BE

The Chinese of Malaysia often draw comparisons between Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew without the facts. In order to denigrate the Malays they reinforce their racial stereotyping of Chinese and Malays referring to Lee in glowing terms of the spin that’s become part of the Lee Kuan Yew Myth and Mahathir in terms of the Kuomintang and Singapore fed rumours about the man.

Mahathir does not share a similar vision for Malaysia as Lee does nor does he have a similar mercenary family background to Lee. And nor were or are his people rejects of their own ancestral societies driven to extremes. Mahathir and Lee were moulded out of totally different fires and made of an equally different metal.

Mahathir was educated against all odds as a medical doctor in a society where Malays and Muslims were excluded from any form of social, political, economic or academic attainment unless appropriately socially connected at the time.

He received no patronage like Lee from his mother Chua Jim Neo’s ’special friend’. He did not taunt his classmates before exams so that they possible performed badly (James Minchin: No Man is an Island) allowing him to do better then be called a genius.

DEMOCRACY VS A DICTATORSHIP

Nowhere in this planet is there evidence of an ethnic Chinese running a democratic state. Autocratic, fascist yes. But democratic no. The Malays like their Indian counterparts have long held traditions of collective government. It may not have been referred to in their vocabulary as democracy but the characteristics have always been there. It may sound a bit unkind and I would like to be proved wrong on this score.

The same cannot be said of Chinese communities anywhere who have traditionally succumbed to and strangely thrived under ruthless iron fisted totalitarians and tyrants. And the Kuomintang is no stranger to the politics of fascism and brutality either. Their influence in corrupt government’s of south East Asia that fed a communist insurgency everywhere in the region from Indo China to Indonesia and Malaysia is legend.

The entire idea of Lee Kuan Yew’s hard driving carrot and stick policies is anathema to the soul of the Malays. To the Malays the success of one of their own in the politics of liberal democratic industrialization in the form of Malaysia by Dr. Mahathir is therefore understandably hard for the Chinese to swallow. The Malays are a comfortable blend of both east and west unlike the Chinese at least in south east Asia.

Mahathir could fight an adversary from within and without Malaysia without the need to tie their hands behind their backs to win. He did not jail dissenters simply for being dissenters. He has not used Malaysia as a base to destabilise Singapore nor to benefit financially from the misery inflicted by the tyrants in his neighbourhood on their people.

The same cannot be said of Lee or his Singapore. Mahathir turned out to be more successful in achieving economic, industrial and technical progress for Malaysia within a relatively more advanced pluralistic and democratic framework than Lee could ever have dreamed of. The Chinese of the region are angered by it. It is as painful to them as it is proving to a Christian that the resurrection of Christ never occurred.

Mahathir had 25 Million people in their diverse forms to satisfy and to manage. Lee had a generic class of a mere 3 million mainly Chinese with all of the economic, political and military backing of Britain, Australia, the US and yes even China. Mahathir for his independence in thought and deed stood alone.

The results must have been devastatingly painful to the Chinese psyche. God after all turned out not to be Chinese. Perish the thought. So the Chinese of Malaysia (at least those who will not speak out) have joined this unholy chorus of criticisms against Mahahtir and thinking Malays in an unsubtle demonstration of where their true loyalties lie.

Inspite of the strength of available evidence against them, the same insult on corruption is never applied to any of the non Malays of the region like the Chinese by the so called opposition in the region. So deep run these prejudices that rumour is often the fuel of many a debate in places like Malaysia and Singapore.

All of Malaysia’s dynamic changes, Mahathir achieved in much a shorter time than Lee’s six decades of pain and oppression Lee had inflicted on his people to get his results. Sure Singapore is impressive. But so too is the local Westfield shopping mall when compared to its surrounds the suburbs and the different stimuli and responsibilities and problems that drive each of these. Its like comparing chalk to cheese.

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MALAYS IN LABOUR - WILL IT INCREASE WITH THE JOHOR CORRIDOR?

Malaysia (warts and all) remains an oasis in a sea of cultural chauvanism. Thailand, Indonesia (till only recently) Viet Nam, Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia all had till recently prohibited the use of Chinese characters in any form from public display. Outside shops, temples or other public places the use of and the displays of Chinese cultural icons and language was prohibited by law. Malaysia remained outside this sphere of intolerance.

Singapore uypped the ante not to be outdone in the field of racial discrimination applying a unique form of racial and cultural discrimination. Created in its attempts to subdue the Malay Nationalism within the island and to render their culture subject to that of the engineered Chinese majority community Singapore introduced Mandarin as its national language alongside the English language. In doing so it achieved its purpose of rendering the entire Malay population culturally and politically impotent.

PORK AND ALCOHOL TWO NON TARIFF BARRIERS TO MALAY EMPLOYMENT

In Malaysia on the other hand as is the case in Singapore, there is significant though subtle discrimination in employment against the Malays even to this day. It manifests itself in non tariff barriers set in employment in one of the largest sectors of the economy and employment, the food, beverages and hospitality industry.

In the context of Asia, food and beverages remain one of the most important and lucrative industries and will continue to outperform most others even in times of economic distress. Food beverages and hospitality are two of Malaysia’s largest employers and contributors to its gross domoestic product. Yet Malay patcicipation in this lucrative field of economic activity is deliberately stiffled and curtailed.

Now here’s the trick. Most restaurants and hotels which are statistically in a majority run by the Chinese, sell or cook food either with pork or pork fat or some element of pork as an ingredient. The manufacture, sale and consumption of alcohol another very significant industry from which the Malays are excluded for religious reasons is also Chinese dominated.

Fully aware of the consequence to Malays of the presence of these ingredients and material in food and beverages, very few previous or for that matter even the current Malaysian government have ever advocated to find alternatives to redress the imbalance created by this non tariff barrier to employment of Malays. The result is that it has become a tool of exclusion preventing and excluding Malays from employment in an important and a vital industry in Malaysia.

Pork is not a life saving necessity nor something that cannot be suitably and painlessly substituted with say,soy substitutes, beef, mutton, venesin or poultry. Yet it is conveniently and widely used in Malaysia by its Chinese population without protest or complaint by it Malay population save in some minority quarters.

The fact they the Malays and their government have not taken any active measures to end Chinese monopoly of this highly lucrative of sectors in the economy although harmful to their culture says a lot about Malay generosity the Chinese are not prepared to acknowledge.

It is examples such as these which conveniently get lost in the heat of arguments against the NEP and Malays. This level of inter racial tolerance is likely to be lost in a Singaporean Chinese dominated Johor corridor. Malays will be further driven into the hinterland or be reduced to being token Chinese like they are in Singapore today.

The consequence of all of the generosity of the Malays and their government is conveniently lost and conveniently forgotten by the Chinese. Whats not remembered is that the Malays in their own country are as they have been for decades, excluded from any form of meaningful employment or participation in an industry so large as the food and beverages sector to which they could contribute more significantly.

Food and beverage is an industry in which the Chinese have a stranglehold and monopoly over which for a long time has underwritten their individual and communal wealth. Entry barriers are low and turnover and profits high.

CONCLUSION

In the earlier days before people like Mahathir intervened, the Chinese middle men reduced Malay rice growers of the north to poverty. It was a feat celebrated by the British as Chinese ingenuity over the Malays. The Malays could do well to demand their government impose a punitive tax on the sale of pork and alcohol in all its forms. It will achieve the necessary balance of allowing the Chinese the freedom to eat pork in public places and others to consume alcohol also in public places for a price. That price has to reflect the disadvantage to the Malay economy.

An opportunity to redress this imbalance where Malays are excluded from places where the the use of pork and alcohol is served can be achieved by imposing license requirements on all premises that sell pork and alcohol which would undoubtedly provide a windfall to government and redressing the imbalance in the process.

More importantly the government of Tun Razak Najib ought to be made to publicly disclose the terms and conditions of the sale of water to Singapore and the sale of the Johor corridor to Singaporeans. And if necessary a referendum on these matters held. If they are found to be not in the interests of Malaysians it ought to be overturned.

The Chinese know that they will not be able to overthrow and set up in its place a non Malay led government. That’s not possible as long as there are sufficient numbers of Malays to constitute a majority in the population.

The Chinese alternative aided by Singapore is now to grab as much land as is possible under terms and conditions that have been kept a secret from Malaysians and to introduce large numbers of imported Chinese labour as has been the case throughout the developing world in Asia and Africa and to spread Chinese economic and cultural hegemony throughout the region.

It will happen. And Lee Kuan Yew wants it to happen before he dies. Bahasa Melayu will be replaced as the main language with Mandarin. If thats taking it the message too far, take a look at Singapore, a former Malay territory and prove me wrong.

Taken from KitaGempur.com

Protes karikutur hina nabi hari ini

Perkasa akan menyerahkan bantahan kepada Duta Sweden di Wisma OSK, Jalan Ampang Kuala Lumpur hari ini Khamis Mac 25hb 2010.

Ini adalah untuk menyuarakan bantahan terhadap tiga suratkhabar Sweden yang menyiarkan gambar karikutur Nabi Muhammad oleh pelukis katun Sweden, Lars Vilks dalam keadaan yang cukup biadap dan begitu menghina.

Mari kita berkumpul di Wisma OSK untuk bersama-sama menyuarakan ketidak puasan hati kepada sikap kurang ajar media dan pelukis katun Sweden terhadap junjungan kita Nabi Muhammad s.a.w. Sweden pada pukul 11 tengahhari hari dan berikan masa hingga 1 tengahhari.

Ini adalah fardhu kifayat terhadap semua kita ummat Islam. Nampaknya pihak media Sweden masih berdegil untuk mencetak semula katun yang dipersoalkan.

Boikot barangan Sweden.

Pemerintah Melayu lemah jiwa, Tunduk propaganda jahat bangsa asing

Perkasa, Ibrahim dan kedudukan Melayu

Majlis perasmian mesyuarat agung pertama Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa) yang dijadualkan pada 27 Mac ini, tiba-tiba menjadi isu.

Sultan Selangor, Sultan Sharafuddin Shah yang pada mulanya bersetuju untuk merasmikan mesyuarat tersebut, telah membatalkan hasrat baginda. Menurut kenyataan Istana Selangor, pembatalan tersebut bagi mengelak kontroversi dan manipulasi pihak tertentu.

Perkembangan tersebut membuatkan Perkasa terutama Presidennya, Ibrahim Ali tersentak. Lebih menimbulkan rasa tidak senang Perkasa ialah laporan akhbar The Sun yang mendakwa Sultan Selangor telah menasihati Perkasa agar mengurangkan sikap ultra-Melayu.

Dalam reaksinya, Ibrahim menafikan Sultan Selangor ada menyebut hal itu dalam pertemuan dengan baginda.

Awang bersimpati dengan apa yang menimpa Perkasa. Kelantangannya memperjuangkan kepentingan Islam dan Melayu di bawah kerangka perlembagaan negara, mendapat tentangan daripada banyak pihak khususnya bukan Melayu.

Pihak-pihak berkenaan dengan disokong secara halus oleh gerakan pembangkang memainkan sentimen kononnya Perkasa ultra-Melayu, rasis, cauvinis dan pelbagai label lagi. Malah dalam blog pemimpin DAP dan portal berita Malaysiakini, ada tulisan yang menyifatkan Perkasa sebagai kelahiran semula syaitan. Strategi mereka adalah untuk melemahkan Perkasa, yang kini mendapat sokongan meluas masyarakat Melayu. Sememangnya ada golongan yang tidak mahu NGO Melayu yang menjadi sekuat Perkasa. Pada mereka, tidak mengapa jika NGO bukan Melayu hebat tetapi NGO Melayu mesti lemah. Jika NGO bukan Melayu menjadi begitu berpengaruh dan rasis, itu adalah hal biasa yang menjadi tuntutan. Anehnya Perkasa yang baru setahun jagung usianya sudah dilihat sebagai ancaman.

Awang ingin bertanya kepada semua, siapakah paling lantang dan ke hadapan mempertahankan kedaulatan institusi raja Melayu ketika dihina, jika bukan Perkasa. Di mana suara NGO bukan Melayu dan tauke-tauke kaya raya ketika Raja-Raja Melayu dicabar?

Ketika ramai tunduk tidak yakin, siapakah yang tanpa gentar dan secara konsisten mempertahankan kepentingan Melayu sewaktu diasak pelbagai pihak selepas Pilihan Raya Umum ke-12, jika bukan Perkasa.

Siapakah yang menjunjung martabat Islam daripada penghinaan banyak penjuru jika bukan Perkasa, beberapa NGO Islam serta Melayu yang lain.

Siapakah yang menjadi perisai mempertahankan perlembagaan daripada dicabar dan ditulis semula, kalau bukan NGO seperti Perkasa. Ternyata Perkasa di bawah kepimpinan Ibrahim mencetuskan keyakinan baru di kalangan orang Melayu.

Janganlah lupa jasa Perkasa. Usahlah terjebak dengan muslihat pihak yang mahu menggugat pertubuhan itu atas motif yang sebenarnya mudah difahami.

Sesungguhnya Awang amat bersyukur dan berterima kasih kerana Perkasa dan beberapa NGO Melayu lain telah membantu menyelamatkan tunjang politik Melayu di negara ini daripada runtuh hasil satu konspirasi besar kesan pilihan raya umum lalu, yang hampir mencapai kemuncaknya.

Itu yang menjadikan Perkasa amat istimewa. Maka majlis pada 27 Mac ini akan tetap bermakna buat orang Melayu. Lebih-lebih lagi kehadiran negarawan, Dr. Mahathir Mohamad yang akan merasmikannya menggantikan Sultan Selangor. Lebih 10,000 dijangka menghadiri majlis tersebut yang akan diadakan di Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putra dalam acara yang penuh istiadat Melayu.

Sebagai tanda penghargaan atas pengorbanan Perkasa, Awang yang sekadar insan kerdil, membatalkan acara lain yang telah Awang beri komitmen lebih awal, semata-mata untuk hadir pada majlis Perkasa nanti biar sekalipun berdiri di luar dewan. Kalau Mahathir sanggup pulang awal dari misi lawatan ke luar negara hanya untuk bersama-sama Perkasa, mengapa tidak kita.

Usahlah menjadi Melayu di tanah air ini, jika kita terlalu takut dan mengikut telunjuk pihak yang sedangpun menghakis kedudukan Melayu.

Awang bukan jenis itu.

Sumber: Utusan Malaysia

Komen mengenai Model Ekonomi Baru (Bhg 2)

Bersambung dari Bhg 1

2) Sistem Pendidikan Negara

a) Dewasa ini, kepincangan di dalam Sistem Pendidikan Negara amat ketara dirasakan. Bermula dengan penggubalan Akta Pendidikan 1996, halatuju sistem pendidikan kita semakin kabur dan tidak menentu.

Masalah polarisasi kaum juga makin menjadi-jadi. Ini terjadi kerana kanak-kanak tidak diperkenalkan antara satu sama lain dan dipisahkan oleh sistem pendidikan kita yang sekarang ini lebih mengutamakan sekolah vernakular dari sekolah kebangsaan.

Buktinya, banyak sekolah vernakular Cina dan Tamil mendapat berjuta-juta wang peruntukan dan sekolah kebangsaan dibiarkan sahaja. Malah peruntukan untuk sekolah berasrama penuh dikurangkan. Ada juga peruntukan di IKM dan MRSM dikurangkan hingga lebih 50%. Yang untung adalah bukan Melayu, yang rugi Melayu.


b) Sistem Pendidikan Negara mesti berpaksikan Bahasa Malaysia dan perlu diselarikan tanpa berkiblatkan negara China atau India. Ini membolehkan semua kaum berinteraksi dan berkenalan antara satu sama lain sejak dari kecil dan kaum Melayu boleh berkeyakinan untuk bertanding dengan kaum lain apabila meningkat dewasa kelak.

Penekanan yang lebih kepada sekolah vernakular telah mengecewakan kaum Melayu. Malah sistem ini tidak selari dengan perlembagaan Malaysia. Ianya melahirkan rakyat yang tidak tahu menahu antara satu sama lain dari peringkat kecil. Ini tidak sejajar dengan intipati perlembagaan yang mahukan masyarakat yang harmoni dan sejahtera.


c) Kajian menyeluruh perlu dibuat untuk mengukur keberkesanan sistem pendidikan negara. Oleh kerana, sekolah kebangsaan tidak popular di kalangan bukan Melayu, maka ianya perlu dirombak untuk menarik lebih ramai bukan Melayu ke dalamnya. Amat malang apabila PPSMI di hapuskan. PPSMI merupakan salah satu pemangkin yang akan menarik minat bukan Melayu terhadap sekolah kebangsaan.

Pertolongan berlebihan terhadap sekolah vernakular perlulah dikurangkan kerana ianya membazir dan tidak memberi apa-apa kebaikan kepada orang Melayu. Malah IKM dan MRSM terpaksa berkorban akibat wang peruntukan mereka terpaksa diberi kepada sekolah vernakular.

Bahasa Malaysia perlu diberi penekanan di dalam sistem pendidikan kita. MCA baru-baru ini telah mengemukakan cadangan yang condong kepada DAP dan Dog Jiao Zong dimana mereka menekankan agar kerajaan membina lebih banyak sekolah vernakular Cina. Adakah BN dan UMNO akan mendapat lebih banyak undi dengan cara ini? Tidak sama sekali. Dalam politik dimana sistem pendidikan yang menjadi percaturannya, yang akan menang adalah DAP dan kaum bukan Melayu.


3) Kelemahan kerajaan membendung anasir-anasir anti Melayu.

a) Apabila anasir-anasir Melayu dengan semberono menyindir dan mempersendakan elemen-elemen yang berkaitan Melayu, kelemahan kerajaan di dalam menangani permasalahan ini mengakibatkan tiada rasa hormat kaum bukan Melayu terhadap kerajaan dan Melayu khususnya. Sebagai contoh :

i) Ketiadaan usaha konkrit membidas buku Dr Kua Kia soong yang memfitnah UMNO, Tun Razak, Harun Idris dan Tun Mahathir di mana para pemimpin Melayu tersebut difitnah membunuh kaum Cina semasa peristiwa 13 Mei, 1969.
ii) Agensi kerajaan seperti polis dan askar diperlekeh sesuka hati oleh pihak pembangkang tanpa dipertahankan oleh ahli politik dan para menteri kerajaan.
iii) Institusi Di Raja dihina sebegitu sekali tanpa kawalan.
iv) Sering memberi muka kepada kehendak kaum bukan Melayu.

- Akhir -

Komen mengenai Model Ekonomi Baru (Bhg 1)

Fasa pertama Model Ekonomi Baru akan dilancarkan pada Mar 30hb, 2010. Dari situ, kerajaan akan cuba mendapatkan feedback dari semua pihak. Difahami bahawa pelancaran MEB akan dibuat pada pertengahan tahun bersamaan dengan pengumuman Rancangan Malaysia ke 10.

Bagi Bumiputera, suatu timbal balas perlu diberi kepada kerajaan. Kepentingan kaum yang merupakan lebih 60% penduduk negara ini dan orang asal tanahair ini tidak boleh diketepikan. Ini sebab legasi penjajahan meninggalkan ekonomi negara yang ditinggalkan kepada penguasaan kaum immigren.

Berikut adalah pandangan berkaitan dengan MEB:

1) Pembentangan Model Ekonomi Baru

a) Majlis Penasihat Ekonomi yang akan melancarkan Pelan Model Ekonomi Baru dipenuhi dengan bukan Melayu.

i) Datuk Andrew Sheng (Bank Negara)
ii) Datuk Nicholas S. Zefrey
iii) Dr. Yukon Huang (Asian Development Bank)
iv) Dr. Homi J.Kharas (World Bank)
v) Dr. Danny Quah (London School of Economics)

Berbanding dengan:

vi) Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak ( USM)
vii) Datuk Dr. Zainal Asnam Mohd Yusof
viii) Dr. Mahani Zainal Abidin(ISIS)

Dan setiausaha – Dr. Norma Mansur (UM)

Apa kepastian bahawa komposisi majoriti yang terdiri dari kaum bukan Melayu akan menguntungkan masyarakat Melayu secara umum?


b) Mengapa perbincangan Model Ekonomi Baru dibuat secara tidak jelas? Adakah rakyat khasnya kaum Melayu hanya perlu menelan segala yang dibentangkan kelak? Mengapa tiada website atau portal untuk membolehkan kerangka model ekonomi ini dibincangkan oleh umum? Badan-badan Melayu seperti Gabem, DPMM dan Perkasa dipinggirkan semasa proses merangka model ekonomi baru ini.


c) Pada bulan Oktober 2009, Perdana Menteri mengisytiharkan bahawa Dasar Ekonomi Baru akan dimansuhkan kerana tidak berjaya mencapai sasaran. Daripada ekuiti 2% pada 1970, hingga 20%, adakah ini tidak diertikan sebagai kejayaan?

Masalah kaum Melayu di sektor swasta amat ketara dimana diskriminasi terhadap kaum Melayu oleh majikan bukan Melayu berleluasa. Sektor swasta menyumbang lebih 10 juta pekerja dan sektor awam lebih kurang sejuta. Akan tetapi, oleh kerana desakan kaum bukan Melayu, sektor awam dibuka dengan luas kepada bukan Melayu hinggakan pembahagian kontrak oleh kerajaan juga dikenakan kaedah meritokrasi yang akan merugikan kontraktor Melayu. Padahal pemberian kontraktor oleh sektor swasta masih kekal ditangan kaum bukan Melayu.

Kerajaan sepatutnya mengkaji kedua-dua sektor awam. Setelah sektor-sektor ekonomi diliberalisasi sedikit demi sedikit, apakah yang tinggal untuk Melayu?


d) Kesan paling mudah dilihat akibat sewenang-wenangnya membuka pasaran tanpa mengambil kira kepentingan Melayu ialah dengan mengukur kadar ekuiti Melayu sejak Mac 2009. Adakah ia menurun atau meningkat dari 18%? Setelah pemansuhan Kementerian Pembangunan Usahawan dan Liberalisasi mengenai IPO, adakah ekuiti kita sudah meningkat? Adakah Ekuinas, yang hingga sekarang masih belum beroperasi sepenuhnya (walaupun ekonomi Melayu sudah kehilangan MECD) sudah menolong meningkatkan kadar 18% tersebut?

Melayu sudah kehilangan banyak di dalam IPO apabila kadar pemberian saham dikurangkan hingga 50%. Kaum bukan Melayu mendapat habuan besar apabila tiada lagi sekatan dikenakan. Beberapa bulan lepas, PNB membuka dan menjual peruntukan unit-unit saham yang dikhaskan untuk bumiputera kepada kaum bukan Melayu atas nama pasaran terbuka. Ini akan meningkatkan lagi kadar pegangan ekuiti bukan Melayu. Apabila mereka meningkat, adakah kita juga meningkat?


e) Terbaru, Datuk Husni Hanadzlah berkata bahawa kerajaan tidak takut terhadap risiko politik apabila membentangkan Pelan Model Ekonomi Baru nanti. Apabila rakyat umum dan Melayu khasnya tidak dapat tempat di dalam perbincangan yang membincangkan hala tuju perjalanan ekonomi mereka, kemungkinan besar risiko yang akan dihadapi oleh kerajaan terlalu besar untuk di atasi.


f) Adalah menjadi norma masyarakat kita untuk berpaling kepada konsep-konsep moden kononnya menunjukkan kita berpendidikan tinggi. Konsep seperti meritokrasi hanya boleh diamalkan di dalam sesuatu Negara jika semua kaum terdiri di atas ‘level playing field’.

Jika kadar per kapita antara kaum masih tidak sama, mana mungkin meritokrasi akan berlaku adil. “Equality in outcome” mesti juga diutamakan seperti “Equality in opportunity”.

Ambil contoh kajian oleh MP Alan Miburn di Britain pada Julai tahun lepas, dimana sistem meritokrasi didalam sistem pendidikan di Britain mengakibatkan jurang pendapatan semakin besar antara yang kaya dan yang miskin hinggakan mereka ingin kembali kepada ‘affirmative scheme’ yang membolehkan orang miskin memasuki universiti dan bekerja di syarikat-syarikat milik kerajaan.


g) Model Ekonomi Baru dikhabarkan memberi penekanan kepada :

i) Peningkatan GDP.
ii) High income economy (ekonomi pendapatan tinggi).
iii) Meritokrasi.

Fokus hendaklah tidak tertumpu kepada ekonomi makro sahaja. Penekanan harus diberikan ke atas meningkatkan pendapatan isi rumah (Melayu), mengurangkan kadar kemiskinan (Melayu), mengecilkan jurang pendapatan (antara Melayu dan kaum lain), membuka lebih banyak ruang pekerjaan (terutama di sektor swasta untuk Melayu) dan menangani inflasi.

Jika dalam jangka masa panjang, Model Ekonomi Baru membawa ke arah keburukan dengan tidak menyediakan platform untuk ‘level playing field’, Melayu akan kerugian akhirnya.

Suratkhabar Cina Babi persenda Melayu pertahan hak!

Apabila Suqiu, Dong Zong atau Hindraf mempertahankan hak mereka, kita bagai tidak ambil peduli. Malah ada yang cetek pengetahuan bersetuju pula dengan kumpulan kumpulan rasis ini. Tidak apa jika segala tuntutan mereka berdasarkan kepada fakta fakta yang menyeleweng dan berbaur hasutan.

Hari ini blogger Darah Tuah menulis mengenai penulisan timbalan editor suratkhabar Sin Chew Jit Poh yang dianggap keterlaluan. Disamping mempunyai banyak contoh perumpamaan yang tidak tepat, timbalan editor tersebut sanggup mengecam kumpulan yang mewakili berjuta-juta ahli sebagai mengigau dan pendek akal.

SIN CHEW JIT POH MEMPERSENDA 76 NGO MELAYU MENGIGAU DAN BERKHAYAL BERAMAI-RAMAI

1. Pada 27 Februari lalu, 76 buah NGO Melayu telah berkumpul di Kelab Sultan Sulaiman, Kg. Baru, Kuala Lumpur untuk bersatu/bergabung bagi mempertahankan hak-hak kaumnya yang semakin terhakis dan terancam.

2. Pada 2 Mac pula, Tay Ting Yan, Timbalan Editor SCJP, telah mengkritik dengan sinis usaha suci tersebut. Kritikannya bersandarkan fakta yang separa benar dan diputar-belitkan pula:

• Membandingkan kaum Melayu umpama orang kulit putih di Amerika dan kaum Han di China manakala orang Cina di negara ini pula umpama Red Indian di Amerika dan orang Tibet dan Uighur di China;

• Prakarsa 76 buah NGO Melayu itu adalah satu khayalan (Quixotic), umpama tindakan khayalan Don Quixote.

3. Fakta Tay adalah benar dari segi kedudukan bilangan majoriti / minoriti penduduk yang dibandingkan itu – Melayu / kulit putih / Han adalah golongan majoriti di negara masing-masing manakala kaum Cina / Red Indian / Tibet / Uighur adalah kumpulan minoriti di negara yang sama. SEMUA orang tahu hakikat ini.

4. Apa yang tidak benar ialah dari segi kedudukan ekonomi kaum / golongan yang dibandingkan itu. Kedudukan ekonomi kaum Melayu (majoriti) sama kedudukannya dengan ekonomi Red Indian / Tibet / Uighur (minoroti) iaitu berada di tahap yang lebih rendah dari orang Cina (minoriti) dan orang kulit putih / Han (majoriti). Hakikat ini juga diketahui oleh SEMUA orang.

5. Untuk berlaku adil dan tepat dari segi fakta, Tay sewajarnya membandingkan komposisi penduduk dan kedudukan ekonomi di Malaysia dengan negara-negara seperti Fiji dan Afrika Selatan, Uganda dan Rhodesia. Ianya sebanding di mana kaum minoriti / pendatang menguasai ekonomi negara-negara berkenaan.

6. Oleh kerana kedudukan ekonomi yang sedemikian terhimpit itu dan ditambah pula oleh hak dan kuasa yang semakin terhakis serta terus diburu dengan pelbagai ancaman maka adalah naïf dan dangkal sekali untuk menyamakan usaha 76 buah NGO tersebut hendak membela serta mempertahankan hak kaum mereka sendiri (satu hakikat yang benar) dengan perbuatan bodoh Don Quixote itu.

Sila baca sambungannya di SINI. Artikel asal Sin Chew juga boleh di dapati di dalam artikel tersebut. Apabila Utusan Malaysia bercerita mengenai Melayu, ada yang membantah. Jika Sin Chew melakukan perkara yang sama, tiada siapa antara pembaca setia mereka yang terkinja-kinja membantah penulisan tersebut.

(Atas permintaan Darah Tuah, semua komentar boleh ditujukan di sana. Terima kasih)

Melayu bergabung bawah Majlis Perundingan Melayu

PRESIDEN PERKASA, Datuk Ibrahim Ali (kanan) bersama ketua NGO yang hadir pada Pelancaran Majlis Perundingan Melayu (MPM) dan Menandatangani Watikah Pengisytiharan oleh wakil-wakil NGO di Kelab Sultan Sulaiman Kampung Baru, Kuala Lumpur, semalam.

Demi menjaga kepentingan bangsa, agama dan negara, 76 pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO) Melayu peringkat negeri dan kebangsaan hari ini bergabung di bawah satu payung yang dinamakan sebagai Majlis Perundingan Melayu (MPM).

Menurut Presiden Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Negara (Perkasa), Datuk Ibrahim Ali, MPM ditubuhkan demi menjaga maruah penduduk bumiputera terutamanya orang Melayu.

“Semakin jelas nampaknya berlaku tekanan terhadap hak dan keistimewaan orang Melayu di tanah air sendiri dan juga kedudukan agama Islam sebagai agama rasmi Malaysia.

“Bukan itu sahaja, MPM juga berperanan sebagai benteng yang mempertahankan kedudukan dan kedaulatan Kesultanan Melayu yang sering dipertikaikan,” jelas Ibrahim yang juga antara pengasas MPM.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika Majlis Pelancaran MPM dan juga majlis Menandatangani Watikah Pengisytiharan oleh wakil-wakil NGO yang menganggotai MPM di Kelab Sultan Sulaiman, Kampung Baru, di sini hari ini.

MPM bukan pertubuhan perkauman

Majlis Perundingan Melayu (MPM) yang dilancarkan hari ini bukanlah sebuah pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO) berbentuk perkauman walaupun ia berperanan sebagai pelindung hak orang Melayu. Salah seorang pengasas MPM, Tan Sri Abu Zahar Ujang berkata, MPM yang ditubuhkan dengan semangat Rukun Negara itu turut memainkan peranan sebagai penggerak bagi menghidupkan semangat generasi muda.

“Selain memperjuangkan hak orang Melayu, MPM juga berperanan mendidik generasi muda agar cintakan agama, bangsa dan negara. “Hari ini, hanya segelintir generasi muda Melayu yang berminat untuk melibatkan diri secara langsung dalam aktiviti patriotik sebegini,” jelasnya pada sidang media majlis pelancaran NGO itu di Kelab Sultan Sulaiman, Kampung Baru.

MPM ketika ini dianggotai oleh 76 NGO Melayu peringkat negeri serta kebangsaan dan jumlah berkenaan dijangka meningkat dari semasa ke semasa. Turut berlangsung di majlis pelancaran itu ialah Majlis Menandatangani Watikah Pengisytiharan oleh wakil-wakil NGO yang menganggotai MPM.

Beliau yang juga Presiden Majlis Bekas Wakil Rakyat (Mubarak) berharap, aktiviti yang akan dilaksanakan oleh MPM nanti akan mampu menggerakkan anak-anak muda Melayu.

Tambahnya, penubuhan MPM bukanlah untuk menggugat mana-mana pihak tetapi cuma bertindak umpama benteng dan pelindung kepada tanah air.

Sementara itu, Presiden Pertubuhan Pemikir Profesional Melayu, Prof. Datuk Dr. Kamarudin Kachar berkata, kerajaan pimpinan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak perlu menerima dengan hati terbuka segala usul yang akan diserahkan oleh MPM kepadanya.

Sumber: Pentas UMNO Bandar Puncak Alam

Dr. Mahathir kecewa parti Melayu tidak bantu kaum sendiri

Mingguan Malaysia, 31 Januari 2010

KUALA LUMPUR 30 Jan. - Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berkata, tiga parti utama orang Melayu iaitu UMNO, Pas dan Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) terlalu 'asyik' mendapatkan sokongan bukan Melayu sehingga tidak mempedulikan rintihan kaum mereka sendiri.

Bekas Perdana Menteri itu berkata, ketika ini apa jua tuntutan bukan Melayu, sama ada beralas undang-undang, Perlembagaan atau perjanjian lalu, akan dilayan oleh parti-parti berkenaan.

Beliau percaya tindakan itu berpunca daripada keyakinan mereka yang menyedari bahawa orang Melayu tidak mempunyai banyak pilihan ketika pilihan raya dan akan tetap menyokong mereka.

"Tidak perlu saya nyatakan apa yang menyebabkan kita berasa kecewa. Tetapi kita lihat orang yang dulu kata orang Islam jika berkawan dengan bukan Islam akan jadi kafir, sekarang peluk cium orang bukan Islam dan dihalalkan segalanya bagi mereka kerana orang Melayu tetap akan bagi sokongan.

"Ia bukan tindakan yang bijak. Orang Melayu rasa tidak boleh lagi bergantung pada parti-parti politik, sebab itu ditubuhkan pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO) untuk menyuarakan pendapat mereka," katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika berucap di hadapan lebih 2,000 hadirin pada majlis pelancaran Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa) Selangor di Dewan Serbaguna Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ), Hulu Kelang di sini hari ini.

Turut hadir, Menteri Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, Datuk Seri Noh Omar; Presiden Perkasa, Datuk Ibrahim Ali serta beberapa pemimpin NGO Melayu.

Dr. Mahathir menambah, terdapat beberapa NGO Melayu yang menemuinya dan menyatakan kekecewaan mereka terhadap kerajaan dan parti-parti pembangkang.

"Tetapi apa yang mereka boleh buat. Mereka kata, jika terlampau giat suarakan pendirian orang Melayu, mereka akan dituduh rasis dan mungkin juga diambil tindakan oleh pihak berkuasa.

"Akhirnya, mereka datang bertemu bekas Perdana Menteri yang sudah tidak bertaring. Mereka kecewa tetapi tidak dapat suarakan kepada pemimpin Melayu sama ada kerajaan atau parti lawan," ujarnya.

Beliau bagaimanapun mengingatkan orang Melayu agar melakukan protes secara tertib dan tidak melakukan kekacauan sehingga menghancurkan keamanan negara.

"Kalau mereka tidak dengar, kita ada kuasa dalam pilihan raya. Jangan gunakan cara yang boleh merosakkan keamanan.

"Tetapi saya bimbang, sekiranya keadaan ini berterusan, orang Melayu yang sekian lama memendam kekecewaan akan 'meletup'," katanya

Adakah tinggal Pertubuhan seperti Perkasa untuk diharap perjuangkan Melayu?

Pada pukul 2 tengahhari Sabtu 30hb Januari 2010, Perkasa Selangor akan melancarkan Perkasa negeri di Dewan Serbaguna MPAJ di AU5, Ulu Kelang Kuala Lumpur. Pelancaran ini dijadualkan akan disempurnakan oleh Mantan Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Semalam Utusan Malaysia melaporkan Dr Mahathir menyatakan kewujudan Pertubuhan-Pertubuhan seperti Perkasa lahir dari perasaan tidak puashati rakyat Bumiputera, khususnya bangsa Melayu terhadap polisi-polisi kerajaan yang dilihat mengenepikan hak keistimewaan Bumiputera yang tertera dalam artikel 153.

Pertubuhan seperti Perkasa muncul kerana suara tidak puashati ini wujud dan UMNO kini dilihat bagaikan lupa peranan utama UMNO dalam membela kaum Pribumi yang perlukan pembelaan dan diperjuangkan.

Laporan Utusan Malaysia tersebut diterbitkan berikut:

NGO Melayu makin dapat kepercayaan - Dr. M

KUALA LUMPUR 28 Jan. - Kemunculan beberapa pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO) berteraskan kepentingan Melayu dan Islam kebelakangan ini membuktikan kaum itu kurang yakin dengan perjuangan parti-parti politik yang mewakili mereka.

Bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berkata, situasi itu juga menyebabkan sesetengah NGO tersebut dilihat semakin aktif dari semasa ke semasa.

Dengan mengambil contoh Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa), beliau berkata, NGO itu dilihat sebagai antara yang paling berpengaruh di kalangan masyarakat Melayu kerana prinsip perjuangannya.

"Ada di kalangan masyarakat Melayu merasakan UMNO tidak lagi berupaya mempertahankan (kepentingan) mereka, jadi kita lihat kemunculan NGO seperti Perkasa.

"Walaupun mereka (Perkasa) aktif, namun (sebenarnya) UMNO masih lebih berpengaruh daripada NGO-NGO ini," katanya pada sidang media selepas menyampaikan ceramah pada program Bicara Perdana anjuran Perpustakaan Negara di sini hari ini.

Dr. Mahathir menjelaskan, perjuangan dan kepentingan bangsa Melayu perlu diutamakan kerana kaum itu merupakan kelompok majoriti di negara ini.

Sekiranya kepentingan Melayu tidak dijayakan, tegasnya, ia akan memberi kesan buruk kepada semua pihak di tanah air.

"Sekiranya perjuangan Melayu tidak dijayakan, maka perjuangan bangsa Malaysia juga tidak akan terlaksana," ujarnya.

Terdahulu dalam ucapannya bertajuk 'Sejarah Sebagai Gedung Pengalaman dan Khazanah Yang Bernilai', Dr. Mahathir berkata, masyarakat serta pemimpin negara ini perlu sentiasa mengingati insiden-insiden yang telah dilalui.

Sebagai contoh, dalam sesuatu perjanjian dengan pihak luar, tegasnya, para pemimpin negara harus memastikan ia tidak merugikan tanah air.

"Janganlah dalam sesuatu perjanjian itu kita kerugian dan kerugian itu pula kekal sehingga akhirat," tegasnya.

Ikutan dari laporan itu, Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Mahyuddin Yassin menjelaskan Perkasa adalah sebuah NGO dan UMNO masih perlu. Laporan The Malaysian Insiders berikut:

Muhyiddin: Umno key, not Perkasa

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 29 — Umno deputy president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin dispelled the notion today that Malay nationalist group, Perkasa, had become more influential than his party.

He said that NGOs like Perkasa had a role to play, but it is ultimately political parties that set the tone for the country.

“At this stage, certain quarters may see the role of NGOs as [getting] stronger, therefore it is seen that the NGO is more influential than a political party.

“But in the end, people will decide their future based on parties that will fight for their future. And it is not [the] NGOs that will stand for election,” he said

He also stressed that Umno remained the strongest of all the local political parties.

Perkasa, which began as a one man band after Election 2008, has been shaping up as a national pressure group to Umno that represents those seeking to defend the constitutional position of the Malays and the “social contract”.

For the past two months, the Perkasa national leadership has been going on road shows to officiate state level launches and to organise massive recruitment drives.

Muhyiddin further argued that that the role of NGOs could not be compared with that of the government.

“Don’t belittle the government; they are only NGOs. No NGO can be compared to what the government can achieve.

“The government is strong and the government is very clear in its direction,” he said.

He added that the government was now more open and people can evaluate its sincerity and commitment.

“We (Barisan Nasional) are clear (in our direction). We are committed, brave and ready.

“We want to ask, what is Pakatan Rakyat and the opposition state’s direction?” asked Muhyiddin.

Despite Muhyiddin’s strong words, Perkasa has grown in strength in recent times.

Yesterday, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said he believes Perkasa was increasingly popular within the Malay community because Umno was being seen as incapable of protecting their rights.

But the former Umno president said his party was still stronger than Perkasa, which was led by Pasir Mas MP Datuk Ibrahim Ali, a deputy minister during the former’s administration.

The ex-premier also affirmed that Perkasa’s popularity among the Malays was increasing because they represented a significant number of Malay opinions.

Penerangan Timbalan Presiden UMNO dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri teramat jelas tetapi mesejnya agak defensif.

Kenyataan Dr Mahathir adalah teguran tidak langsung kepada UMNO supaya jangan mengenepikan hak dan kepentingan orang Melayu. Sesuatu perubahan perlu ditangani tetapi hak dan kepentingan orang Melayu usah sekali diketepikan.

Dengan hanya mengatakan UMNO saja yang releven dan Perkasa diperkecilkan sebagai NGO, ianya seolah-olah Muhyiddin bersikap angkuh dan mengenepikan suara yang bertambah kuat dari orang Melayu yang dilaungkan melalui Perkasa. Dimanakah janji kepimpinan supaya kerajaan sedia mendengar suara rakyat?

Peringatan ini mudah saja, pihak kerajaan pimpinan UMNO perlu kreatif dan bijak membawa pembaharuan yang sekali gus tidak mengenepikan agenda membangun anak bangsa Pribumi asal negara tercinta ini.

Masaalahnya kerajaan terlalu bersikap copycat dan meniru polisi dari penasihat luar negara dan IMF tanpa mahu mencipta sendiri polisi yang mencapai pelbagai objektif.

UMNO usah sekali merasakan undi Melayu sudah terjamin hingga hak dan kepentingan Melayu boleh dikorbankan dan hanya digunakan sebagai retorik politik. Sikap sedemikian perlu dibuang kerana dalam usaha UMNO yang merupakan parti induk BN mahu memancing undi bukan Melayu, mereka sudah memberi terlalu banyak konsesi.

Konsesi ini walaupun dikatan untuk semua rakyat Malaysia, tidak menjaminkan orang Melayu mendapat bahagian mereka. Contohnya, rakyat pribumi adalah 65% penuduk negara ini. Mengapa pula program biasiswa tertentu dipecahkan menjadi 51%/49% antara Bumiputera dan bukan Bumiputera?

Politik sekarang adalah penuh intig dan tidak boleh dijangka. Jangan sampai UMNO berada dalam keadaan seperti perumpanaan "Yang dikendung keciciran, Yang dikejar tak dapat."

Allah: What in God's name have the Courts done?

The High Court of Malaysia’s decision in the Catholic Herald’s fight to use the word Allah is quite clearly provocative, contentious, inflammatory and suspect.

DOES THIS DECISION MEAN THE JUDICIARY IN MALAYSIA IS NO LONGER CORRUPT?

I wonder if Malaysia’s legal fraternity, who together with the Catholic Church in Malaysia once so willing to condemn the judiciary, will now be consistent in their opinions of the judiciary and condemn this decision as being the work of that same incompetent and corrupt institution.

Or does incompetence and corruption have a different interpretation when they are the beneficiaries of decisions by the same ‘corrupt and incompetent’ judges?

WHATS AT ISSUE HERE

At the core of this argument is the controversial and provocative use of a word Muslims have for centuries in countries like Malaysia adopted as their unique and inalienable right to reference to God. Christians including the Catholics used Deo or God equally for centuries in places like Malaysia to refer to the almighty.

Interestingly Catholics eschewed even the English language for centuries till Vatican 2. In its place on prescription was Latin. A language alien to many of its faithful who never quite understood a word of it at all.

The use of Latin as prescribed by the Vatican for centuries had been the subject of debate and irritation, let alone ridicule when seeing masses of illiterate Indian and Chinese peasants bowing before an alter, whilst Latin chants and hymns played out in centuries old rituals originating from their own cultures now distorted in a European Mid Eastern form imposed on them as worship.

WHY USE ALLAH AT ALL

At a time of much uncertainty and political upheaval, the Church an arm of the sovereign state of the Vatican has seen it fit to enter into the divisive domain of multi racial and religious politics.

One might legitimately argue that the church does have a role to play in defence of its faithful. But it would be hypocritical and unnecessary when one considers the position of the Catholic church, an undemocratic and unresponsive theocratic state, interfering in such matters that concern the internal affairs of another sovereign state, Malaysia.

The Church for centuries had a prohibition on the use of any other language than Latin. It eschewed anything remotely relevant to its many diverse adherents in an elitist totalitarian domination of the world in what is often described as an extension of the Holy Roman Empire.

Their argument in this case is that the word Allah had been used for decades in many places including Malaysia and that therefore gives them a constitutional right to continue to use it regardless of the ilogical circumstances and context to which it is applied.

Why does the Church seek to only use the word Allah which is both sinister and deceptive when applied particularly to Muslims from rural areas who could very easily be fooled into believing there is a nexus to Islam within the Church through its use of the word Allah? Why not the entire liturgy in Arabic from where the word Allah originates? Or perhaps the language of Malaysians Bahasa Malaysia?

WHY IS MALAY AND ARABIC SO IMPORTANT NOW TO CATHOLICISM- OR IS IT?
For centuries under European domination of the peninsula, Malay was treated as a lower and therefore copntemptuous and unworthy language limited in its use to a token in its broken form when addressing the original inhabitants of the peninsula the Malays. It was relegated to a level of insignificance at missionary schools and never was given any prominence for the same reasons the Church now seeks to capitalise on the use of the word Allah.

The church equated and associated the use of the Malay language in its proper form as a bridge to Islam and therefore actively discouraged its use till now.

The Pontiff, in the form of Nazi Ratzinger, not long ago called Islam evil and joined in an unholy chorus of anti Arabic (inspite of it having a relatively large constituency amongst Arabs) anti Islamic sentiment. Why now the backing for selective use of the dispised evil Arabic Allah? What is his real motive?

The Pope’s anti Islamic rhetoric was driven by the Vatican’s unquestioning support of American foreign policy however flawed and its other sychophant its new convert, Britain’s Tony Blair. Sadly that campaign now associated with the Catholic CHurch as well turned out to be a campaign of mass murder with no justifiable cause. It turned to be something reminsent of a modern day Spanish inquisition another unjustified bloody campaign by the Catholic church.

Ratzinger and his ambassadors cannot simply wash their hands of so much blood with a simple publicity campaign of “Reaching out to Islam”. They must act with deeds. When will the Church’s politics and interference in the affairs of other states stop? When will Catholics become an example for others to emulate?

A PYRRICH VICTORY A SINISTER PLOT

There is a political battle being fought out there for control of the hearts and minds of a large population of Sabahans and Sarawkians being engineered by both the Catholic church and their rivals for souls the American style evangelical Christians.

They will apply every Amway style of multi level marketing, sinister political and economic tools and bait to rope in as many disgruntled Malays and Muslims and galvanise them into a vote bank for the next general elections.

This practice is not much different to what they did to Indians in the rubber plantations and poorer Chinese offering them the incentives of a good Catholic school education of they did convert. The practice endures to this day in India where it is meeting stiff and violent resistance and quite rightly so.

Catholics frown and campaign against Malay Muslims proselytizing. At the same time suprisinglythey appear terribly oblivious, insensitive and ignorant to the pain this same phenomenon and “virtue” they inflict on Muslims, so offensive to Malay Muslims.

This would have been a different argument if the Catholics were seeking to use Bahasa Malaya in the entire liturgy to make it relevant to “Malaysians”. A matter so unconvinclngly argued by non Malays as being so deeply revered to their “heritage and identity as Malaysians” when it suits them. But sadly that’s not the case here.

What Catholics appear to be seeking here is an extension to that form of racism that whatever non Malays and non Muslims wish to do in the name of religion has to be tolerated in the name of a half written constitution. Whilst at the same time arguing against everything that the Malays as a majority in a democracy do as wrong and racist.

TOLERANCE IS NOT STUPIDITY

Catholics must learn to reciprocate in kind to a people in whose country they have been treated with much reverence, dignity and respect over centuries. Malaysia although fundamentally a Muslim state has, advocated for and advanced Catholic (and other religious causes and purposes) without the let or hindrance of religious intolerance like that imposed on them by the Thais, Burmese, Philippines, Australians, Chinese and more recently the Swiss.

Much of the reason we are able to debate such issues and to read and write about it today it is often argued is the result of a good Catholic education. Wrong! It is equally the result of Malay Muslim generosity in allowing the propagation of the faith, its schools and other institutions to thrive and its tolerance of their values.

It is a pity that in return all that the Catholic church has to offer is an insult to the Malays and Malay Muslims in pursuing such a worthless policy of provocation.

CONSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVE

There is a flawed perception that the constitution gives blanket freedoms to religious practices which it clearly does not do. The state always has residual powers in preservation of its sovereignity to amend or ignore aspects of the constitution. It happens everywhere in the commonwealth and elsewhere in the inerests of self preservation.

In this case in particular we have a foreign state the Vatican, by its local operatives the Church seeking to undermine national policy (however objectionable it may appear to some) through the sinister use of the constitution of its host state.

The Catholic church unlike Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and others is unique in that its directives come from a foreign government, that of the Vatican. It therefore becomes state policy of the Vatican.

The Church cannot therefore be arguing that some constitutional religious freedoms, inconsistent with its behaviour over the centuries have been violated here. It may not argue that using the word Allah alone is therefore somehow a constitutional right or a religious practice because it is neither.

Its pursuit of the proposition is clearly a provocation, when it knows full well there is resistance from the majority, Malaysia’s 60% Malay Muslims. A valid counter argument to the church’s position is that this entire exercise is an unlawful interference in the affairs of a state by a foreign government, the Vatican. Additionally the Church in adopting its controversial posiiton on the use of the word Allah, may inadvertantly be acknowledging the truth of the Quran which, if it is consciously doing may not be such a bad thing after all.

The Catholic church itself is not paragon of virtue nor the best example of a protector of its many faithful when one considers it conduct in favour of the rich and powerful against the abused in South America for centuries.

Closer to home its backing of Lee Kuan Yews attacks against a former priest (Fr. D’Souza) who had the courage to stand up for the rights of the oppressed in Singapore a decade or two ago. It is but one of many examples of the politics of expediency the Catholic church practices at the expense of the teachings of Christ.

The constitution in such cases must be read down and not up as appears to have been the case with the Catholic Herald (for want of a better description of the case) insistence on the provocative use o the word Allah.

THE CALIBRE OF JUGES DECIDING THESE CASES

In all of this one cannot help but wonder if the justices who decided this matter were of the same calibre of one retired justice NH Chan. NH Chan’s history of judicial incompetence and the embarassment of his analysis demonstrated in the Perak Constitutional Crisis, his record of illogical and substandard judicial decisions are sadly hailed by many leading lawyers (in Malaysia) including the much celebrated Appeals court judge Sri Ram Gopal as being exemplary and creditable.

Chan remains an icon to the defiance of the laws of reasoning when one reads his decisions, his capacity for argument and his grasp of legal issues apart from his embarassing inability to articulate himself with any form of conviction.

The constitution of Malaysia does not give license under the pretext of guarantees of religious freedoms to mischief or covert undermining of the peace and stability of the state. It is neither implied nor is it expressed in any form within the constitution. Yet this is clearly what the decision in this case implies.

WHAT THE CHURCH CAN DO TO FOSTER BETTER INTER FAITH TIES

In a demonstration of its faith in its own credo of Good Christian Charity and goodwill, the Catholic Church ought to withdraw the ridiculous and provocative demand now legtimised by a flawed decision. It should demonstrate that it ought not to be allowed the sinister use of one Arabic word Allah which is clearly a thorn in the side of its Malay majority hosts.

The Church may do so without any embarrassment to itself. On the contrary with one fell act of goodness and respect it would build a bridge of understanding likely to last forever as a monument to its credo, rather than for the blemishes in its record of insults, abuse, its betrayal to the colonials and the undermining of the cultural and religious sensitivities and heritage of Malaysia’s majority.

If this matter were to be put up for reviewed independently or in the event the government chooses to exercises its rights as a sovereign state in the reserve powers of government through the appropriate minister, the Church will find itself with a pyrrhic victory designed for fools in a constitution designed by Christians.

Gopal Raj Kumar

Isu kalimah Allah: Mahkamah tidak ambilkira asas kebebasan agama lain bersyarat

Penghinaan agama rasmi?

Oleh SHAMRAHAYU A. AZIZ

WALAUPUN isu sensitiviti agama sering menjadi topik perbincangan, masih ada pihak yang enggan menerima hakikat bahawa masyarakat kita memerlukan pendekatan lebih teliti untuk menangani isu ini. Ia begitu rumit dan tidak mudah untuk dibicarakan.

Isu penggunaan perkataan Allah dalam terbitan bukan berkaitan agama Islam adalah isu terkini yang dibincangkan. Walaupun belum ada larangan mahkamah mengenai penggunaannya, golongan ini harus faham bahawa masyarakat Islam di negara ini tidak berpuas hati dengan penggunaan perkataan 'Allah' sewenang-wenangnya.

Perlu diingat, kenyataan undang-undang seperti tafsiran mahkamah bukanlah satu faktor terbaik dalam menjaga keharmonian antara agama di negara ini. Keharmonian itu lebih bergantung kepada sifat faham-memahami, menghormati serta sifat bertoleransi antara satu sama lain.

Sifat memahami, menghormati dan bertoleransi ini bukan sahaja daripada aspek hubungan politik atau ekonomi, malah merangkumi sosial termasuk membabitkan antara agama.

Mungkin ramai yang menganggap sifat toleransi ini hanya mudah disebut di bibir, namun langkah sebenar mengamalkannya amat payah untuk dilakukan. Namun kita percaya, sifat-sifat tersebut telah lama wujud dalam masyarakat Malaysia.

Sifat-sifat itu menjadi penyumbang utama kepada kesejahteraan negara. Ia juga telah membawa Malaysia ke arah kecemerlangan dan kestabilan.

Setelah berjaya mengharungi pelbagai cubaan dan kepayahan untuk mengekalkan hubungan antara kaum dan agama, masyarakat seharusnya bertanggungjawab untuk tidak membuat sesuatu yang boleh memusnahkannya.

Menjadi tanggungjawab setiap ahli masyarakat untuk memastikan hubungan sosial kekal sempurna. Tanggungjawab itu termasuklah menghormati kepercayaan agama orang lain.

Perbuatan dengan cara perbuatan lahiriah atau penulisan perlulah sentiasa menghormati perasaan terutamanya sentimen keagamaan semua anggota masyarakat.

Seperti yang dimaklumi, agama adalah antara perkara sensitif. Semua anggota masyarakat harus sedar bahawa setiap ajaran agama mempunyai teras-teras tertentu yang tidak boleh dilunturkan. Ini kerana agama itu sendiri mempunyai ikatan tertentu yang mungkin tidak boleh difahami oleh pengikut agama lain.

Kita telah melihat pengalaman dunia yang mana peperangan malah penghapusan etnik berlaku atas alasan persengketaan agama.

Realiti mengenai peri penting kestabilan sosial, terutamanya dalam perkara berkaitan agama ini harus ditanam dalam fikrah setiap ahli masyarakat.

Daripada segi undang-undang, Perlembagaan Persekutuan mengiktiraf Islam sebagai agama bagi negara ini di dalam peruntukan Perkara 3(1). Perkara itu turut menjamin kedudukan agama lain dengan formula "aman dan damai".

"Islam ialah agama bagi Persekutuan; tetapi agama-agama lain boleh diamalkan dengan aman dan damai di mana-mana bahagian Persekutuan".

Formula "aman dan damai" ini belum pernah ditafsir oleh mahkamah.

Namun, daripada segi amalan, agama selain Islam tidak boleh diamalkan sekiranya ia mengganggu dan menggugat keadaan "aman dan damai" masyarakat negara ini.

Bahagian kedua Perkara 3(1) ini juga memberi pengertian bahawa, keharmonian dan toleransi antara agama perlu dititikberatkan supaya tidak menggugat kedudukan Islam sebagai agama rasmi negara.

Oleh itu, penggunaan perkataan 'Allah' oleh Herald Catholic boleh ditafsirkan sebagai menggugat kedudukan Islam sebagai agama rasmi negara ini. Ia juga boleh mencemar formula "aman dan damai" yang dimaktubkan di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Merujuk kepada isu penggunaan perkataan 'Allah', kita perlu melihat aspek baik dan buruk hubungan antara penganut agama dalam formula 'aman dan damai' itu.

Undang-undang, pada banyak ketika, tidak dapat menjadi penyelesaian kepada semua masalah terutama yang melibatkan emosi atau sensitiviti.

Contoh yang mudah, adakah kebenaran mahkamah untuk membenarkan suami berkahwin dengan isteri kedua dapat mengubat atau menjadi penawar kepada emosi isteri pertama yang amat terluka dengan tindakan suaminya?

Paling baik pun, setelah terpaksa menerima keputusan mahkamah tersebut, isteri pertama harus meneruskan hidup bermadu dengan tangisan di dalam hatinya. Ini dikatakan formula 'rela dalam paksa.' Formula 'rela dalam paksa' ini sudah pasti tidak akan menjamin kebahagiaan akan kekal lama.

Begitulah juga gambaran yang dapat dibuat mengenai kesan daripada penggunaan perkataan 'Allah' oleh Herald Catholic.

Selain Perlembagaan, undang-undang mengenai pengharaman penggunaan perkataan-perkataan yang suci dalam agama Islam telah lama wujud di dalam undang-undang di negeri-negeri. Ia termaktub dalam peruntukan undang-undang berkaitan kawalan dan sekatan penyebaran agama bukan Islam di kalangan orang Islam yang selari dengan peruntukan Perkara 11 (4) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Undang-undang ini adalah sebahagian daripada segmen perjanjian sosial antara kaum dan agama sewaktu proses mencapai kemerdekaan. Namun begitu, penguatkuasaan undang-undang tersebut masih belum begitu terserlah.

Undang-undang dan penguatkuasaannya mungkin bukanlah jalan terbaik atau jalan utama untuk menjamin keharmonian antara agama di negara kita, namun mempunyai undang-undang yang lengkap dan penguatkuasaan yang proaktif boleh mengawal selia hubungan baik antara agama.

Sesungguhnya, sifat faham-memahami berhubung kepercayaan agama, adat resam dan keperluan setiap golongan masyarakat adalah jalan terbaik untuk mencapai keharmonian di negara ini.

Sifat toleransi, seperti yang disebut adalah juga formula yang bergandingan dengan sifat faham-memahami antara satu sama lain. Sifat ini harus wujud dalam setiap jiwa dan raga rakyat.

PENULIS ialah Pensyarah Kuliyah Undang-Undang Ahmad Ibrahim, Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia.

Sumber: Februari 4, 2009

Satu Sekolah Semua: Lee Kuan Yew ngaku polisi dwibahasa gagal

SIngapura sering diguna pihak cauvanis CIna sebagai model negara maju, tetapi negara yang 75% kaum Cina pun tidak mengamalkan sistem sekolah vernakular. Malah Lee Kuan Yew sendiri memperakui sistem dwibahasa melibatkan bahasa CIna yang dijalankan di Singapura pun tidak berjaya.

Baca artikel berikut:

Anguish over bilingualism

INSIGHT DOWN SOUTH
By SEAH CHIANG NEE

There’s renewed debate over the decades-old language grind after surprising remarks by the architect of the republic’s bilingual education policy.

FOUR decades of bilingual education have been shaken up by its architect Lee Kuan Yew, who now says it was a mistake from the beginning.

In a rare self-criticism, the 86-year-old Minister Mentor blamed it on his own ignorance in thinking that people could easily master two languages.

It showed a side of him that Singaporeans rarely get to see or hear – expressing contrition in such harsh tones about himself for something he did four decades ago.

Over state TV, he said recently that he was “wrong” to have insisted on the bilingual policy, which was launched in 1966.

“At first I thought, you can master two languages. Maybe different intelligence, you master it at different levels,” he said, but after 40 years of learning it, he was convinced otherwise.

“We started the wrong way,” said Lee. “We insisted on ting xie (listening), mo xie (dictation) – madness!

“Nobody can master two languages at the same level. If (you think) you can, you’re deceiving yourself.”

As a result, Lee added: “Successive generations of students paid a heavy price, because of my ignorance, by my insistence on bilingualism.”

It was as close to a public apology as Singaporeans are likely to get.

Most observers saw it as his retraction of a major strategy that he introduced for his multiracial people. The republic’s bilingual system is watched with interest by many multiracial countries in Asia.

Under the system, aimed at bonding races and cultures, English is taught to all — but ethnic Chinese, Malay and Indian students need a mandatory pass in their own mother tongue.

The rationale is simple and logical. Singaporeans can communicate with each other, and the outside world, in English, as well as use it to earn a living. At home, however, they are encouraged to speak their mother tongue.

For the Malays and Indians, learning Bahasa Melayu and Tamil has not been too difficult, but among Chinese who hail from English-speaking homes, passing – let alone mastering – Chinese, a totally dissimilar language, is very tough.

Lee’s remarks were immediately taken by many Singaporeans as an indication that the government plans to do away with the policy.

This is unlikely to happen, particularly with the emerging economic power of China and Singapore wanting to serve as a bridge between Beijing and the West.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong quickly put paid to that speculation, saying: “To put it very simply, we are affirming our bilingualism policy. We have never wavered in this fundamental...”

However, PM Lee said, “We are in a dynamic situation because the position is changing, and we have been updating our policies progressively.” Lee Senior put the future this way: “It doesn’t matter what level (of Chinese) they reach, they will like the language, it is fun, and later on in life they’ll use it.”

The study of Chinese has undergone changes since 2004 that make the process less torturous for English-speaking Chinese.

The aim is for the average Chinese here to continue to be bilingual in English and Chinese, but without forcing him to master Chinese as well as English.

Those with higher abilities to do so could choose a fast and higher Chinese language track. Some have been sent to top universities in China.

The change of mind may have come too late for the hundreds of thousands who have gone through the language grind in the past four decades.

Many of them had adopted the attitude of just doing enough to pass exams, realising they wouldn’t need to use it for much of their working lives.

One out of four people surveyed said they considered it unnecessary to learn Chinese in this global world, where even the Chinese themselves are flocking to learn English.

A former Singapore scholar recently blogged: “I am a typical byproduct of Singapore: a Chinese who can speak Mandarin, passed Mandarin classes but can still barely read and write the language well enough to be considered proficient.

“Technically I am illiterate,” he declared. “And, while that may not speak for all of us, there are sufficient numbers to justify the label ‘typical’”. The worst cases are the talented children who fared so miserably in Mandarin that they had to continue their studies abroad.

An early casualty of Singapore’s bilingualism was the Golden Girl of swimming, Junie Sng, who won 10 gold medals in the 1983 SEA Games, compared to nine four years earlier.

Her English-speaking parents migrated to Australia, where she now resides. The Chinese language dilemma has contributed to Singapore’s brain drain.

Every year, about 1,000 bright students join the immigration outflow, including a fair number who want to escape the exam requirements.

In 1989, a Singaporean mother, Pauline Tan, wrote a passionate letter to The Straits Times criticising the way Chinese was being taught.

She said her Primary 3 son was having suicidal thoughts because he hated having to study Chinese every day. “He was constantly ridiculed and scolded by his Chinese teacher. He felt ashamed and shunned his classmates.

“He found Chinese boring. It is spelling, dictation, writing, tests and more spelling, dictation, writing and tests,” she said. Finally she and her husband migrated to Australia “to spare our kid further misery with Chinese.”

Today, her son – aged 29 – is an IT specialist, while his younger brother is doing his doctorate in mathematics at Oxford University.

It is partly such losses that have forced Singapore to import talent from abroad – and probably explains Lee’s feeling of anguish.

Source: The Star, December 19th, 2009

Baca juga tulisan blog Bonjour Planet Earth bertajuk Singapore icon Lee Kuan Yew admits that bilinguism policy in education was a serious mistake....

Apa lagi Dong Zong mahu guna sebagai hujah jika tidak sikap racis cauvanis dan keengganan berintegrasi sebagai 1Malaysia.

Pelancaran Perkasa di Sabah dan Sarawak

Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa (PERKASA) akan mengadakan Majlis Pelancaran cawangan Perkasa di Malaysia Timor.

Perkasa Sabah akan melancarakan cawangan mereka pada hari Sabtu November 12hb, 2009 di Le Meridien Hotel Kota Kinabalu dari pukul 8:00 malam.

Pelancaran Perkasa akan dirasmikan oleh Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak.

Menurut Pengerusi Penaja, Encik Musli Oli sini, satu seminar bertajuk "Rakyat Didahulukan Pencapaian di Utamakan. Sekadar Retorik?" akan diadakan di tempat yang sama pada jam 8 pagi sempena pelancaran tersebut.

Pelancaran Perkasa Sarawak akan diadakan esok harinya pada Ahad 3 petang bertempat di Kelab Golf Sarawak di Petrajaya, Kucing.

Bagi sesiapa yang berminat, kedatangan anda amat dialu-alukan.

Anwar, Pas, DAP hancurkan Melayu Islam - Ibrahim Ali

TAIPING 7 Dis. - Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa) menegaskan, orang Melayu akan hancur selagi terus menyokong bekas Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan konco-konconya.

Presidennya, Datuk Ibrahim Ali (gambar) menegaskan, orang Melayu juga tidak boleh bergantung kepada Pas kerana parti itu hanya mempergunakan agama Islam dan menjadi tunggangan Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) serta DAP.

Pada masa sama, katanya, kehancuran orang Melayu akan lebih kritikal jika tidak bersatu menentang DAP yang semakin melampau dan kurang ajar memijak kepala penduduk bumiputera dan Islam.

"Ini merupakan tiga ancaman yang boleh menghancurkan orang Melayu di negara ini. Tidak ada makna pembangunan pesat negara kalau Melayu akhirnya hilang kuasa di negara sendiri.

"Selepas Pilihan Raya Umum (PRU) Ke-12, perkembangan ini kalau tidak ditangani dengan betul, Melayu boleh jadi bangsa Palestin dan Melayu Singapura yang kehilangan negara," katanya.

Beliau berucap di hadapan kira-kira 2,000 orang pada ceramah perdana mengenai isu-isu semasa di Dataran Kampung Paya, Batu Kurau dekat sini malam tadi.

Menurut Ibrahim, kejahatan Anwar, yang dahulunya ditatang 'bagai minyak penuh' semasa zaman pemerintahan Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad telah dihukum Allah SWT 'secara tunai' di dunia ini kerana sikapnya itu.

Kata beliau, selaku Ketua Pembangkang, Anwar sanggup menjanjikan 'bulan dan bintang' kepada Pas dan DAP tanpa memikirkan kepentingan dan nasib orang Melayu dan Islam.

"Sebab itu pemimpin DAP sanggup pijak gambar tiga wakil rakyat Bebas di Perak. Mereka pijak gambar orang Melayu dan Islam. Melayu dalam pembangkang jadi pengecut dan hanya diam bila DAP kurang ajar.

"Apabila DAP menghina institusi raja, menyamakan Islam dengan agama lain dan memperlekeh bahasa Melayu, Anwar hanya diam membisu, sampai sekarang tidak bersuara," katanya.

Pas pula menurut Ibrahim diibaratkan sudah sampai ke peringkat 'masuk wad gila' kerana kenyataan pemimpin-pemimpinnya yang mengarut terutama sekali Mursyidul Am, Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat.

Katanya, Pas hanya dipergunakan oleh DAP dan PKR untuk memecahkan undi Melayu di negeri-negeri tertentu terutama sekali di Perak, Selangor dan Pulau Pinang hingga menang beberapa kerusi.

Jelas beliau, dominasi Pas di Kedah dan Kelantan tidak dikhuatiri kerana masih diperintah oleh Melayu Islam tetapi kehadiran Pas di negeri lain adalah amat bahaya.

"Walaupun Nizar (Datuk Seri Ir. Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin) jadi Menteri Besar Perak tetapi beliau hanyalah patung. Pemerintah Perak yang sebenar ialah DAP. Mereka marah sangat dan pijak gambar orang Melayu selepas kuasa mereka dirampas.

"Pas pula sibuk mendoakan kehancuran umat Islam lain. Kalau benar doa Tok Guru Pas berkat sudah tentu Kelantan sekarang negeri paling maju dan mungkin sudah ada sepuluh menara berkembar Petronas di sana," katanya.

Ibrahim menambah, kemenangan besar DAP dilihat hampir sama dengan kejayaan mereka semasa PRU 1969 walaupun pada masa itu pergerakan komunis telah dibubarkan selama enam bulan.

"Bagaimanapun perjuangan mereka tidak mati. Bekas penyokong komunis kini berada dalam pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO), parti politik, Dewan Undangan Negeri dan Dewan Rakyat.

"Sebab itu mereka begitu berani (nak) bawa Chin Peng balik. Apa tandanya itu? Masih tidak sedar lagikah rakyat Perak?" ujar beliau.

Katanya, walaupun bukan ahli UMNO dan hanya wakil rakyat Bebas, beliau menegaskan orang Melayu perlu kuat dan bersatu kembali di bawah payung UMNO dan Barisan Nasional (BN) demi kepentingan agama, bangsa dan negara.

"Orang Melayu dari dulu memang kalah dari segi ekonomi tetapi kuat dalam politik. Malangnya sekarang politik pun sudah mula kalah. Jadi jangan menyesal kalau Melayu terus hancur pada PRU Ke-13 akan datang," katanya.

---------------------------------

Gambar pemimpin DAP pula dipijak, dibakar

TAIPING 7 Dis. – Suasana di ceramah perdana di Dataran Kampung Paya, Batu Kurau dekat sini malam tadi kecoh seketika apabila orang ramai bertindak memijak dan membakar gambar lima pemimpin DAP.

Tindakan itu diambil sebagai tanda marah terhadap perbuatan pemimpin DAP memijak gambar tiga wakil rakyat Bebas di Perak baru-baru ini.

Presiden Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa), Datuk Ibrahim Ali yang menyampaikan ceramah pada majlis itu berkata, pihaknya menyokong tindakan tersebut sebagai amaran kepada DAP.



"Ada kalanya tindakan jahat perlu dibalas jahat. Kalau tidak pemimpin DAP tidak akan sedar.

"Dulu selepas pijak gambar wakil rakyat Bebas mereka beri alasan tak nampak, jadi sekarang kita pun boleh buat alasan sama. Kita pijak selepas itu minta maaf dan bagi alasan tak nampak juga,” katanya ketika ditemui pemberita selepas majlis tersebut.

Gambar-gambar pemimpin DAP yang dipijak dan dibakar itu ialah Lim Kit Siang; Pengerusi DAP Perak, Ngeh Koo Ham; bekas Speaker Perak, V. Sivakumar; Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang, Lim Guan Eng dan Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN) Tebing Tinggi, Ong Boon Teow.



Mengulas lanjut, Ibrahim berkata, pemimpin DAP sepatutnya tidak memulakan tindakan biadap sebegitu jika mahu dilayan dengan baik oleh masyarakat.

Jelas beliau, insiden lompat parti merupakan agenda Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dalam usahanya mengambil alih tampuk pemerintahan negara selepas Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-12 lalu.

"Dulu semasa ADUN Bota, Datuk Nasaruddin Hashim lompat ke Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) tak ada pun orang Barisan Nasional (BN) pijak gambar dia.

"Jadi DAP patut pijak gambar Anwar kerana beliaulah yang menganjurkan perkara ini dan akhirnya jadi punca kepada insiden lompat parti ini,” ujar beliau.

Sumber: Utusan Malaysia 8hb Disember 2009

Mengapa peruntukan MARA tidak cukup untuk tampung pelajar?

Ekoran tulisan kami sini berhubung anak Melayu dinafikan biasiswa yang mana ini adalah hak asasi anak-anak Bumiputera di bawah artikel 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan, Menteri Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal memperakui peruntukan tidak cukup.

Laporan berikut:

Peruntukan Pinjaman Mara Belum Cukup Tampung Permohonan Pelajar - Shafie

KUALA LUMPUR, 3 Dis (Bernama) -- Majlis Amanah Rakyat (Mara) belum dapat memenuhi semua permohonan pinjaman pelajaran ekoran kekurangan peruntukan.

Menteri Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal berkata sepanjang tahun ini, Mara hanya dapat memberikan pinjaman kepada 13,419 pelajar berbanding 19,457 permohonan yang memenuhi kelayakan.

"Pada 2008, seramai 37,846 orang menerima pinjaman berbanding jumlah pemohon yang layak iaitu 39,220 orang.

"Adalah diunjurkan pada 2010, Mara memerlukan sejumlah RM1.998 bilion bagi meneruskan usaha-usaha membiayai pinjaman pelajaran di dalam dan luar negara. Dijangka seramai 86,871 pelajar akan mendapat manfaat daripada program penganjuran pelajaran ini," katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian dalam jawapan bertulisnya kepada soalan Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) pada persidangan Dewan Rakyat hari ini. Lim mahu kementerian menyatakan kedudukan kewangan semasa yang terperinci bagi semua pinjaman Mara kepada pelajar yang diluluskan pada 2008 dan 2009 serta peruntukan untuk pinjaman seterusnya.

Mohd Shafie berkata pada tahun ini, Mara menaja 76,534 pelajar melibatkan 69,538 pelajar dalam negara dan 6,996 pelajar di luar negara membabitkan nilai pinjaman RM1.794 bilion.

Tahun 2008, katanya Mara telah memberi pinjaman pelajaran kepada 75,138 pelajar melibatkan 68,956 pelajar dalam negara dan 6,182 pelajar di luar negara.

"Jumlah kelulusan pinjaman adalah sebanyak RM1.451 bilion," katanya.

Ini mengesahkan tanggapan penulis bahawa kenyataan beberapa pemimpin termasuk Perdana Menteri mengatakan ada peruntukan tambahan untuk MARA cuba menutup realiti yang dihadapi anak-anak Bumiputera di bawah itu.

Mana boleh mencukupi jika semua pihak yang berada dan tidak berada mahukan baisiswa dan sekolah berasrama penuh MARA? Pastinya mereka yang ada "know who" dan pengaruh akan menggunakan kelebihan itu untuk mandapatkan kemudahn untuk keluarga, dan anak buah mereka mendahulu mereka yang tidak berkemampuan.

Jika kewangan tidak dapat memenuhi semua permohonan, sudah sampai masanya kerajaan menetapkan orang Melayu dari golongan kelas pendapatn menengah ke atas berhenti dari bergantung kepada kerajaan.

Polisi kerajaan yang condong kepada meritokrasi hanya akan menindas golongan pendapatan rendah dari peluang untuk memperbaiki nasib mereka kerana terpaksa bersaing dengan mereka yang lebih bernasib baik dan kemampuan kewangan.

Pemimpin yang laungkan rakyat didahulukan. Bila istilah disebut adalah rakyat, ianya jelas bermaksud membela rakyat rakyat marhaen? Adakah cara yang tidak ada jelas membantu rakyat marhaen? Sila fikirkan betul-betul untuk realisasi apa yang dislogankan.

Adakah kini anak Melayu dan Bumiputera bukan rakyat lagikah? Sudah lupakah mereka ini rakyat asal yang ditindas sejarah? Adakah hak mereka dalam Perlembagaan sudah tiada lagi?

Dalam kerajaan dikatakan konon dalam kedudukan kewangan yang serba kekurangan, kerajaan boleh utamakan biasiswa untuk semua bagi belajar ke Universiti elit luar negara yang berpuloh kali ganda lebih mahal dari peruntukan pelajar biasa? Ia dibuka pula kepada semua anak orang-orang berada yang punya kelebihan hidup untuk mendapat markah baik sama-sama menikmati biasiswa itu?

Dimana prioriti kerajaan? Pencapaian yang mereka mahu utamakan nampaknya caca marba hala tuju dan cara untuk mencapai.

Surat seorang MP Melayu S'pura kepada PM S'pura

Dear Prime Minister

May you and family be in the best of health and blessings. If there is a way, can you ask local papers or media channels to stop from reporting or discussing the remarks made by MM Lee about Malaysian Chinese?

I say this coz comments published in Singapore (supporting MM’scomments) are made from a skewed angle and do not take into account the historical reasons. The comments so far are made by Chinese Singaporeans who do not really understand the issues. They also seem to suggest that similar problems do not exist in Singapore when, in fact, Singapore Malays in their own motherland, Singapore, are treated more dismally that Malaysian Chinese in the land of Malay Bumis.

Indeed, if this issue is to continue, then it is only fair to show that Chinese leaders in Singapore are doing greater injustice to Singapore Malays than Malay Malaysian leaders to Malaysian Chinese.

The Malaysian Chinese are not bumis in Malaysia yet they get nearly every thing:

a) Right to have Chinese vernacular education from preschool to university.
b) Right to retain their Chinese names [The Chinese in Indonesia and Thailand get nothing of that sort. Worse, they have to have Thai or Indonesian names]
c) Right to display Chinese names in Chinese characters in huge public adverts in buildings and public places
d) In development projects, they reap early profits as all projects require infrastructures and these materials are controlled by Malaysian Chinese
e) Voting strength by constituencies also show so many Chinese advantage.

It is good for us not to say that Malaysian Chinese are “marginalized”. If they want to talk about marginalization or injustices, it is better that they talk about Singapore Malays who, in their own motherland, are marginalized and subject to so many injustices:

1. Malay language has lost its stature in the State and industry
2. Chinese language has now become a universal precondition in employment
3. Malays are “cordoned off” in National Service. Many key security sites are out-of-bounds to Malays [Even Malay Ministers and MP’s are not allowed to enter such areas]
4. The Civil Defence takes in high proportion of Malays consideringthelower stature of CD and the higher death and injury risk in CD services
5. No Malays are holding key positions in government and statutory boards.
6. Malay MP’s are given sinecures. In fact Malays are deemed fit only to be Ministers in Sewerage, Drainage, Refuse, Welfare and Drugs matters
7. Promotions and postings in government and statutory boards also show the Singapore Chinese’ disdain towards Singapore Malays
8. Recent retrenchments also reflected that Singapore Malays “should go first”
9. Proportion of Singapore Malays who remained unemployed is high, notwithstanding good educational and vocational qualifications
10. Vast in-take of Chinese from China, Hong Kong and Taiwan into Singapore but strict control of Malays from Malaysia and Indonesia.

I hope your office would do something to stop this, or rectify the matter by giving the issue its proper balance.

I cc this note to BH Singapore and Malaysia.
I do not cc to Straits Times as they do not publish letters of this kind.
I cc to TODAY coz two strong letters were published in today’s TODAY edition.

Regards

Mansor Haji Sukaimi
Former Member of Parliament (1976-1984)

Dipetik dari blog Pemuda UMNO Nibong Tebal