Pemimpin Melayu sangkal artikel 153!

Hari ini MIM ingin membincangkan isu yang lebih berat. MIM tertarik dengan artikel "NEP policies keeping Malays ‘poor’ and ‘weak’, say analysts, politicians" yang disiarkan di Malaysian Insider.

Kesemua yang ditemuramah mempunyai pandangan yang berlainan tentang saranan Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad yang mahukan polisi-polisi berteraskan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) yang berterusan.

1. MIM sangat skeptikal dengan pertimbangan pakar-pakar ekonomi bukan Melayu yang seringkali melaungkan 'memajukan Malaysia setaraf negara-negara Asia yang lain' dan memfokuskannya hanya kepada kelemahan DEB dan Melayu.

2. Tetapi mereka gagal atau tidak mahu membincangkan perbezaan ketara lain di antara Malaysia dan negara-negara Asia seperti sistem sekolah satu aliran dan penggunaan satu bahasa sahaja di negara-negara tersebut. Begitu juga suara-suara sumbang seperti Lim Kiat Siang DAP, Chua Soi Lek MCA dan lain-lain. Kenapa?

3. Dan rasa-rasanya kita sudah terlalu kerap mendengar kumpulan bukan Melayu yang sentiasa mendesak dan memaksa agar polisi-polisi pro-DEB di lupuskan. Sama juga dengan Melayu seperti Anwar Ibrahim dan balaci-balaci beliau. Itu sudah biasa tetapi apabila ada orang Melayu UMNO yang mempertikaikan DEB, kita tentunya tertanya-tanya, apa hal dengan orang Melayu ni??? Dia tak sedar diri ke??

4. Artikel di dalam Malaysian Insider itu turut mengemukakan pandangan YB Nur Jazlan Mohamad MP UMNO Pulai, Johor. Di antaranya :-

It would be illogical to maintain NEP-like policies. The NEP was introduced in the past because there was a gap between the Malays and the Chinese (in particular). Today, many Malays are now in the middle-class category.

“Today, we also have so much competition from overseas, countries like China and India are growing stronger economically, it will be pointless to maintain the NEP. We do not need affirmative action,” said Umno Pulai MP Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed.

He said Dr Mahathir’s argument was also “flawed” because of the fact that a majority of Malays were in the middle-class category and “have assets to lose in the event of riots or a supposed revolution.”

“The real poor are the Bumiputeras in Sabah and Sarawak . That’s why they have to come and find work in Peninsular. You don’t find many Malays going to Sabah and Sarawak for work. Mahathir is only looking from a Peninsular point of view,” Nur Jazlan told The Malaysian Insider.

5. MIM amat musykil apabila terdapat pemimpin UMNO yang mempertikai DEB dan bukan menyokongnya. Lebih-lebih lagi apabila pemimpin tersebut mendapat pangkat dan kesenangan yang mereka dapat adalah kerana parti UMNO dan perjuangannya.

6. Tetapi kenyataan Nur Jazlan Mohamad di atas seperti tidak berbuat demikian. Malah kenyataan beliau itu hanya sekadar pandangan ringan yang tiada pemberat, tiada facts & figures dan menimbulkan persoalan baru iaitu apakah kenyataan Nur Jazlan itu menjawab persoalan atau pun sebenarnya untuk ridicule (memperlekehkan) Tun Dr Mahathir?

7. Nur Jazlan Mohamed ialah anak sulung Allahyarham TS Mohamed Rahmat (Tok Mat). Berkemungkinan besar kehidupan Nur Jazlan dari kecil tidak pernah merasa susah seperti Dr Mahathir dan kebanyakan kita orang Melayu.

8. Nur Jazlan Mohamad pernah mengejutkan arena politik apabila mahu bertanding jawatan Timbalan Presiden UMNO yang dipegang oleh TS Muhyiddin Yassin. Tindakan beliau itu mendapat kritikan dan juga diperli oleh beberapa pemimpin UMNO.

9. Tun Dr Mahathir pernah mengatakan sesiapa yang bertanding TP UMNO selain daripada Muhyiddin Yassin adalah "Jokers". Malah ada juga yang mengatakan "This is not a place for any Tom, Dick and Harry"

10. MIM tidak tahulah sama ada YB Nur Jazlan mempunyai rasa tidak puas hati kepada Tun Dr Mahathir disebabkan oleh kenyataan Tun Dr Mahathir !!

11. Apa pun, MIM berharap agar Nur Jazlan dapat menerangkan dengan lebih jelas mengenai pandangan kontra beliau itu. Nur Jazlan boleh mesejkan di dalam blog MIM. No problem...

Petikan dari blog Minda Intelek Melayu

How come asking someone to go home is a racist remark?

The non-Malays went berserk when they heard how the Principal in Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Kulai, Johor insulted their children, by asking the Chinese to go back to China and the Indians of wearing dog-chains.

I am not a racist, though I admit that I started to doubt that now. I personally don’t agree with racist remarks from anybody especially coming from a teacher. But with the racist sentiment filling up the air uncontrollably, lately, I understand fully, how this teacher has come to this point.

A teacher wouldn’t be uttering such words without a good reason. Something must have triggered the words and I believe, she was provoked into saying it just like what the DAP and MCA is doing to the government, UMNO and the Malays lately.

We are already choking, and it looks like nothing could be said or done could purify the air for now.

I do believe that the ‘dog-chain’ thing is too much. The Principal should apologize on that and if action is to be taken, then be it.

But, I didn’t know that coming from China is something insulting. Asking someone to go home is not at all a racist remark.

Especially when the Chinese made it clear how proud they are to be Chinese from China . They look up upon Mao Tze Tung and all the great warriors of China and never share the same proudness towards our Hang Tuah, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Mat Kilau and other Malaysian heroes just because these Malaysian heroes are not of Chinese ethnic.

The Chinese despise Malaysia , Malays, our Kings, our language and everything, so why the hell don’t they go back to China ? It is just natural for the Principle to tell their kids to go back to China , where their hearts and souls belong.

Only in Malaysia , we see people go crazy, stomping their feet, insisting that they are Malaysians but at the same time don’t want anything to do with Malaysia .

Only in Malaysia , we see people who insist that they are Malaysians but couldn’t even speak Bahasa Malaysia .

Only in Malaysia , we see people who want to be treated equally as the original settlers but cunningly try to re-write the Malaysian’s history and constitution.

Only in Malaysia , we see people who claim to be Malaysians but cannot even sing the National Anthem!

Only in Malaysia , we see people who fight for equality but insist on going to vernacular schools.

No other multi-racial country in the world would tolerate vernacular schools except Malaysia .

No other multi-racial country in the world would give equal privilege, rights or acknowledgment on the importance of other culture and language to be taught and nurtured among the youngsters.

Only in Malaysia we see minority own 81% of the economic cake and it is still ain’t enough.

Only Malaysian Chinese would ask for Namewee to be forgiven and look up upon the person and even set up a fan club.

And only Malaysia , would forgive someone like Namewee.

The fact that Malaysia has come this far and that the Malaysian Chinese have achieved so much doesn’t seem important anymore.

Of course there are few Chinese students who didn’t get scholarships despite being poor, but there are Malay and Bumiputra students with the same fate too. The problem lies in the implementation of the system, not the race. We have to stop looking at things from the race point of view.

In order to do that, maybe the Chinese first need to look at it from the non-Chinese point of view: what if you didn’t get promoted even when you have proven to be the best employee just because the Chinese management wants only Chinese to hold top posts?

Or you did not get the job even when the interviewer admitted that you are the best candidate, and tell you to your face that they can’t hire you because you are not a Chinese?

Only Malaysian Chinese can hire a new, dumb guy to become your boss, rather than promoting you to the post because the new, dumb guy is a Chinese and you’re not.

Only Malaysian Chinese who want to hold top posts in government sectors but will never ever open top posts for other races in the private sectors dominated by them.

Only in Malaysian Chinese we see a clear practice of double standard and bias when questioning about the positions and employment opportunities in government sectors as compared to private sectors.

Only in Malaysian Chinese, we see zero tolerance, total greed and unlimited hatred.

Only in Malaysian Chinese we see that greed, intolerance, hatred and double standards are acceptable values.

So, how do the Malaysian Chinese interpret equality, actually?

How do the Malaysian Chinese prove that they deserve to be treated as Bumiputras or even call themselves Malaysians?

Could I get a straight, simple answer to these simple questions?

Angelia Sinyang

Dipetik dari blog Mylasia

Semua berpura-pura?

Parti mana dan pemimpin mana boleh menentukan sokongan? Di ambang pru-12 tiada yang menyangka BN mengalami tsunami politik. Gejala sokongan pura-pura kepada BN hampir mengundang padah.

Kini sokongan pura-pura itu masih berterusan.

AYT tidak menduduh golongan muda kah, golongan pasca meredeka kah atau golongan veteran. Yang jelas sokongan pura-pura itu masih berterusan.

Suasana politik tanah air kini selain gejala kepura-puraan malah isu-isu yang sepatutnya telah dinoktahkan lama dahulu, malah dibangkit semula.

Isu hak melayu/bumiputera misalnya dijadikan isu sebagai punca kemunduran kepada perekonomian negara. Kononnya pembelaan kepada melayu/bumiputera akan merundungkan perekonomian negara, malah menjadi punca negara tidak dapat bersaing diperigkat antarabangsa.

AYT teringat Tulisan saudara A Kadir Jasin melalui blognya bertajuk “Wajarkah korbankan DEB kerana undi minoriti?” Pertanyaan ini adalah layak bagi mantan wartawan kawakan ini, kerana usia DEB cuma 30 tahun, sedangkan pengelibatan beliau dalam dunia kewartawanan telah melangkau 40 tahun.

Sudah tentunya pengkesahan mengenai kewujudan DEB seawal pelaksanaaan nya, beliau telah ikuti, mungkin juga pernah menulis mengenainya.

Menurut penulis itu lagi, jika data gross national product (GDP) yang menjadi ukuran, maka sejak DEB dilaksanakan pada tahun 1970, GDP telah meningkat daripada 12 billion ringgit kepda 358 bilion ringgit pada tahun 2007, hanya untuk 27 tahun, dengan kata lain, GDP melonjak 2,875% atau purata 106% setahun. Dengan GDP sebesar 358 bilion riggit, menjadikan ekonomi Malaysia ke- 29 terbesar di dunia.

Dengan menggunakan mata kasar, maka selama pelaksanaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB), produktiviti negara terus mengalami perkembangan, seiring dengan perkembangan dunia, malah perkembangan ini jauh lebih laju di banding negera-negara yang lebih awal mencapai kemerdekaan.

Di mana kah silapnya, sehinggakan dasar ini terpaksa dikorbankan? Sesuatu dasar yang dianggap berjaya akan tetapi dikatakan sebagai punca pemusnah? Adakah tidak terlalu gopoh gapah menarik dasar ini? Sehinggakan pemimpin kita melepaskan geramnya kepada ilham Tun Razak ini.

Atau memang betul seperti pertanyaan saudara A Kadir Jasin, bahawa mengorbankan dasar ini semata-mata untuk menarik undi minoriti?

Saya hendak mulakan dengan bertanya: Selama 30 tahun Dasar Ekonomi Baru berkuat kuasa, adakah ia menyekat perkembangan ekonomi negara?

Jawabnya tidak. Malah kerana pelaksanaan matlamat-matlamat dan program-program DEBlah, ekonomi Malaysia berkembang pesat.

Keluaran Dalam Negara Kasar (GDP) meningkat daripada RM12 bilion pada tahun 1970 kepada RM120 bilion 1995 dan RM357.9 bilion 2007, menjadikan ekonomi Malaysia ke-29 terbesar di dunia.

Adakah ia menyekat kemajuan kaum-kaum bukan Bumiputera dan membantutkan kemasukan modal asing seperti yang didakwa oleh begitu banyak pihak sehingga membuatkan sesetengah pembesar Umno berasa bersalah dan defensif?

Pun tidak. Kadar kemiskinan dikurangkan dan pendapatan semua kaum meningkat. Tetapi pendapatan kaum-kaum bukan Bumiputera, khasnya Cina meningkat dengan lebih pantas kerana mereka menguasai dunia perdagangan dan profesionalisme.

Jurang Miskin-Kaya Meluas

Malah jurang pendapatan antara yang miskin dan kaya menjadi luas semula sejak beberapa tahun kebelakangan ini apabila kemunculan kegiatan baru ekonomi seperti perkhidmatan (services) dan teknologi maklumat dan telekomunikasi (ICT) lebih menguntungkan sesetengah kaum dan golongan pekerja.

Laporan Rancangan Pembangunan Manusia Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (UNHDP) tahun 2004 mendapati 10 peratus rakyat Malaysia yang paling kaya menguasai 38.4 peratus daripada pendapatan ekonomi berbanding 10 peratus paling miskin menguasai hanya 1.7 peratus.

Kita semua tahu siapa dan kaum mana paling kaya di Malaysia dan siapa pula yang paling miskin di negara kita ini. Malah jurang antara yang kaya dengan yang miskin dalam kaum yang sama turut meningkat.

Bumiputera tidak mencapai matlamat 30 peratus pemilikan kekayaan korporat. Mengikut perangkaan rasmi, pada tahun 2006, pemilikan Bumiputera pada nilai pasaran dalam syarikat-syarikat yang tersenarai di Bursa Malaysia dianggarkan RM88.4 bilion atau 15.1 peratus.

Tetapi bukan Bumiputera yang berupa 34 peratus daripada warganegara memiliki RM251.1 bilion (42.8 peratus) manakala pemodal asing memiliki RM234.7 bilion (40 peratus).

Majoriti aset Bumiputera dipegang oleh institusi amanah dan beberapa kerat ahli perniagaan Melayu yang berjaya.

Lebih Buruk Tanpa DEB

Hatta pada nisbah yang rendah dan berat sebelah ini pun, kita boleh berkata DEB telah berhasil mengurangkan kemiskinan dan ketidakseimbangan kaum.

Misalnya, apabila DEB dilancarkan pada tahun 1971, pemilikan korporat Bumiputera dianggarkan hanya dua peratus.

Jadi apalah salahnya kita meneruskan pelaksanaan sesetengah matlamat dan kaedah DEB yang baik dan berkesan itu?

Mengapakah sesetengah orang Melayu dan parti-parti politik Melayu begitu takut untuk mempertahankan sesuatu yang terbukti baik dan menguntungkan semua kaum?

Kalau ada perkara yang hendak ditentang dan dikritik dalam dasar itu adalah kegagalan mencapai sepenuhnya matlamat membasmi kemiskinan dan 30 peratus pemilikan Bumiputera.

Dalam apa bentuk sekalipun, matlamat membasmi kemiskinan tanpa mengira kaum dan menambah ekuiti Bumiputera wajib diteruskan.

Tetapi dasar-dasar berkaitan pemilikan ekuiti bukan Bumiputera boleh diliberalisasikan kerana mereka bukan sahaja sudah mencapai matlamat itu malah atas dasar meritokrasi sudah boleh bersaing dengan orang asing.

Inilah masanya bagi badan-badan amanah dan tabung-tabung pelaburan rasmi, termasuk Ekuiti Nasional Berhad yang baru ditubuhkan, menambah modal dalam syarikat-syarikat bukan Bumiputera dan asing yang berdaya maju kerana harga saham di Bursa Saham berada pada paras yang menarik.

DEB Punca Bukan Melayu Tolak BN?

Apakah pengundi bukan Melayu menolak Umno dan Barisan Nasional pada pilihan raya umum tahun lalu kerana DEB?

Kalau begitu, kenapa mereka sokong BN sebelum ini, khasnya pada tahun 2004?

DEB hanyalah alasan! Mereka menolak Umno dan BN kerana imej BN yang tidak baik dan kerana mungkir janji. Banyak janji dan ikrar era Abdullah Ahmad Badawi seperti keterbukaan, kebebasan dan liberalisasi tidak dilaksanakan seperti difahami oleh pengundi.

Selain merakamkan protes, pengundi bukan Melayu tahu bahawa dengan menghukum BN mereka boleh membuat tuntutan baru.

Dilema Umno dan BN adalah memastikan agar tolak-ansur dengan bukan Melayu ini tidak akan menambahkan kemarahan orang Melayu dan memastikan orang bukan Melayu mengundi BN.

Yang dikhuatiri adalah apa yang disebut oleh ungkapan Inggeris iaitu pengundi bukan Melayu mungkin “have the cake and eat it at the same time.” Dalam erti kata yang lain, mereka terima apa yang diberi, tetapi tetap tidak mengundi BN.

Ada Bumiputera Tak Sedar Untung Nasib

Bumiputera yang menolak DEB atau berasa bersalah mendapat bantuan DEB sebenarnya tidak kenang budi dan tidak sedar diri.

Apatah lagi kalau mereka membuta tuli bercakap mengenai meritokrasi dan liberalisasi yang mereka sendiri tidak faham implikasinya.

Kalau tidak kerana sekolah asrama penuh, MRSM, biasiswa dan pinjaman pelajaran, adakah mampu bilangan profesional Bumiputera dinaikkan ke tahap sekarang?

Pada tahun 1970, ada hanya 6.8 peratus akauntan adalah Bumiputera, 4.3 peratus arkitek, 3.7 peratus doktor dan 7.3 peratus jurutera. Yang agak banyak adalah doktor haiwan (40 peratus) sebab pada waktu itu Melayu pelihara haiwan. Tetapi pada tahun lalu, 24.5 peratus akauntan adalah Bumiputera, arkitek 38.2 peratus, doktor 52.9 peratus dan jurutera 52.4 peratus.

Apakah Melayu dan Bumiputera profesional ini boleh berada di mana mereka sekarang jika bergantung nasib semata-mata kepada pembiayaan ibu bapa mereka yang mengerjakan bendang, dusun dan huma untuk mendapat pelajaran tinggi?

Sekalipun mereka sudah berdikari dan tidak perlu tongkat lagi, tetapi ingatlah banyak lagi orang Melayu, Iban, Kadazan dan Orang Asli yang miskin dan melarat.

Dan bagi setiap rumah besar yang doktor atau jurutera Melayu miliki, orang Cina miliki lebih banyak dan lebih besar.

Jangan berbangga sangat dengan aset-aset Permodalan Nasional Berhad, Tabung Haji, Felda dan Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera. Hari ini semakin banyak kawasan bandar seperti Seri Kembangan, Petaling Street dan Bukit Bintang, hampir-hampir tidak ada penyertaan Bumiputera malah India pun hampir-hampir tidak ada.

Jadi, apakah yang buruk sangat dengan DEB sehingga begitu ramai orang, termasuk orang Melayu, berasa ia merugikan dan wajib dihapuskan?

Meritokrasi Bila Tembolok Terisi

Orang bukan Melayu dan sesetengah orang Melayu kini asyik bercakap mengenai keadilan sosial dan meritokrasi.

Bukankah kerana keadilan sosial dan meritokrasi di bawah DEB maka begitu ramai orang bukan Melayu mampu ke universiti-universiti ternama di dunia atas pembiayaan sendiri mengatasi bilangan Bumiputera yang dibiayai oleh Kerajaan?

Mengapakah apabila Kerajaan memberi biasiswa atau bantuan kepada Bumiputera, ia dituduh memberi tongkat, tetapi apabila bukan Bumiputera mendapat hak yang sama, ia dikatakan hak dan meritokrasi?

Apabila Bumiputera berjaya dalam perniagaan dia dituduh kroni. Tetapi apabila korporat Cina dan India menjadi raksasa kerana kontrak, francais dan lesen kerajaan ia dikatakan meritokrasi?

Siapa yang memegang monopoli gula sampai hari ini atau menjadi kaya raya kerana lesen judi, lesen TV satelit, lesen IPP dan kontrak berbilion ringgit membina hospital, kereta api laju dan sekolah?

Dan berapa kerat tahu atau masih ingat bagaimana Tun Abdul Razak Hussein terpaksa “menyelamatkan” Malayan Banking pada tahun 1965 apabila pengasasnya, mendiang Khoo Teck Puat, disingkirkan atas tuduhan melencongkan wang bank itu kepada syarikat persendiriannya di Singapura?

Begitulah juga dengan pengambilan oleh IPTA. Apabila keutamaan diberikan kepada Bumiputera, bukan Melayu merungut. Tetapi apabila Kerajaan membenarkan penubuhan IPTS yang majoriti pelajarnya bukan Melayu, tiada siapa pun mengucapkan terima kasih atau bersungut?

Hari ini, ada 20 Institut Pengajian Tinggi Awam (IPTA) yang tersenarai dalam laman web rasmi Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi, tidak termasuk 24 politeknik. Bilangan IPT swasta yang disenaraikan berjumlah 450 – ya, 450.

Dengan pengambilan bukan Bumiputera yang semakin ramai ke IPTA dan kemasukan ke IPTS yang terus dimonopoli oleh bukan Bumiputera, adalah tidak mustahil dalam masa yang singkat pengajian di IPT akan didominasi oleh bukan Bumiputera.

Soal pokoknya adakah situasi berat sebelah yang memihak kepada kaum-kaum minoriti ini menyokong pemulihan Umno dan pembentukan 1Malaysia yang sejahtera, aman dan makmur?

Sudah lupa yang sejahtera, aman dan makmur itu adalah cogan kata manifesto BN tahun lalu?

Dan apakah sudah dikaji dan difahami implikasi sistem biasiswa dua tingkat (two-tier) kepada nisbah kemasukan dan prestasi pelajar Bumiputera dan bukan Bumiputera ke IPT?

Sumbangan bukan Bumiputera Tidak Dinafikan

Tiada siapa yang menafikan bahawa bukan Bumiputera juga menyumbang kepada perkembangan dan kematangan ekonomi negara, tetapi ia berasaskan kepada prinsip keuntungan.

Mereka menyumbang kepada perkembangan ekonomi kerana suasana politik yang stabil sejak 1969 membolehkan mereka meraih keuntungan yang besar daripada apa yang mereka laburkan.

It is not altruism -- bukan sumbangan percuma yang tidak mengharapkan sebarang alasan!

Mari kita hadapi realiti. Selain Singapura yang berupa negara kecil dan majoriti penduduknya Cina, tidak ada tempat lain di dunia di mana orang Cina mempunyai kuasa politik yang begitu luas serta memonopoli ekonomi selain daripada di bumi Malaysia ini.

Tetapi, pilihan raya demi pilihan raya membuktikan bahawa yang menjadi tonggak BN adalah orang Melayu dan Bumiputera lain.

Malah majoriti calon bukan Melayu BN yang menang pilihan raya menang di kawasan majoriti Melayu.

Tetapi akibat kelemahan Umno, orang bukan Melayu bulat-bulat menolak BN pada pilihan raya 2008 manakala ramai orang Melayu memihak kepada Pas.

Perimbangan kuasa antara Umno dan Pas sudah berubah. Tidak mustahil Pas akan menjadi parti utama Melayu yang terpaksa berpakat dengan parti-parti bukan Melayu untuk memerintah.

Itulah yang akan terjadi apabila peranan Umno sebagai parti induk politik Malaysia tidak dapat dipulihkan lagi.

Dan harapan memulihkan Umno sehingga boleh diterima kembali oleh majoriti orang Melayu dan dihormati oleh bukan Melayu tidak akan berjaya jika kepemimpinannya terus dicurigai dan dipertikaikan.

Tindakan tidak menyingkirkan anasir-anasir rasuah daripada kepemimpinan Umno, malah melantik mereka semula, tidak membantu proses pemulihan Umno.

Ironinya, masyarakat perniagaan yang didominasi oleh bukan Melayu boleh hidup makmur sama ada dalam suasana bebas rasuah atau penuh rasuah!

Apabila orang Umno sendiri mendapati sukar mempertahankan parti mereka, adalah sukar bagi Umno mendapat sokongan orang lain, terutamanya sokongan bukan Melayu. Orang bukan Melayu mempunyai banyak pilihan.

Kesimpulannya, janganlah sewenang-wenangnya ditolak kebaikan DEB semata-mata untuk memancing undi atau kerana ia tidak berjaya sepenuhnya.

Itu bukan salah DEB. Itu adalah pengkhianatan oleh pelaksana yang dangkal, lemah, malas dan korup.

Sementara itu Chua Soi Lek dalam penjelasan selepas lebih seminggu beliau menafikan beliau mempersoalkan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB), sekali gus meminta hak dan kepentingan orang Melayu diketepikan khususnya soal pengagihan ekuiti.

Presiden MCA itu berkata beliau hanya menyentuh soal pembangunan di Malaysia, agar bukan satu kaum mendapat semua manakala kaum yang lain dinafikan.

“Mana saya sentuh mengenai DEB (Dasar Ekonomi Baru)... tengok ucapan saya, satu benda pun tak sentuh.

“Saya cakap terus terang, tetapi bagaimanapun penjelasannya, sebahagian orang Melayu tak akan boleh terima, semua seronok dengan agenda sendiri,” kata bekas Menteri Kesihatan itu.

“Saya minta siapa yang tak faham, tengok balik teks ucapan saya dalam laman web MCA pun ada, saya cuma cakap pasal pembangunan di Malaysia, bukan satu kaum dapat semua, (kaum) yang lain dinafikan, tak ada. Semua orang punya kepentingan bersama, untung sama-sama ada yang melatah,” kata beliau dalam temu bual bersama Berita Minggu hari ini.

Pelbagai pihak membidas Dr Chua ekoran ucapan dan resolusi yang diputuskan oleh kongres itu.

Dalam kenyataan baru-baru ini, Menteri Penerangan Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim mendakwa kenyataan Dr Chua supaya ekuiti Bumiputera dikurangkan adalah bertentangan sama sekali dengan Perlembagaan negara.

Majlis Perundingan Ekonomi Melayu (Mapem) akan menghantar satu memorandum kepada Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak berhubung resolusi Kongres Ekonomi Cina itu.

Anggota Mapem dan juga Yang Dipertua Dewan Perniagaan Melayu Selangor (DPMMS) Tan Sri Rozali Ismail berkata memorandum berkenaan akan dihantar bertujuan menyatakan pendirian Mapem berhubung resolusi dan kenyataan Presiden MCA yang tidak mengambil kira sensitivity masyarakat Melayu.

Ketika bercakap kepada pemberita di Ipoh semalam, Dr Chua berkata ucapan beliau yang menyentuh isu ekuiti Bumiputera dalam Kongres Ekonomi Cina Malaysia pada Sabtu lalu adalah sekadar pandangan dan bukannya satu bentuk desakan.

Katanya apabila diadakan kongres, maka pelbagai pandangan akan dikemukakan dan ia adalah untuk kepentingan negara dan bukan untuk sesuatu kaum saja.

Sambil berkata beliau tiada kuasa menghalang orang daripada bercakap, Dr Chua berkata beliau hanya katakan saya tidak bercadang merampas hak sesiapa dan hanya kemukakan pandangan bagaimana negara dapat berdaya saing pada peringkat antarabangsa.

“... bagaimana yakinkan pelabur dan pertingkat pertumbuhan negara supaya dalam masa singkat, 10 tahun ini kita mencapai negara berpendapatan tinggi... itu saja, bukan saya nak hentam sesiapa,” katanya.

Berhubung soala MCA tidak takut berkongsi pandangan dengan DAP dalam perkara yang bawa keuntungan kepada masyarakat Cina, Dr Chua berkata, kalau pandangan berkaitan kepentingan Cina, itu bukan monopoli DAP.

“... jangan cakap DAP jadi jaguh masyarakat Cina. Kalau kita (MCA) sentuh kepentingan Cina, (orang) kata MCA macam DAP... jadi, orang Cina kata betullah DAP jaga Cina sebab (orang) Umno pun cakap macam itu.

“Jadi, MCA jaga siapa? Hujah macam ini sudah tak boleh pakai. Apa yang saya dan pemimpin MCA sentuh... macam DAP.

“Jadi, DAP cakap mereka jaga kepentingan Cina sebab tengok Umno pun cakap macam itu dan orang Cina pun percaya, MCA tak boleh pakai. Apabila kita (Barisan Nasional) tak dapat sokongan orang Cina, kita cakap sebab Cina tak suka MCA, tapi yang bunuh MCA siapa?” kata beliau.

Sehubungan itu, Dr Chua juga menyangkap pandangan tokoh sejarah yang berpendapat perbahasan mengenai isu Melayu-Cina kini mula kelihatan seperti kempen pilihan raya umum 1969 yang kemudian membawa kepada rusuhan kaum.

Dr Chua menyoal: “Anda ingat sekarang Cina dan Melayu gaduh?”

Sebaliknya kata beliau, pada masa sekarang rakyat lebih rasional dan mereka tahu bagaimana duduk semeja dan berhujah memberikan pendapat.

“Perdana Menteri pun hadir (kongres) dan tak merajuk, ada juga peserta Melayu. Saya lihat susah nak kerja macam ini.

“Semua suka kita berpura-pura sehingga sekarang pemuda Cina dan Melayu di bandar tak sokong kerajaan. Sekarang kita dibelenggu budaya pura-pura,” katanya.

Petikan dari blog Apa Yang Tersirat

'Melayu liberal' dan 'Melayu alat' masaalah baru Melayu

Dalam satu ucapan yang penuh berlapik, Dr Puad Zarkashi menyatakan kemunculan 'Melayu Liberal' dan 'Melayu alat' sebagai masaalah baru umat Melayu hari ini.

Berikut petikan laporan Utusan Malaysia bertarikh Julai 17hb, 2010:

KANGAR 17 Julai – Kepelbagaian Melayu adalah antara cabaran baru yang perlu dihadapi UMNO bagi memastikan parti itu terus kukuh di atas landasannya.

Timbalan Menteri Pelajaran, Dr. Mohd. Puad Zarkashi berkata, antara kepelbagaian Melayu itu termasuk wujudnya golongan Melayu liberal dan 'Melayu alat'.

Berucap merasmikan mesyuarat perwakilan UMNO Bahagian Kangar di sini hari ini, beliau yang juga anggota Majlis Tertinggi bimbang jika cabaran itu tidak ditangani segera, ia akan menimbulkan masalah kepada parti dan orang Melayu.

Menurutnya, sikap golongan Melayu liberal bukan sahaja merugikan bangsa sendiri, tetapi ada di antara mereka yang tidak mendaftar sebagai pemilih.

"Mereka (Melayu liberal) anggap perjuangan Melayu sebagai sudah ketinggalan zaman,” katanya sambil menambah bahawa golongan itu tidak memikirkan masa depan bangsa sendiri kerana telah menikmati kehidupan yang selesa.

Beliau berkata, ‘Melayu alat’ pula adalah golongan yang sering terpengaruh dengan dakyah pihak tertentu sehingga mudah diperalat tanpa memikirkan masa depan negara dan bangsa.

Mohd. Puad berkata, jika orang Melayu begitu mudah diperalat oleh mana-mana pihak yang ingin melihat kehancuran, ia akan menjadi ancaman kepada UMNO. – Bernama

Sah! Melayu adalah penduduk asal Malaysia

Kajian arkeologi oleh pakar-pakar arkeologi Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) mengesahkan bahawa rumpun Melayu merupakan penduduk asal Malaysia sejak lebih 40,000 tahun dahulu.

Hasil kajian itu sekali gus menyangkal teori migrasi yang dikemukakan oleh penyelidik dari Vienna School of Thought, Heine-Geldern pada 1930-an yang mendakwa rumpun Melayu berhijrah ke Malaysia dari Tanah Besar Utara.

"Data arkeologi yang diperolehi di Semenanjung Malaysia dan Sarawak menunjukkan rumpun Melayu adalah penduduk asal bumi Malaysia sejak lebih 40,000 tahun lalu dan bukan berhijrah ke sini dari Tanah Besar Utara.

"Artifak-artifak seperti seramik yang ditemui di lebih 100 kawasan ekskavasi yang dijalankan menunjukkan bahawa ia adalah berbentuk tempatan dan bukan dibawa masuk dari luar," jelas UKM dalam portal beritanya di http://pkukmweb.ukm.my/news.

Hasil kajian itu didedahkan Ketua Penyelidik Arkeologi UKM, Profesor Datuk Dr. Nik Hassan Suhaimi Nik Abdul Rahman semasa membentang kertas kerjanya bertajuk '38 Tahun Arkeologi di UKM' pada Seminar Penanda Aras Penyelidikan Arkeologi di Bangi yang berakhir kelmarin.

Antara lokasi yang menjadi tapak kajian adalah Pulau Kalumpang dan Beruas (Perak); Kota Johor Lama, Kota Seluyut, Kota Sayong Pinang dan Muar (Johor); Kota Melaka (Melaka); Kota Lukut (Negeri Sembilan) dan beberapa tapak di Tasik Kenyir, Terengganu.

Nik Hassan Suhaimi yang juga Timbalan Pengarah Akademi Tamadun Melayu (ATMA) berkata, keputusan kajian itu selari dengan penemuan tengkorak manusia di Gua Niah, Sarawak oleh Tom Harrison dan isterinya pada 1958.

Tambah beliau, penyelidikan arkeologi di UKM sejak 1980-an menemui pelbagai data baru tentang asal usul kerajaan Melayu tertua di Malaysia iaitu kerajaan Kedah Tua yang diperolehi dari tapak arkeologi Sungai Mas, Kedah.

"Isu penting dalam zaman kerajaan awal ialah proses Indianisasi. Berdasarkan kajian yang dibuat di UKM, proses Indianisasi itu boleh ditukar kepada proses pembumiputeraan kebudayaan India," katanya seperti yang dilaporkan portal tersebut.

Dipetik dari Malaysia Instinct

LKY acknowledge Singapore Malay special position

MM rebuts NMP's notion of race equality

Constitution requires Government to give Malays special position, he says in House debate

By Clarissa Oon

IN A rare intervention in Parliament, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew rose yesterday to 'bring the House back to earth' on the issue of racial equality in Singapore.

Spelling out the Government's approach to the treatment of different races, he pointed out that the Constitution of Singapore itself enjoins the Government to give Malays a 'special position', rather than to 'treat everybody as equal'.

He rebutted as 'false and flawed' the arguments by Nominated Member of Parliament Viswa Sadasivan calling for equal treatment for all races.

On Tuesday, Mr Viswa had tabled a motion for the House to reaffirm its commitment to principles in the National Pledge when debating national policies.

A total of 14 MPs spoke on the motion over the past two days. The wide-ranging and vigorous debate ended with Parliament accepting an amended version of Mr Viswa's motion proposed by People's Action Party MP Zainudin Nordin, and modified slightly by MM Lee.

Mr Zainudin's amendment was to acknowledge the progress Singapore has made in nation building, while Mr Lee's was to highlight the principles in the Pledge as aspirations.

While present at almost every Parliament sitting, the last time Mr Lee rose to speak was in April 2007 during a furore over ministerial pay increases.

He told the House yesterday that he had not planned to weigh in on the debate over the Pledge, but was moved to do so by Mr Viswa's remarks on the hot-button issue of race.

In a lengthy speech on Tuesday, the NMP had expressed pride in Singapore's inter-racial harmony and principle of equal opportunity for all races.

However, he questioned if the Government was sending out mixed signals by emphasising racial categories, for example, through ethnic self-help groups.

MM Lee declared that the assumption of equal treatment for all races is 'false and flawed', and 'completely untrue'.

To 'remind everybody what our starting point is', he pointed to the racially tense period of the 1960s, the circumstances in which the Pledge had been written.

Singapore had just been thrown out of Malaysia. The Malays in Singapore were feeling particularly vulnerable, unsure if the Chinese majority here would treat them the way the Malay majority in Malaysia had treated the Chinese minority there.

Because of such a backdrop, the Pledge crafted by then Culture Minister S. Rajaratnam took pains to emphasise principles that would be 'regardless of race, language and religion'.

Mr Lee also drew the House's attention to Article 152 of the Constitution, which makes it the Government's responsibility to 'constantly care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore'.

In particular, it states that the Government must recognise the special position of the Malays, 'the indigenous people of Singapore', and safeguard their political, economic and educational interests.

Mr Lee contrasted Singapore's approach with that of the United States, where despite a 1776 declaration that 'all men are created equal', blacks did not get the right to vote until a century later, and racial segregation continued well into the 20th century.

For Singapore to reach a point where all races could be treated equally 'is going to take decades, if not centuries', he said bluntly.

For this reason, he sees the Pledge not as an 'ideology', as Mr Viswa put it, but as an 'aspiration'.

Mr Viswa had also wondered if Singapore had got the balance right between prosperity and the happiness of its citizens, and if it had done enough to strengthen its democratic fundamentals.

Education Minister Ng Eng Hen, who spoke after MM Lee, provided a detailed response, spelling out how the Government's record over the past 50 years had been entirely in the spirit of the Pledge.

'Far from compromising these ideals in the pursuit of economic gro-wth, we have been defenders of these ideals in building a nation,' he said.

Policies are debated openly in Parliament, and the Government is accountable to the people at every election, he said.

He noted that Mr Viswa's model of a multi-party democracy, more opinionated media and politically active universities was drawn from other democratic models in the West.

In Asia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Thailand have elements of these models too.

But he questioned if those places had done better than Singapore, and said it was not self-evident that their models would work here.

More important than high-flown rhetoric in pledges and anthems was the reality on the ground, in the lives that citizens led, he maintained.

He agreed with the NMP that Singapore must move with the times.

However, Dr Ng said: 'We must not do so unthinkingly, but consider carefully each step forward, carving our own path towards a better society and a more vigorous economy.'

Date: Aug 20, 2009

Copyright © 2007 Singapore Press Holdings

Malaysian Chinese: Bully Or Bullied?

MCA are now talking the same rhythm as DAP that are to set aside Malay rights and privileges.

Datuk Chua Soi Lek assert that Chinese community issues is not trifling matters but involved intellectual such as education, scholarship, promotions, judiciary and crime.

However, issues involving judiciary and crime are the ground used by opposition to continued their rebel.

To those who do not understand opposition’s modus operandi, here is an education about them or “Opposition Parties in Malaysia for Dummies”:

1. An offender could not win a case in court if the judge and police are dedicated to their job, sincere and clean. The opposition have no other option than to pollute authorities image in order to win in court.

2. Government that govern a country strongly base on harmony could not be defeated through a fair election. So the opposition must raise issues of races, allegation towards judiciary and law in order to shake and separate people support to win the election.

3. Government that govern the country do not have major problems and could not be destroy easily. Base on this, opposition created allegations and provocation on issues that could weaken the nation to champion for the people.

In the year 1956, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra had requested from British to accept non Malay as citizen automatically without conditions.

Malay rights and privileges had been clearly line out in Federal Constitution. The fact is that Malay Supremacy have become a basic including law in connection with preserving Malay rights and place as the majority citizen.

Which part of the history that Datuk Chua, MCA, DAP, PKR and PAS do not understand, respect and believe? It is written in history and cannot be changed anymore.

Through scientific, mathematics and both eyes, the world can see that Chinese community are living luxuriously in the country. But why they do not feel satisfied towards Malay for their rights and privileges.

This is because the human character that never felt enough.

As a human being, we need toleration to survive. Chinese community must see what they have not otherwise.

They must learn to appreciate what they have and thankful how they obtain it.

Stop acting as a victim because you are not and you look as a bully.

It is easy for Datuk Chua and Chinese community telling government to change procedure and rewrite law and constitution.

What about the law written for private sectors owned by Chinese?

How can we ascertain that YTL, Public Bank, Alliance Bank, Subang Parade, KLCC and Alamanda not to discriminate Malay. Even beauty saloon are racist in choosing its workers.

Worse of all, Malay could not fight back in this matter as they would be labelled as racist.

Just admit that Chinese are racist. For an example, the existence of China Town worldwide up to the stage that the originator from the countries do not feel comfortable about it.

There will be no happy ending if Chinese continued not to admit that they have better living and racist.

If Chinese dream of their children to become a Malaysian Prime Minister, then their children need to be taught to accept Malaysia as it is including races, schools, history, kings, cultures, languages and its beauties. In other words, be a 1 Malaysia or else, do not blame people for telling you to return to China to fulfil your children dream.

Source: Malaysia Instinct

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