New IGP must seriously grapple with the new Malaysian phenomenon where crime index falls but Malaysians feel even more unsafe!

DAP Member of Parliament for Rasah and Negri Sembilan State Assemblyman for Lobak Anthony Loke, who is also DAPSY National chief, was the latest victim of crime when he was rudely awakened early this morning by five parang-wielding robbers who broke into his Seremban home and tied him up, along with his elderly parents.

The 4am incident took place after the robbers cut through the front door lock, and woke the occupants in the double-storey terrace house in Taman Yoon Chan, Seremban – hitherto quite crime-free but no more safe.

Recently, both the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had made great play about the successful NKRA on crime reduction, claiming that there have been a drastic drop in the crime rate with improvement of the crime index since January this year.

However, up and down the country, ordinary Malaysians do not feel this dividend of fall of crime index in their daily lives as they do not feel comparatively safer in the streets, public places or privacy of their homes as compared to previous years as highlighted by the terrible ordeal which Loke and his parents went through early this morning.

I call on the new Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar to seriously grapple with this new phenomenon in Malaysia where crime index falls but Malaysians feel even more unsafe in many areas.

I had invited public responses to the question: “Crime index down but do you feel safer?” on my twitter, facebook and blog, and the following are some of the responses:

Twitter:

Robbery on going in my housing area for the past few weeks. If we are safe, there won’t be any gated community.

KL, never felt more unsafe

Safe? Even Police are not pro-active when suspicious activity is being reported to them.

i dun feel safe. scary to see so many crimes still unsolved

definitely still not safe. My security committee had 2publicise tat dey caught a robber 2get funds4 guards

 penang – 10 police doing roadblocks, hide behind trees, lanes in the dark – how2 be safe? when they ought to do more rounds

YB Uncle, nobody is safe if we don’t do anything. Our security are depending on Nepal guard. Is that the way make us safer?

 No, sir, I definitely don’t feel safe walking/driving on our streets!

We are worse off. Can someone suggest that those security fee to guard our house be exempted from income tax?

sir, I’m sure u know the stats were manipulated. My cousin had accident, made police report but got scolded by police instead.

thanks and NO I do not feel safe walking in Brickfields as even at day time there are snatch thefts and at night there are parang gangs walking around. Have experienced both. Like in UK the Govt must put in place safer measures to fight crime, not only increase police n patrols( which has been done but no success ) but also “talking cameras” where victims can be warned off, the observers must respond if crime is to be reduced

Blog:

All of us will have to hire security guards from Indonesia. Give them more jobs! When police cannot protect you, you need to protect yourself, with guns.

 Crime index has not come down. William Cheng commented in today’s Oriental Daily News that in order to create a false picture that crime index has come down, police refused to entertain victims who came forward to lodge reports. These poor victims were being “pushed” to go from one police station to another until they got tired and gave up lodging the report.

When the people complained about the high crime rate in the country not so long ago, the Govt. said it was a matter of perception. Now we are being told that the crime index has come down. Can we say that it is also a matter of perception? With more and more neighbourhood hiring security personnel to look after the safety of the residents, how can we say that the security situation has improved? Worse, we have also to contend with hordes of foreign criminals.

Facebook

of cos not! a auntie was just killed in a plotted robbery in front of her house early in the morning going to work recently at my kampung!

 I feel cheaper…..my life is getting cheaper every time..just waiting for the day the robbers make their way into my life..sigh…

 the highest crime ratio in SEA is really Malaysia. Robberies, rapes,murders almost happen every second..

Where we have big robbers like Umnoputras robbing the country’s coffers, the small one also follow their big brothers’ footsteps..

Last Thursday, the new IGP unveiled his vision, the “4P” plan, for the police to deliver more efficient services to the public – proactive, protective, performance-oriented and people-oriented.

As a first step, he should prove this “4P” plan is meaningful to Malaysians, visitors, tourists and investors in ensuring a safer country to work, live and play where official announcements of falling crime index is greeted with public acclaim rather than public cynicism because there is no match between the fall in crime index as announced and  the public feeling more safe from crime than before, whether for person or property.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 October 2010, 5:44 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Life Story Of A 100 Ringgit Note

by
Richard Loh

I was having a beautiful dream, sleeping among the other 100 ringgit notes banded in stack of 100, when suddenly the loud noise from the opening of heavy metal door woke me up. The lights were switched on and by now all other denominations notes were wide awake as well.

We were inside a strong bank vault with two armed security guards guarding the opened vault. Inside, all new notes comprising of the various denominations were stacked separately from the old notes.

I was part of the new note, under the 100 ringgit denomination. I was just released yesterday, after being dressed so beautifully in colors with security input and a serial number which I supposed was to be my name, from the authority of Bank Negara to my new owner, the Bank.

The old notes were laughing at us, the new notes, and I asked why they are laughing at us. One 5 ringgit note started yelling, afraid that we could not hear him because the bankers inside the vault were talking so loudly. “You all are going out to face the world, you will be squeezed, splashed with saliva, argued and fought over, love and hate, all kinds of hands will be touching you and you may get to travel all over the world. The Chinese New Year is just a week away and you all will be in great demand. We the old notes are tired and needed some rest, so good luck to you all.”

One banker started to grab us and stacked them inside a tray and after taking a few more stacks he walked out of the vault and ordered the security to lock the vault.

Once outside, he counted the stacks again together with a nice looking lady, I supposed must be the cashier over the counter. We were roughly handled and squeezed together inside a drawer. After a while I heard the cashier asking someone over the counter, “you want the 100 ringgit new notes as well” and that someone, a bank customer answered  yes, he wanted some new 100 ringgit notes.

The cashier opened the drawer and took a stack of the 100 ringgit note which included me and placed us inside a machine. Suddenly we were shaking so vigorously and one by one we were jammed through a tiny slot and came out to the other side. Still dizzy from the shaking machine, which I learned later was a money counting machine, we were picked up and handed over to the customer, a middle age man. Before leaving the man requested for some ang pow envelope which the cashier gladly gave him.

My long journey into this new world started with this man, an office manager. He took me back to his office and sitting behind his chair, he pulled me out but not before he put his finger in his mouth to get wet from his saliva and recounting his stack of note. Still wet from his saliva, I was slided into the red packet and sealed. He continued with what he was doing with the other notes.

Before the office closes he called in his secretary, a malay lady and gave her an ang pow with me inside. The manager told the secretary that this ang pow was his personally and her bonus from the company will followed suit. The secretary thanked him and left for home feel with happiness.

The next day, my new owner went to the market to but some vegetables. I was traded for the vegetables to an Indian vegetable seller. With me tagging along, the Indian vegetable seller went to a toddy shop and passed me to another Indian selling the toddy.

Before going home, the toddy man pass by a 4D outlet and gambled me away. By now, I was a little soiled with me been squeezed into the vegetable seller’s pocket and spilled with toddy. I remained with the 4D owner for a while locked inside a little safe. I guess it was about a week before I was taken out.

I heard the 4D owner talking to someone over the phone, “we have to kow tim them, a few hundred ringgit should solved our problem”. Out I go again, this time to a small secluded coffee stall. I was handed over to someone who converse in malay. This man took me to a money changer and exchanged for Thai baht.

The money changer then exchanged me to a Chinese who just came back from holiday and wanted to change his remaining US dollar back to ringgit.

The Chinese man with his family traded me for some pork and the pork seller took me to Genting. What a nice and cool place. The pork seller exchanged me for the casino chips and play his heart out while I was squeezed into a small box near the gambling table mixing with other notes of various denominations. I stayed there for a while until the casino security took the box and delivered us to the casino vault where we were separated and went through the counting machine. I was so dizzy that I doses of and when I woke up I was about to be exchanged to a young lady for her winning chips.

The young lady was so thrilled with her winning and now she can pay her government tax with her winning without hurting her monthly income. There I go inside a government office for the first time after the young lady paid her tax. The government has to pay the civil servants through their bank accounts and I was bundled by the bank into an atm machine.

Today is pay day for the civil servants and you can see almost all banks with atm machines were crowded. Most of the civil servants were muslim malays and they started emptying the atm by withdrawing their salary. I was withdrawn by an elderly civil servant and he put me inside his newly bought wallet. Coincidentally today was also a Friday and with me inside this civil servant’s wallet, he went for his prayer.

Over the weekend the son of the civil servant requested some money to buy some books. The father took out his wallet and pulled me out and the son took me and went in search for his books. Finally I landed inside the cashier box of a book shop.

The cycle of me going round and round continues for a couple of years. I was owned by all different races one time or another, muslim and non muslim and all kinds of hands had handled me. There are the hands of Indians selling vegetables and toddy, the Chinese hands selling pork, non halal food and from gambling outlets, the malay hands selling nasi lemak, tom tam, ikan bakar and the mamak stalls and even through the hands of the corrupt. The government had used me to pay the salary of the civil servant through the banks.

One day I found myself back inside the government treasury. The government had announced that those elderly citizen 60 years and above will received 100 ringgit each as appreciation for their contribution. Some will be receiving by cash while others through the bank.

On the day of distribution, I was given to an old elderly malay woman. She was so happy and she decided not to used me as yet and she kept me inside her locker at home.

There was no problem of me being circulated among the different races, religious and non religious, Malays, Chinese, Indians and even foreigners for so many years and there was not a single complain about me.

Out of the blue the elderly malay woman who owned me, after hearing rumors that I was dirty and non halal or whatever they claimed me to be, decided to give me up. I was shocked because all these years I was appreciated and happily owned without any fussed.

What is happening, is there something that I don’t know of and why condemned  me for being dirty after being so useful to everyone for so many years?

What is the government and bank negara going to do with me, clean me up or burn me? I pray that those who had insulted me to face the reality of the world and not by using religious argument to discredit me for I am non political, non religious and I am born into this world just to serve everyone human being without discrimination or distortion.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 October 2010, 1:30 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Tengku Razaleigh factor

by
Jema Khan

The Malaysian Insider

October 04, 2010

OCT 4 — The upcoming Galas state seat by-election is interesting on many fronts. It was a seat won by PAS in the last general election though Umno won the Gua Musang parliamentary seat which encompasses Galas.

By many accounts winning the Gua Musang parliamentary seat has nothing to do with Umno but more due to it being the stronghold of its long-standing MP, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

Who is this man known colloquially as Ku Li?

Well, if you read “Malaysian Maverick” written by Barry Wain which is actually about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, you would know. Ku Li is an elder statesman in Malaysia who also, by many accounts, could have been PM of Malaysia.

A jovial, effervescent and decent man who has within him the institutional memory of this country, he really personifies all that was good in our founding fathers. Ask him about any of them, be it Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein, you name it, he was there at the time and can still give you a decent recollection of what they stood for.

He has a very Malay way of putting his objections to all the bad things that are happening to our nation. See him on YouTube under Mycitizen and you will get a flavour of the man. Our founding fathers were the generation that really sacrificed their wealth and wellbeing for this country and their views would be very similar to that of Ku Li’s today.

In fact, the irony of it all is although Ku Li sacrificed so much personally for Umno, it is the opposition that today have a greater appreciation for his integrity and intellect. They accept him as an elder statesman that they would love to have on their side.

It is only with the advent of this by-election that Umno through Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is reaching out publicly to Ku Li. The lukewarm response of the Umno leadership to Ku Li is perhaps of the fear that he could challenge the leadership in the party.

Lest we forget, he only lost by 43 votes to Dr Mahathir in the contest for president of Umno in 1987.

The upcoming by-election is not simply a question of whether Umno wins or loses the seat. Many other questions will arise from it which will be of national significance.

Will the direction Umno takes after this be more in line with those of Ku Li? Will PAS go easy in the campaign as it does not want to alienate Ku Li? Will PAS want to close the door on any possible co-operation with Umno?

Could there be a major role for Ku Li either in the current government or in bettering the ties between the BN and Pakatan?

When it comes to Ku Li, I think he will follow his own calling as he has done all his life, sometimes to his own political detriment. A gentleman politician is rare in this country but something we desperately need today.

Perhaps he will not rise up any further in the political arena as he is unwilling to soil his reputation, but his beliefs and thinking will transcend today, far into the future.

Ku Li calls a spade a spade and has credibility and gravitas. It would be a shame if the political parties on both sides of the divide do not tap him for the betterment of the nation.

In any event I am sure that we will be hearing more of Ku Li soon and if we were all to put on our non-partisan hats, we could actually listen to and absorb the message.

It is society that needs to be positively affected and it is not only the political parties that can do it but the messenger has to have the credibility for the message to be believed.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 October 2010, 1:03 pm and is filed under
Election
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar waves his magic and and thrills European audiences

by
Tunku Aziz

My Sinchew

4.10.10

I have had to come all the way to Brussels and Berlin to discover a side of Anwar Ibrahim that I was wrong about.

Reading the Barisan Nasional-owned newspapers that consistently portrayed him as a “traitor to Malaysia” who exaggerated the situation obtaining in the country given half a chance, I have, I must admit, tended to view him as a self-serving political demagogue who could not care less about the fate of his country as long as he achieved his ambition of becoming prime minister.

Anwar spoke last Monday evening (28 September 2010), on
“Liberal Values in the Muslim World – Why Islam and Democracy are Destined to Coincide”
to a packed hall of some of Europe’s powerful decision makers. These were men and women with wide international experience and could not be easily hoodwinked even if he had tried.

It was vintage Anwar, perfect smooth as silk delivery of a complex, serious subject to a critical audience. He knew his stuff. His was more than a speech; it was an intellectual journey mapped out by someone who knew the area traversed like the back of his hand.

There he stood, under the spotlight, his charming and quietly confident self as always, speaking without a note for a full hour. Earlier in the day, when he said to me he had to go back to his hotel room to give his speech the once over, I told him half in jest that he could make his speech standing on his head. He did just that and more. He successfully won the audience over with his argument, supported by historical antecedents and more recent examples that completely demolished the conventional wisdom in non-Muslim circles that Islam and democracy were somehow incompatible bed fellows. He challenge the unfounded belief that it was against the order of nature for Islam to embrace democracy as seriously flawed because of the underlying assumption that Muslims, unlike others, were not born free to exercise their democratic rights.

As I sat listening to the prime minister Malaysia never had, thanks to Mahathir the Maverick, and who might yet take the country by storm, Anwar, I mean, not Mahathir, I could not help thinking how utterly sad and absurd for Najib, whose articulation of his 1Malaysia slogan invariably finishes in a cul-de-sac, offering his services to Obama to help bring about greater understanding of Islam, the religion of peace, among the majority American non-Muslims. My dear fellow, charity begins at home.

The only Malaysian politician, who can, without making a fool of himself, stride the world stage with the right combination of strong intellectual credentials and honesty, is not to be found within the serried ranks of the BN, but in the person of Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia’s iconic liberal democrat.

As I saw here in Brussels, he had the European parliamentary leadership, figuratively speaking, eating out of his hands. Many have already put the champagne on ice; they clearly see this victim of a rotten political system as the next man to lead the country.

For all our sakes, I hope they are right. Malaysia needs a thorough overhaul and Najib whom we need like we do a great big hole in our head is unlikely to understand the dynamics of change for the great leap forward. Even if he understands the urgent necessity for change, would he be allowed to by the reactionary forces with the party ever so gingerly as the prospect of a palace coup remains a distinct possibility? He is not only busy watching over-sized baggage, but also his back with the sort of loyal friends he has had foisted on him. There simply isn’t much time for anything else while the ship of state springs more leaks by the day.

I was asked by a senior European Parliament bureaucrat over coffee what the Pakatan Rakyat coalition’s priorities would be on taking over the federal government? In brief, I said revamp institutions of state that have been virtually destroyed and have, in many cases, been rendered dysfunctional, overhaul policies, systems and procedures that have tended to divide rather than unite Malaysians, pay special attention to economic policies centred on orderly growth and sustainable development, and generally to put things right and undo the excesses and abuses of that began under Mahathir so that democratic principles and practices may have a real chance of taking root. A tall order but with fairness, and integrity grounded in the rule of law, God willing, we will get there.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 8:09 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Last rites begin for Gerakan

by
Thomas Lee

My Sinchew

4th Oct 2010

The last rites for Gerakan have started to be performed by no lesser person that its former president Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik, who has announced that he is quitting as the party advisor due to the lack of confidence in current party chief Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon.

The outspoken maverick KengYaik said on Monday 4 October 2010 that he would be resigning as the party advisor because of disappointment over the politically infirm Tsu Koon’s tendency to “bury his head in the sand.”

Formed on 24 March 1968, the party descended to its worst electoral performance during the March 2008 general election, losing control of the Penang state government which it held for nearly 40 years, and winning only two parliamentary seats compared to 10 previously. Tsu Koon was among those kicked out by the Penangites.

The party was founded on 24 March 1968 by internationally renowned sociologist Prof Syed Hussein Alatas, Methodist lay leader Tan Sri Dr David Tan Chee Khoon, popular trade unionist V. David, MCA’s second president Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu, and many idealistic young academics and professions.

At its formation, Gerakan was a popular opposition party, not affiliated with the federal ruling Alliance coalition, the predecessor of the Barisan Nasional. During the 10 May 1969 general election, Gerakan won most of the seats in the state legislature of Penang, and Chong Eu was installed as the chief minister, and served for a record 21 years, until 1990, when he stepped down in favour of Tsu Koon.

Following the tragic May 13 racial riots soon after the 1969 general election, Gerakan agreed to join an expanded Alliance coalition under a new name Barisan Nasional, created and headed by Tun Abdul Razak in 1973 as a means to reduce politicking and to promote racial harmony and peaceful co-existence among the various races. Gerakan has remained a Barisan Nasional component party until now.

The Gerakan membership, since its founding, comprises about 80% Chinese, 15% Indian, and 5% Malays and other races. Its leadership is predominantly Chinese, although it claims to be a multi-ethnic party.

The party started its decline following the stepping down of Keng Yaik as president on 8 April 2007 to pave the way for Tsu Koon to take over the reins as party chief.

Contrary to the expectations of party members and many outside the party, Tsu Koon proved to be a weak leader, being seen as a mere office-boy of his Umno bosses, even in his role as the chief minister of Penang. The end-result is the almost elimination of Gerakan during the political tsunami of 2008, with the party being wiped out in Penang, with Tsu Koon and the top party leaders among the casualties.

The most shameful event in the party’s history is the dishonourable renegade of the election pledge by Tsu Koon during the campaigning of the 2008 general election that he would not join the cabinet via the backdoor with a senatorship if he were to lose in the polls. His acceptance of a minister’s post via an appointment as a senator soon after the election caused the loss of respect for him and Gerakan among the people, including party members.

By accepting the minister post via a senatorship, Tsu Koon has discredited himself, and brought shame to his party. At least MIC president S. Samy Vellu and MCA president Chua Soi Lek show more credibility than the Gerakan president and could walk with their heads high by not grabbing ministerial appointments for themselves via the backdoor.

Being given a ministerial post as a compensation for loss in an election will render one to being tied to political patronage, and becoming politically impotent and at the beck and call of the political patron.

Hence, it is not surprising that a recent Merdeka Center survey shows that only 1% of Chinese voters have any respect for Tsu Koon, meaning quite obviously that there are Gerakan members among the 99% who do not have confidence in him. Keng Yaik is definitely one of them!

Several weeks ago, Tsu Koon had boasted in Kuala Terengganu that Gerakan still has the support of the people because it has set up 170 new branches nationwide since the March 2008 general election. But he did not mention that Gerakan was almost totally wiped out, particularly in Penang, and he himself was kicked out by the people during the 2008 general election.

The Merdeka Center survey shows that Tsu Koon is deluding himself that he and Gerakan still have the support of the people. With a 1% support of the community, what relevance do Tsu Koon and Gerakan have?

The people have no confidence in Gerakan and reject the party because its leader is seen as a person with no principle and no integrity.

Take, for example, the 2009 Kampung Buah Pala issue in Penang. Tsu Koon had then attacked the DAP-controlled Penang state government and blamed Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng for the problems faced by the residents in the area, whose houses were ordered to be demolished.

The irresponsible comment by Tsu Koon exposes the type of person he is — a coward to the core who does not admit and accept responsibility for his own mistake.

The whole Kampung Buah Pala nonsense was created by his administration, with the scandalous deal negotiated, concluded and sealed by him when he was the chief minister.

About the only thing the Guan Eng administration did was being forced to honour the Tsu Koon scandalous deal by allowing the legitimate payment approved earlier by Tsu Koon when he was the chief minister.

In fact, it was just procedural that the state agency responsible paid out the money as it had been approved by Tsu Koon when he was in power, and I doubt Guan Eng actually knew about the payment until the scandal exploded.

Tsu Koon not only failed to admit that it was him who created the problems, but dumped the whole load of rubbish for Guan Eng to clean up. No person, especially Penangites, worth his or her salt will give Tsu Koon any respect for refusing to admit and accept responsibility for the Kampung Buah Pala fiasco.

Tsu Koon is obviously a liability to the 250,000-strong Gerakan as whatever little respect the people, especially Penangites, have for him has been buried with his unprincipled action over the Kampung Buah Pala fiasco, and his backdoor elevation to the cabinet.

As a minister, Tsu Koon has not done anything positive, concrete or commendable so far. His handling of the inter-faith panel initiated by the Najib administration, for example, is a big joke, to say the least.

The Cabinet Special Committee to Promote Inter-Religious Harmony and Understanding (SCPIRHU) has remained silent soon after its inaugural meeting on 6 April this the year, after several Muslim groups and muftis baulked at the inclusion of the term “inter-religious” in the name of the panel. The Muslim groups also want Tsu Koon removed as minister-in-charge of the panel, and proposed that he be replaced by Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, the minister in charge of Islamic religious affairs. See how much respect Tsu Koon has among the Barisan Nasional people.

Tsu Koon has not been able to make any headway to get the panel (SCPIRHU). which has since been renamed the Committee to Promote Religious Understanding and Harmony, going even months after its set-up, which shows how effective he is as a minister.

Also, when Umno secretary-general Tengku Adnan publicly distanced his party from the Malay rights group Perkasa last month, Tsu Koon was among the first to rush to support him. Yet a week later when Prime Minister Najib Razak made a turnaround on the attempt to reject Perkasa and push through his multi-racial 1Malaysia plan, Tsu Koon did not question Najib or Adnan. Instead he tried to divert the public attention with an assault on the secular DAP and the Islamist PAS. Obviously, he is as flexible as the bamboo tree, bending according to the direction the wind is blowing.

Several former Gerakan leaders have also questioned the relevance of the party.

Its former Nibong Tebal MP Datuk Dominic J. Puthucheary, for example, has been reported as saying that the party has no power and influence at all, and that it is pertinent simply because of its link with the Barisan Nasional.

Former Gerakan Wanita chief Datuk Rhina Bhar, ex-Gerakan Penang state executive councillor Datuk Dr Toh Kin Woon, former Gerakan deputy minister Datuk Dr Tan Kee Kwon, among many others, may not be vocal in complaining against the party they had served for many years, but their unfavourable views on the party leadership is well-known publicly.

The impending demise of Gerakan is certain, and it is time perhaps for those sincere and honest members of the party who have the love and interest of the nation at heart to move out to channel their time, effort and resources to a more useful and beneficial political alternative party to serve the nation.

Edward Gibbon, the author of the definitive History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire has attributed the fall of the Roman Empire to the loss of civic virtue and decline in morality among the Roman citizens. The gradual disintegration of the Roman economy and the barbarian invasions were the final nails in the Empire’s coffin.

The lesson of Rome has been an archetype for every perceived decline and fall of a nation or an organization, and, hence, should also served as a symbol for our own fears.

The Gerakan members should pay close attention to Gibbon’s contention and conclusion that moral decay was the fundamental reason for the decline and fall of Rome. It started with the moral decay of an emperor with no principle, no integrity, and no shame.

Keng Yaik is absolutely right that a leader who doesn’t bother about a very crucial and critical EGM in his own party, but is prepared to go for socializing in another Barisan Nasional component partner’s function is not fit to continue leading the party.

“Tsu Koon is someone who hates getting involved in solving conflicts for fear of offending people,” Keng Yaik was quoted as telling reporters at a press conference.

Keng Yaik said Tsu Koon’s attitude of speaking no evil and burying his head in the sand had brought about many problems in the party.

Obviously, the days of Gerakan are number, given the type of leadership it has. Truly, the party has become more and more irrelevant by the day.

The no-confidence vote against Teng Hock Nan during the Penang Gerakan EGM on Sunday 10 October 2010 should extend to include such a vote on Tsu Koon.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 8:01 am and is filed under
Gerakan
,
Thomas Lee
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Proposed Advisory Board Will Create More Bureaucracy

By
Jerry Francis

Ipoh Echo

The Perak Government’s proposal to establish advisory boards in every district to hear public views from a broad spectrum in determining the state‘s direction, appears to be a good idea.

However, why is it necessary now? Is the state government admitting that what had been done in the past was not according to “public opinion and feedback” and therefore it needs to form the advisory board comprising NGOs and media representatives? Or, it is merely to satisfy those aspiring to hold official post?

This is the impression I got when state chairman for local government, Dato’ Dr. Mah Hang Soon, recently explained that the advisory board is merely to channel public opinion and feedback on issues and problems faced by the people. “Its role is only to give opinions and advice from their respective field of interest,” he stressed.

The creation of an advisory body was first disclosed by the Menteri Besar Dato’ Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir last year, although he labelled it as a civic society council. “What is good is that it would involve the whole community in social development where the NGOs chosen will be representing all the bodies which focus on poverty eradication, welfare and development,” Zambry had stated.

Appoint Only Knowledgeable Councillors

In an immediate reaction to the proposed move, President of Ipoh City Watch (ICW), Augustine Anthony, described it as “creating more bureaucracy”.

According to him if the local government had followed section 10(2) of the Local Government Act 1976 when appointing their councillors then there would be no need to set up such an advisory board.

“At present the Councillors are mostly from political parties who perhaps are clueless in the affairs of the local council matters and the fact that there is a suggestion that there should be an advisory body only compounds the belief that they are so,” he said.

Augustine pointed out that under the said section, the councillors appointed must have wide experience in local government affairs, have achieved distinction in any profession in commerce or industry, and are capable of representing the interest of their communities in the local authority area. “It is for this reason we have always asked the local government to follow the spirit of section 10(2) and that is to appoint the best brains in the community. And if we have the best, then there is no reason for them to be advised by some other advisory body,” he added.

Two Heads Rather Than One?

It appears that the present corps of local councillors in the state is incapable of getting opinions and feedback from the people and therefore it is necessary to have two heads rather than one? How can such an advisory board be relevant to the local authorities when its members can only provide lip service, as they have no voting rights.

Certainly the state government has sufficient expertise and the machinery to undertake development projects which are beneficial to the people without having an advisory board to pass on opinion and feedback.

Creating an advisory board will just encourage discussion after discussion, and waste time as well as public funds, without achieving its objectives. Take for instance the various state government’s sponsored tourism seminars and symposiums held in the past with the view to get “opinions and feedback” from private sector and individuals to promote tourism to the state. I was invited to attend a number of them. Lengthy discussions were often held and views and suggestions were compiled and reported to the state government.

The same views and suggestions repeatedly emerged at subsequent seminars and symposiums. Yet, nothing came out of such discussions, just a waste of time and money.

Need For Honest Intention

Therefore, there is no doubt that the proposed advisory board will end up the same, unless the state government has the honest intention to hear the “opinions and feedback” of the people.

The state government has all the trained professionals and agencies, including the State Economic Planning Unit, State Development Corporation, and various local councils to plan and implement suitable projects. All the state government needs is for their elected representatives, councillors and officers to be dedicated and sincere in carrying out their responsibilities, and for the authorities, to honestly and fairly implement all viable requests from the people, irrespective of opposition controlled constituencies.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 10:03 am and is filed under
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Benefit Of Being Malay First

by
Jacqueline Ann Surin

The
Nut Graph

4th October 2010

ARE you Malay first? Or Malaysian first? That is the current rhetoric in some parts of our political landscape and is spurring some Malaysians to engage in a contest over what it means to be Malaysian.

For certain the question is not a new one. The DAP has for the longest time been brandishing the motto of “Bangsa Malaysia” in an attempt to dismantle the Barisan Nasional (BN)’s race-based politics. DAP advisor Lim Kit Siang, for one, is nowhere close to letting up on this issue. He has demanded repeatedly for, especially, Umno politicians to declare if they are Malaysian or Malay first.

And while Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin seemingly failed the test question, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz recently scored some points by declaring he was “Malaysian first and Malay next”. But is the question really about which should come first? Why does it seem to matter so much? And which of the two labels — one about race and the other about citizenship — is more profoundly important to us as Malaysian citizens?

Asset vs liability

If there’s anything that we’ve learnt from our series of Found in Malaysia interviews, it’s that our identities are far more complex than, first, the British colonialists and now, the BN government would like us to believe.

Just read some of the stories from the Malay Malaysian personalities we’ve featured. Chef Wan has Japanese and Indonesian ancestry in him, national squash player Mohd Azlan Iskandar is European, Indian, Malay and Chinese all in one, and Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz who is featured exclusively in the Found in Malaysia book is, in her own words, of pendatang stock since her ancestors were from Sumatera.

And so, one wonders why someone like the deputy prime minister, who is also Umno deputy president, feels compelled to respond to Lim’s challenge by making his Malay identity more important than, in this instance, his national identity. Why was it not possible for Muhyiddin to have replied that he was both Malay and Malaysian with neither one identity being more important? After all, our racial identities are far more complex than the tightly contained boxes we are expected to tick.

But this isn’t just about Muhyiddin although what our deputy prime minister, who is also education minister, says has implications on politics in Malaysia. It is about a larger issue of why being Malay to some is far more critical in Malaysia than placing equal or more importance on being Malaysian.

This is where I find a commentary by Deputy Education Minister Dr Puad Zarkashi and the remarks by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at the end of September at the United Nations rather disingenuous. Our racial diversity, we are told, is an asset, not a liability, that is cherished.

These claims, however, belie the fact that it is really far more advantageous to be a Malay citizen than a non-Malay citizen in Malaysia. From quotas for education and housing to promotions in the civil service to becoming prime minister, it cannot be denied that the system in place clearly favours Malays over non-Malays primarily on the basis of race.

And so if it’s clear that there are two classes of citizens in Malaysia — Malays and non-Malays — it is only logical to expect the growing incidence of name-calling of non-Malay Malaysians whether in political rallies, Biro Tatanegara programmes or in schools. In order to maintain the paradigm of ketuanan Melayu that is repeatedly used to justify continued Malay privileges and dominance, one must not ever admit that regardless of race, we are, as citizens, all actually the same and hence deserving of equal opportunities and treatment.

No surprise then that the likes of Muhyiddin are not about to declare they are Malaysian first. Similarly, that would also explain just why Puad, who is an Umno supreme council member, would so quickly label the likes of Nazri as suffering from “Malayphobia”. Those who declare themselves as Malaysian first, Malay second, are dangerous because they are violating the constitution and Umno’s raison d’etre, charged Puad.

Herein lies the weak link to the BN’s claim that it believes in the vision of 1Malaysia. How can citizens believe that the government, especially Umno, cherishes our diversity if it consistently favours one racial group of citizens over others?

Inclusive instead of exclusive

Any attempt to reframe the equation so that all of us are the same — from a citizenship point of view — would of course be seen as a threat. After all, such thinking could just dangerously lead to changing the equation of privilege and superiority to one of equality.

And that’s why Nazri‘s remarks made him such an instant hero in some circles. No matter the actual motivation for his remarks, this is what I suspect many people heard him say. That it was more important to him to belong to a group of people (“Malaysians”) where everyone was the same than it was to belong to another group of people (“Malays”) who enjoy exclusive privileges at the expense of others.

For many Malaysians, including me, saying “I am Malaysian first” is not about denying the cultural heritage of our respective ethnic groups. It is about reclaiming an identity that is inclusive instead of exclusive. It is about contesting the equation of Malay privilege so that no citizen needs to feel disadvantaged because of their race.

For certain, our identities are not one or the other, and cannot be limited to just race or nationality. Class, gender, sexuality, and religion are other aspects of identity that have been sidelined in this debate about being Malaysian. Indeed, depending on context, one aspect of our identity may be far more important than another with no contradiction at all to who we are. When Malaysians are overseas for example, it’s the most natural thing to say, “I’m Malaysian” instead of “I’m Malay/Chinese/Indian/etc”.

Still, if Umno politicians, or any other politician for that matter, want us to believe that 1Malaysia is for real, they best start talking and acting in ways that demonstrate they believe in an equation of inclusivity instead of exclusivity. The sum result, after all, is in the proof.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 8:31 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The need to stand up and be counted

By
Mariam Mokhtar

Monday, 04 October 2010 15:26

Last Saturday, a group of Malaysians, studying, living and working in the United Kingdom, spent the afternoon in the Cruciform Lecture Theatre in University College London listening to Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Raja Petra Kamarudin, PKR information chief Tian Chua and DAP Senator Tunku Abdul Aziz discuss the current political climate in Malaysia.

Many Malaysians are already aware that the country is heading towards further instability. Corruption has compromised our institutions and when the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission is seen to be part of the problem, public confidence is shattered.

Tunku Abdul Aziz confirmed what many suspected – the infiltration of the Malaysian police at every level, from the lower ranks, the inspectorate and up to the top. But he added that not all policemen were bad or corrupt.

In addition, Anwar talked about the thousands of deaths in police custody and mentioned the efforts of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) in helping to defend the families of Kugan and Teoh Beng Hock. He described the time when when he paid his respects to Teoh’s family, where his presence at the funeral was condemned and his motives were misconstrued, by  his enemies.

What these leaders told the audience was nothing new. But they were not there to present the usual rhetoric. They were there to urge the overseas Malaysians to act, to make small sacrifices and to take a stand against the forces which are destroying our country.

Back home, the Malaysian people have asked the BN government to do something and correct the injustices and restore our faith in the system. But Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has opted to do nothing and that is not an option we can live with.

Only last week, Najib reminded us that ‘there would be a bad impact on people if BN loses power’ and said, “There is no other government in the world which has done what the Malaysian government had, is doing or will be doing”.

What is this bad impact that the PM is referring to? Who will be affected by this ‘bad impact’? The ordinary Malaysians or the Umno elite?

Thus when Tian Chua described how Malaysia had become the joke of the international community, he condemned the government’s use of  economy as an exchange for human rights, civil liberties and racism, to stay in power. He described how BN used racial and religious sentiment to cling onto power. Both race and religion were used as the final line of defence.

Is Umno short of ideas that it has to stoop low and use ethnicity and religion as their final line of defence? For several years, there was always an excuse to avoid discussing controversial issues. Is Umno unable to rationlise? Our inability to confront these issues head-on will ultimately mean that we store these problems up for later.

RPK insisted that the next election was going to be won through the media but stressed that we needed a credible opposition or a good alternative to the existing government. He insisted that without the Civil Society Movement, the opposition could not improve and he lamented how PR lacked quality candidates.

Anwar revealed that there was a strong clamour for change by the rakyat, especially the young – the students and youth who he claimed made up PR’s support base. He condemned how the government constantly played the race card.

But didn’t the Deputy Prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin recently announce that the rights and privileges of Malaysians were preserved in the New Economic Model?

Anwar was careful to heap praise on the more assertive and confident Malays who recognise the abuses perpetrated by the government. He believed that the majority of Malays did not believe in the Umno agenda and said that his sodomy trial was all about a judiciary that is at the beck and call of Umno and a media controlled by Umno.

Responding to a question about whether Malaysia would be pushed by PAS towards an Islamic state if PR were to come to power, the participants were told that PAS needed 2/3 of the 222 seats in parliament to amend the constitution. With PAS only having 1/3 of the seats, then the formation of an Islamic state, is mathematically impossible. Kelantan, which has been under PAS rule for thirty years still had not reverted to a Muslim state.

With the Sarawak state election and the nation’s General Election looming, the words of Senator Tunku Abdul Aziz had a poignant message for Malaysians so that public confidence could be restored: “There is no institution in Malaysia that has not been compromised. Corruption makes victims of us all.”

He described the Malay psyche and how the BN government depended on the Malay votes in the rural areas to prop them up.

He warned that when one takes a stand against the government, the marginalisation of that person will take place and he then becomes the ‘enemy of the state’ and is wiped off the government radar screen.

The Senator’s challenge was for us to stand up and be counted. He is right. Doing nothing emboldens the Umno elite and weakens Malaysia as a whole. It is an option that could cost us our future and possible our lives.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 10:07 am and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Muhyiddin return to Treasury his salaries and allowances as Federal Minister for past 15 years so as not to be associated with forbidden money?

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Umno Ministers should decide at the Cabinet meeting tomorrow whether they will return their salaries and allowances to Treasury as they do not want to be associated with gambling money.

Ten days ago on September 25, Bernama carried the following report:

MUAR, Saturday 25 September 2010 (Bernama) — Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin has called on Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng to answer allegations made by Umno Youth on the state government’s financial source to fund its poverty eradication programmes.

Muhyiddin said Muslims would not want to be associated should gambling money were used for the programmes.

“We want an answer from Lim. If the money is from a forbidden source, Muslims will have no part in it,” he told reporters after launching a Pagoh education excellence programme at the Dewan Sri Pekembar, here.

Muhyiddin was asked on a news report today quoting Umno Youth as claiming that funds from gambling activities were used to finance poverty eradication programmes in Penang.

In line with Muhyiddin’s declaration that Muslims do not want to be associated with money from “a forbidden source”, the Deputy Prime Minister should set an example and declare that he will not only return his salary and allowances to Treasury, but will return all his salaries and allowances as Federal Minister for the past 15 years since 1995.

Muhyiddin’s past Cabinet portfolios were Minister of Youth and Sports (1995–1999), Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs (1999–2004), Minister of Agriculture (2004–2008) and Minister of International Trade and Industry (2008–2009) before becoming deputy prime minister and education minister in April 2009.

Can Muhyiddin compute and declare how much salaries and allowances he would have to return to the Treasury as Federal Minister in the past 15 years because they come from the Federal Government Consolidated Fund which includes gambling tax.

In the recent June meeting of Parliament, DAP MP for Rasah Anthony Loke had asked the Prime Minister-cum-Finance Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak  whether revenue from gambling was separated from the Consolidated Fund; the mechanism to manage the gambling revenue; its uses and what percentage was channelled to deal with social woes resulting from gambling activities.

This was Najib’s reply:

“At this time, revenue from gambling activities are categorized as government revenue. Based on Article 97 of the Federal Constitution and Financial Procedure Act 1957 (revised in 1972) all taxation or revenue received by the federal government will be credited into the Consolidated Fund.

“The Consolidated Fund comprises three main accounts, the Consolidated Account, the Consolidated Trust Account and the Consolidated Loans Account.

“All revenue from payment of taxes are put into the Consolidated Account like all other government revenue and is used for purposes of management spending and national development.”

In reply to another question from Loke, the Deputy Finance Minister Senator Awang Adek disclosed that the  gambling tax collected by the Barisan Nasional federal government last year amounted to RM2.3 billion, and that the figure included taxes from the casino in Genting Highlands and from revenue of numbers forecasting such as Magnum and Sports Toto.

As Muhyiddin said that Muslims do not want to be associated with money from “a forbidden source”, and part of the expenditure for national management and development including paying the salaries and allowances of Cabinet Ministers is sourced from gambling revenue, the Deputy Prime Minister must be consistent and return all his salaries and allowances as Cabinet Minister going back to 15 years to the Treasury.

It is most unfortunate that instead of advising Penang Umno not to resort to irresponsible politicking, as falsely accusing the Penang government of using gambling money to pay RM100 annually to senior citizens in the state aged above 60 years, Muhyiddin acted in a most irresponsible manner in aiding and abetting Penang UMNO’s “political desperado” tactics.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 1:06 pm and is filed under
Finance
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
,
Penang Government
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will 8th Cabinet meeting tomorrow still end up empty-handed with no disciplinary action against the two principals who made racial/religious slurs against students in school despite 1st incident occurring 55 days ago?

The question many Malaysians are asking is whether the eighth Cabinet meeting tomorrow will still end up empty-handed with no disciplinary action against the two principals, one in Johore and the other in Kedah, who made racial and religious slurs against students in schools despite the first incident occurring 55 days ago on August 12.

Another case of disgraceful conduct by public servants was discussed by the Cabinet last Wednesday – the  derogatory, offensive and insensitive reference to the Chinese and Indian communities as “Si Mata Sepet” (“Squinty-eyed”) and “Si Kaki Botol” (“Alcoholics”) by the National Civics Bureau (BTN) deputy director Hamin Husin at a closed-door Puteri Umno function – but there was no satisfactory outcome although the open mockery of the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia policy by public servants further undermined Najib’s authority, credibility and legitimacy.

The Cabinet meekly asked the Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Sidek Hassan to investigate the racist remarks by Hamim, who have meanwhile received the endorsement of Perkasa to  lodge a police report under the tutelage of Perkasa.

Where does the Cabinet come in  on this. Do the Ministers have any leadership role? Or are they completely impotent and irrelevant!

The Najib Cabinet risks being regarded as the Cabinet-joke in the nation’s history under six Prime Ministers – with a Deputy Prime Minister who openly repudiated  Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia concept by declaring that he is Malay first and Malaysian second; a KPI Minister who cannot pass the KPI in his own political party, denounced by his President-predecessor and party adviser as “an ostrich” who ran away from problems; and Cabinet Ministers most of whom dare not take a clear-cut stand whether on 1Malaysia or New Economic Model, the two signature policies of the Prime Minister.

All Malaysians await the outcome of tomorrow’s Cabinet meeting – whether there is going to be more procrastination and  “tai chi” over the gross indiscipline of the two errant school principals and the BTN deputy director in openly flouting Najib’s 1Malaysia concept.

I am waiting for the outcome of the Cabinet tomorrow to decide whether to move an emergency motion in Parliament on Monday to demand an urgent debate on these two issues.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 October 2010, 3:16 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘… I am proud of my ethnicity …’

By
K Temoc
 | Letters

I refer to the article titled Behind Perkasa’s pig obsession  by your columnist Helen Ang. While I find it interesting I must take issue with her on two points, both related to DAP. Firstly (excuse the pun) it’s about her criticism of Lim Kit Siang’s ‘Malaysian First’.

She made a motherhood statement that the Malaysian First-ers hate to be called ‘pendatang’ and don’t like to be told ‘balik Cina’, but one that lacks relevance because really, which Chinese does?

Then she argued that though Dr Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah has Chinese skin tone and Chinese facial features, no one has told him to ‘balik Cina’. And the reason is of course that Ridhuan is a Malay-speaking Muslim, ipso facto the ‘balik Cina’ jeer does not apply to him as he belongs here.

Then her logic plummeted when she averred that for Malaysian First-ers to avoid the ‘balik Cina’ gibe, they should emulate Ridhuan who is the model Malaysian First-er. She also quoted a blogger (I believe to be Shuzheng) who also argued that Malaysian First requires doing a Ridhuan Tee. Shuzheng argued that if a Chinese, like Ridhuan, no longer possesses Chinese characteristics, then nobody can ask him/her to ‘balik Cina’.

Ang and blogger Shuzheng both failed to understand two things: (a) Dr Ridhuan tee is not a Chinese by choice and a Malay through his constitutional rights, so how and who he looks like is totally irrelevant, and (b) Lim Kit Siang’s ‘Malaysian First’ is not about acceptance per se. On July 5, Lim Kit Siang made a media statement (available on his blog) in response to a second challenge by DPM Muhyiddin to state whether he is a Chinese or Malaysian first.

Lim said: ‘I had already stated in Parliament that I am a Malaysian first and Chinese second. I am proud of my ethnicity but I have always believed that all Malaysians must rise above their ethnic, cultural, religious and geographic differences to seek a common bond with the Malaysian identity transcending all ethnic, cultural, religious and geographic identities.’

That’s a political vision statement of the highest merit, akin to one made on Aug 28, 1963 in a distant land by another visionary who said the following immortal words during an era of seemingly impossible struggle for racial equality, and for an end to ethnic discrimination.

Those words were: ‘I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.’

‘I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.’ […]

‘This is our hope. This is the faith ….. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood.’ […}

‘Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksand of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God’s children.’

That visionary, Martin Luther King Jr, didn’t have to abandon his identity, heritage or convert himself into a white man as Michael Jackson did. And he wasn’t alone nor the first in the struggle – there was Rosa Parks nearly a decade before him – to chip gradually but perseveringly away at what was then seen as the insurmountable odds of invincible racism.

Thanks to their efforts, endurance and faith in themselves, today an African American sits in the White House as the 44th President of the United States of America. At home Lim Kit Siang espouses the Malaysian First doctrine to seek the same outcome. His objectives are clear and straightforward, and he knows he would still need many like-minded successors to chip away at the vested interests of Malaysian racism before his dream can come true that all Malaysians ‘will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character’.

Lim Kit Siang and many like me do not want to see a Chinese as a future prime minister of Malaysia but rather a Malaysian.

Secondly, I regret very much Ang made a double incorrect statements that the wearing of selendang (presumably by Teo Nie Ching) to a surau and Lim Guan Eng ‘Photoshop-ed’ slaughtering cow in Islamic ritual were examples of DAP preaching Malaysian First in the hope of gaining privileges as first-class citizens.

I believe by now we should be able to easily disregard her bizarre accusation of Malaysian First as a concept to gaining privileges as first class citizens, but I lament her refusal to acknowledge that Teo Nie Ching had to wear a selendang after a faux pas already chided by the Selangor Sultan; and if Teo visited her Malay constituency, what better place than a surau, the traditional gathering place for kampung Muslim Malays.

I would like to ask Ang what’s wrong with the DAP current program of seeking Malay acceptance through more direct socio-political intercourse. After all, the Malays represent more than 60% of Malaysians. Why disparage a political party for striving to demonstrate their Malaysian character as well as enlarge its voters base?

The only area I agree with Ang would be in her concerns with the DAP’s unnecessary flirtation with Islam. I believe the DAP can seek rapprochement with the Malay community without over- the-top fawning over a historical Muslim leader and his exemplary governance, and

perhaps in that process, misleading some Pakatan Rakyat Muslims into believing Lim Guan Eng is so enamoured of Caliph Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz that he will soon be embracing Islam.

But unfortunately the worst of her attacks against DAP was when she made no mention of the fact that the photo showing Lim Guan Eng slaughtering a cow in Islamic ritual was a forgery. I hope it’s a genuine slipup and not a Shuzheng type of insecure creativity, where that blogger (in a letter) had accused Lim Kit Siang, in promoting the Malaysian First concept, of denying his (Lim’s) ancestral roots.

Let me conclude by reproducing for both Helen Ang and blogger Shuzheng a crucial sentence of what Lim Kit Siang had stated in his media statement of July 5, 2010.

‘… I am proud of my ethnicity …’.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 October 2010, 11:48 am and is filed under
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s Pastoral Picture of Malaysia

Asia Sentinel
 | Correspondent

Despite the prime minister’s speech to the UN, his country is facing serious racial tension

Malaysia’s Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak, made an eloquent speech to the United Nations earlier this week, telling the assembled body that, among other things, Malaysia “is a multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-cultural and democratic society that has benefited from the positive interaction and synergy between the various communities. Mosques, temples, churches and other places of worship co-exist in harmony.

“Although Islam is the official religion, we honor other religions – Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism – by making their religious and cultural celebrations as national holidays and celebrate them as national events. It is this equilibrium that leads to moderation or wasatiyyah in the Islamic tradition of mutual justice.”

That picture of Malaysia, thought to have been crafted by the giant US public relations firm APCO Worldwide for delivery in New York, is badly frayed, however. Many people in Kuala Lumpur say racial tension is higher than it has been since 1987, when former Prime Minister Mahathir cracked down in the so-called Operation Lalang and threw lots of top opposition politicians in jail under the Internal Security Act, which allows in effect for indefinite detention without trial.

Political events since the 2008 general election have led to ever-rising tension, particularly between Malays and Chinese although there have been strains in the Indian community as well. It is unclear today how far down into the society that racial bitterness extends. On many occasions, the two races have worked together to attempt to calm racial tensions. Last year, when unknown vandals firebombed a Christian church in a Kuala Lumpur suburb, urban Malays went to the church to attempt to calm anger.

Najib’s attempts to unify his country are facing deep problems, many of them caused by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has taken on the question of special rights for the Malay majority and played a major role in the development of a Malay superiority NGO called Perkasa, whose fiery leader, Ibrahim Ali, has been perceived as a Mahathir ally although he is an independent legislator.

“Perkasa’s vocal spokesmen Ibrahim and Mahathir seem hell bent – through such vociferous bickering – to stop Prime Minister Najib Razak from implementing his New Economic Model which is supposed to liberalise the economy from the clutches of the economically stifling, much corrupted and skewed New Economic Policy that heavily plays on ‘Malay rights,” wrote Raja Petra Kamarudin, the editor of the influential blog Malaysia Today.

“The problem is a segment of the Malays fear what is needed to revive private investment, especially domestic private investment, could cause Najib to lose the general election,” said an analyst with a Kuala Lumpur-based think tank. “This assumes that the Malay electorate would be hostile to policy measures to ameliorate the NEP’s re-structuring objectives. Najib has said this will now be applied on nationally rather than on a company basis while continuing the focus on reducing poverty.  Perkasa’s strength comes from its linkage with Mahathir who still commands some support in Umno and among the Malay community. Undoubtedly, Malays who feel threatened by prospect of less contracts etc from the Government will be hostile to Najib’s economic plans.”

The Sept. 27 death of another lawmaker, Parti Islam se-Malaysia state assemblyman Che Hashim Sulaima, will kick off the 12th by-election since the 2008 electoral surprise that gave the opposition control of four states and shocked the ruling Barisan Nasional. The United Malays National Organisation is expected to pull out all the stops in going after the Kelantan seat. With the Islamic fundamentalist PAS in the unanticipated role of positioning itself as a moderate party seeking to attract non-Malay votes, it remains to be seen if UMNO will attempt to appeal to voters by emphasizing Malay superiority.

Mahathir has been fanning the flames of unrest by his continuing demand for the continuation of special treatment for Malays, a cause he has espoused ever since the publication of his book, The Malay Dilemma. In that book, Mahathir argued that because Malays were rural and backward and because the economy was controlled by urban Chinese, they needed special treatment. After disastrous racial riots in July of 1969, the government agreed with Mahathir and created the New Economic Policy, in affect an affirmative action program for a majority race. For 40 years, they have been given that special treatment but they have advanced relatively little vis-à-vis the Chinese. Today, social scientists argue that affirmative action to help the Malays has been a crutch that has cushioned their lives and kept them from healthy competition.

But changing that policy is messing with a powder keg. Rallies against changing it have drawn thousands of angry Malays. Mahathir fanned the flames considerably by lending his public support to a Malay superiority rally in Terengganu on May 13, the anniversary of the 1969 race riots that took hundreds of lives. The octogenarian former leader has not broken with Najib, partly out of his loyalty to Najib’s father, who reinstated him in politics after he was expelled from UMNO following publication of his book. But he continues to demand special treatment for Malays. In his blog, Che Det, on August 30, he wrote that the leader of the Chinese Economic Congress was racist for calling for a meritocratic society.

“It is racial because he was advocating taking away the protection afforded by the NEP and quotas from the bumiputeras (native Malays) and not from any other race,” Mahathir wrote. “I am not proud of the protection afforded the bumiputera. It implies weakness. I don’t think Malays and other bumiputera like to think that they are inferior in any way. But the reality is that in Malaysia the bumiputeras need new skills and a new culture even. These cannot be had by them in a mere 20 years. The original planners of the NEP were too optimistic.”

Najib hired the US public relations firm APCO to come up with a US$40 million program to seek to pull the races together as well as to seek to burnish his own image overseas, tarnished as it has been by a long series of scandals. The program, called 1Malaysia, is considered by most people to have failed.

Despite the fact that the special rights have become a millstone around their neck instead of moving them into a higher income bracket. Especially, critics say, it has created a rentier class of so-called “Umnoputras” who skim off contracts through government–linked companies to enrich themselves and that little of the benefit trickles down to the rank and file

When Najib took office in April 2009, he started seeking to modify the program, called the New Economic Policy. That has led to continuing tension. In May, some 1,500 members of the Malay Consultative Council, a group of 76 Malay-rights organizations, summarily rejected Najib’s plans to replace it with what the premier called his New Economic Model.

At the forefront of the protest against Najib’s plans has been Ibrahim Ali, who has not only threatened non-Malays but launched a series of attacks on moderates. Among other things, Ibrahim has sought to have top officials including Chua Soi Lek, the president of the Malaysian Chinese Association – the second biggest component of the Barisan Nasional after the United Malays National Organisation – arrested for sedition, basically for talking back at him. He has demanded also that shariah laws be amended to prohibit non-Muslims from entering mosques and prayer rooms – which they have done traditionally. He has also demanded that Nurul Izzah Anwar, an MP and opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, be jailed as well after Nurul accused Mahathir of inciting racial animosities.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 October 2010, 11:46 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Perak DAP leaders,  branches, members and supporters should rally behind Ngeh and Kula

On Sunday morning, I had sent the following sms to Perak DAP State Chairman, Ngeh Koo Ham and Perak DAP Deputy State Chairman M. Kulasegeran:

“Lets face it. What happened last 36 hrs have caused enormous damage to DAP leaders involved, DAP, PR – only question is who suffer more damage –  which is utter madness. Its massive ‘lose-lose’ formula without any redeeming ‘win-win’ element at all. Public opprobrium all round. Nobody can hold head high. Decisive action needed.”

Ngeh and Kula have since issued apologies for the Perak DAP leadership crisis and have pledged to resolve party differences internally.

I urge all Perak DAP leaders, branches, members and supporters to rally behind Ngeh and Kula on an unity ticket to restore the Pakatan Rakyat government in Perak and to help Pakatan Rakyat to take over Putrajaya in the next general elections.

I am reminded of two quotations about the lessons of history:

“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history.” – Aldous Huxley

“Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” – George Santayana

Perak DAP leaders, branches and members must remember these quotations and prove that they are not only mindful of them but  would not repeat the Perak DAP history where because party disunity, Perak DAP suffered the worst electoral setback in the 1995 general elections – reduced to only one State Assembly seat after winning four Parliamentary and 13 State Assembly seats in the 1990 general elections.

DAP Perak leaders, branches and members should fully embrace the unity formula in Perak so that DAP Perak can play its full role in ensuring that DAP and Pakatan Rakyat “write history” in the state in the next general elections – which is the expectation and aspiration of all Perakians and Malaysians who want to see a new beginning for Malaysia after more than half-a-century of misrule.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 October 2010, 3:08 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why Islam And Democracy Are Destined to Coincide

by
Anwar Ibrahim

First and foremost, there is essentially no problem in terms of compatibility, not a foundational problem at least that would make it impossible for a country with a majority of Muslims to be governed according to the requirements of a constitutional democracy. In other words, the notion of Islam being diametrically opposed to democracy and its principles is a fallacy.

Islam enjoins the faithful to uphold equality, justice, and human dignity. If violence and terror are being spread by Muslims in the name of Islam then it is an aberration reflective of such people and the focus should rightly be on the underlying causes of such actions, not Islam. Blaming Islam won’t solve the problem as long as the underlying causes are not addressed and resolved.

But detractors say that Islam not only condones but urges the faithful to commit acts of violence in the name of jihad. This is nonsense. But they cite chapter and verse to support this view. Yes, but it is only by extreme distorting of the textual interpretation. On the contrary, the truth is that Islam prohibits violence and terror by virtue of the principles of moderation and the protection of life, limb and property.

This is subsumed under the doctrine of the maqasid al-Shari’ah, a most crucial and significant tool for the progress of Muslim societies, a tool which unfortunately has been much ignored. By virtue of this doctrine for example, jihad is a call to the faithful to fulfill the tenets of the religion by doing good and averting evil, establishing justice, promoting charity and helping the weak and the marginalized. It is not a battle cry for war, let alone one to justify mayhem and murder. Above all, jihad enjoins Muslims to maintain peace and harmony and safeguard the sanctity of life and property. These are ideals completely in consonance with the dictates of democracy.

But what about this incarceration/liberation dichotomy? The answer lies in debunking the school of ideological rigidity which is largely responsible for making the religion very rigid and exclusive. The fact is that Islam is amenable to adapting to modern times with its defining feature being its inclusive nature. Empirically, we know that Islam in Southeast Asia is a case in point. So is Turkey though the same may not be said about the Islam of the Middle East but that ought to be seen in the context of the geopolitical situation there.

The modernity of Islam in Southeast Asia is reflected for instance in the adoption of the principles of freedom and democracy for the establishment of an independent state. In this regard, the region’s transition to democracy debunks the notion of incompatibility between Islam and democracy.

As for equating Islam with intolerance and violence, that again finds no basis in reality. Muslim rule for centuries in Spain remains in the history books as clear testimony to the tolerance and spirit of convivencia among Muslims, Christians and Jews. In Southeast Asia, traders and Sufis spread the religion through their accommodative style of proselytizing which attracted adherents who have also kept some significant aspects of their pre-Islamic cultures. This explains why multi-cultural and multi-religious societies evolved in Muslim majority countries.

Today, those who call for violence and terror in the name of jihad can find little traction for their brand of Islam. A case in point is Indonesia two elections back when the people overwhelmingly rejected the radicals who rode on the jihad ticket. This is significant in debunking the notion that democracy in a Muslim majority nation can be easily hijacked by extremists and radicals.

Turkey is a fine example of what a Muslim nation can achieve if its leaders remain steadfast in observing the basic tenets of Islamic statecraft: modernist, moderate, progressive and tolerant with justice and the rule of law as a motto for governance. The recent referendum of the Turkish people in favor of fundamental constitutional changes to further strengthen democracy speaks volumes. In this regard, Turkey’s leaders stand in sharp contrast to the autocrats and dictators in some other Muslim countries who continue to deny the people democracy by raising the hijacking by extremists’ spectre.

The question arises as to whether there has been any real progress in political reform in the Muslim world apart from Turkey and Indonesia? Isn’t it true that certain states continue to be under one-man or one-party rule despite the trappings of reform? And even though certain states appear to moving on the path to real democracy, the rhetoric often exceeds the reality. There must therefore be greater resolve for Muslim countries to embrace constitutional democracy and translate that into reality: hold free and fair elections, ensure the separation of powers and guarantee fundamental civil liberties including allowing the full participation of women in political life. Vindictive prosecutions, arbitrary arrests, and the use of the state apparatus to silence political dissent must be a thing of the past. Unless and until such reforms are in place, the convergence of Islam and democracy will only be a mirage.

As for the process of democratization itself, there is the troubling question of the real intention of certain Western powers. You cannot turn a blind eye to blatant human rights violations in some countries and condemn these practices in others. You cannot say to one country, give us your support in this current war we’re waging, and we won’t interfere in your administration. The “you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours” diplomacy may be good realpolitik but it is a betrayal of the cause of democracy and freedom.

Unfortunately, however, it is partly because of this hypocritical approach to democratization that we still see many Muslim societies languishing under sham democracies. These are governments with the trappings of democracy but are in fact masquerades perpetuating injustice, human rights abuses and corruption. These ‘democracies’ employ the entire state apparatus and exploit the people’s hard earned money to promote their personal and vested interests. They plunder the state coffers, parcel out vast tracts of prime commercial land to relatives and cronies, and expropriate millions of hectares of virgin forests transforming them into wasteland.

So, the truth is that the assault on freedom and democracy is not from Islam, though the bulk of the perpetrators are Muslims. Indonesia and Turkey have demonstrated that democracy is not only acceptable but essential to Islam and that the enemy of Islam is not democracy but injustice, corruption, tyranny and greed. Indeed, freedom and democracy is part and parcel of the self-evident truths that would set mankind apart from the rest of God’s creatures.

The real issue is not whether Islam and democracy are destined to coincide but whether those in power in Muslim majority countries will uphold freedom and democracy, respect the rule of law and fulfil their duties to the people. If that doesn’t happen then it is incumbent on us to make it happen. And that is a cause worth fighting for.

(Keynote address by Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Parliamentary Opposition Leader at Brussels, 28th September, 2010)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 October 2010, 10:47 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anti-Extremism Begins at Home

By
Kee Thuan Chye

I TOTALLY agree with most of what Prime Minister Najib Razak recently said at the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, especially about the attempts in some parts of the world to demonize Islam and spread Islamophobia.

I find it alarming to see so many e-mails and videos being circulated warning people of the dangers of Islam and propagating the fear that, with the Muslims multiplying at the current rate, they would one day outnumber people of other faiths and take over the world.

This kind of fear propagation reminds me of that practiced by Mahathir Mohamad when he warned Malays that they would lose power to the non-Malays, especially if Pakatan Rakyat takes over the government. It’s destructive.

It appals me that even Malaysians are instrumental in spreading Islamophobia by forwarding these e-mails. When I get one, I often reply to the sender to tell them not to disseminate such hatred. I tell them this problem has arisen because of misunderstanding of history, and that these e-mails don’t tell the other side of the story, which is the plight of Muslims who have suffered because of the historical events fashioned by imperialists.

Some of the e-mails reek of ignorance and bigotry. One that irked me no end was of an American serviceman answering questions about whether a Muslim could be a real American. These are just some of his answers:

Religiously – no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam.

Socially – no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Philosophically – no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

These answers are so distorted, blinkered and untruthful that they are not worth rebutting. The danger lies in e-mails such as this being received and accepted as the truth by millions of people who don’t know what Islam is about.

I am not a subscriber of organized religion, but I believe in the right of all religions to exist. I also believe no religion should throw mud at another and claim to be truer than any other.

The only way to resolve the differences in the world today is to get all sides to sit down at the table and discuss. Perhaps the US should even sit down with al-Qaeda and thrash it out, peacefully. Why not? These two are the major causes of the mess the world is in today. If they can talk, instead of fight, we might get some peace.

This is the same line taken by Najib at the UN when he said: “We must choose negotiations over confrontation. We must choose to work together and not against each other.”

He also said, “We must choose moderation over extremism”, which I readily agree with. But then why doesn’t he deal with the racial extremists that exist in his own country?

Nothing has been done about the school principals in Johor and Kedah who allegedly made racist remarks despite the calls from several quarters, including the MCA, for action to be taken immediately. Hasn’t the lack of action dragged on for too long?

Ironically, as Najib was calling for moderation at the UN, a Biro Tata Negara (BTN) assistant director named Hamim Husin was reported to have made racist remarks at a meeting with Puteri Umno members.

He now claims he did nothing wrong because it was a closed-door meeting, but any sensible mind would figure out that this is not an excuse. He was not talking to friends. He was talking in an official capacity in an official situation. In any case, it’s not a matter of closed-door or public. He has to be responsible for what he says. Racism is racism, whether it is in the public sphere or over the dinner table with your family members. So, what action will be taken on this matter?

Of course, we know that Najib was talking about religious extremism at the UN, but, outside that, and to be consistent, he should hold the same standard for racial extremism. Especially in his own country.

He said we should “work together to combat and marginalize extremists who have held the world hostage with their bigotry and bias”. So why doesn’t he apply this to the extremists who hold Malaysia hostage with their bigotry and bias? Why does he let an NGO like Perkasa oppose what needs to be done for his New Economic Model (NEM) and Economic Transformation Programme (ETP)? Why does he accommodate their objections even when he knows that they stand in the way of a brighter Malaysian future?

At the UN, he also said the world had “allowed the ugly voices of the periphery to drown out the many voices of reason and common sense”. Isn’t that what is happening in Malaysia as well?

Almost every day, we hear “the ugly voices” of Perkasa denouncing this person or that person for saying something it dislikes, including people like MCA president Chua Soi Lek. Every now and then, Perkasa would run to the police station and make a report against someone for making a seditious statement. And the odd thing is, the police would usually take follow-up action and call that person in for interrogation.

But when Perkasa says and does anything that could be deemed seditious, no action is taken against it. A week or so ago, some Perkasa members protested outside the venue where the Chinese rapper Namewee launched his debut album. They also burned posters of the artist. They challenged him to come out and meet with them. They said they just wanted to talk.

If all they wanted was to talk, why did they burn those posters? And why did they call themselves “hulubalang Melayu” (Malay warriors) and “panglima perang” (commanders of war)? And why did they vow afterwards to hound Namewee wherever he went?

This was obviously a racially motivated act calling for “war”. If it wasn’t a threat to public peace, what is? But the police did nothing about it.

Well, so much for Najib’s call at the UN to “reclaim the centre and the moral high ground that has been usurped from us”. When he comes home, he’ll have to get down to the ground and reassess his moral position. Or he might find his own position usurped by forces going out of control.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 October 2010, 9:04 am and is filed under
Kee Thuan Chye
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should give local content to his call for a global movement of moderates against extremists

At the Eighth Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM 8) in Brussels on Tuesday,  the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak reiterated his call for a global movement of moderates from all faiths to play a dominant role in a world threatened by extremism.

This was an expansion of his call he made last month at the United Nations General Assembly in New York in which he urged nations to reclaim the centre from extremists.

At the end of his six-day visit to the United Nations and the United States, Najib was uplifted by the positive response to his call and he told the accompanying  Malaysian media that Malaysia’s profile had been enhanced, particularly in the West.

I was in Melbourne when Najib made the international call for global moderation, not only making it the theme in his maiden address to the United Nations General Assembly but also publicly commending United States President Barack Obama for the latter’s “courageous public position” in dealing with Islamophobia in condemning the proposed burning of the Quran by a Florida pastor and urging Obama “to galvanise the moderates, bring in the non-governmental organizations and social movements

I immediately came out with a statement urging the Prime Minister on his return home to lead a national campaign to galvanise moderates in Malaysia against the rise of extremism, whether racial bigotry or religious intolerance, which would be fully in line with his own declaration of “Zero tolerance for racism” made just before National Day on August 31.

Najib did not do any such thing on his return home nor did he  make any clarion call for moderation  to reclaim the centre from extremists.

Instead, he has gone off to make another international call for  a global movement of moderates at ASEM 8 in Brussels.

Najib should realize that his call for a global movement of moderates against extremists will quickly lose all credibility unless it is grounded by a national agenda against extremism, whether racial bigotry or religious intolerance.

For this reason, I call on Najib to make a Prime Ministerial statement in Parliament when it reconvenes on Monday on how he proposes to give local content to his international call at UNGA and ASEM 8 for a global movement of moderates against extremists.

This is relevant and most pressing as Najib has himself expressed concern at the rise of extremism in the country – a development which is raising increasing national and international concern as  impacts adversely on Malaysia’s international competitiveness.

How can Najib’s call for a global movement of moderates be taken seriously when he is not prepared to take a stand against extremism or dissociate himself from irresponsible politicking of race or religion?

For instance, it is now 56 days but no action has been taken by his government against the two school principals who made incendiary, insensitive and racist statements against students in school, making a total mockery of Najib’s “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” policy.

Also, how can  Najib allow  the Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Penang Umno to continue with their  irresponsible politicking to create panic among Muslim senior citizens in Penang so as to return the RM100 under the Senior Citizens Appreciation Programme on the ground that it is funded from “gambling sources” when this has been denied by the Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng and Muhyiddin has not dared to respond as to whether he would return to Treasury his salaries and allowances as Federal Minister for past 15 years so as not to be associated with “forbidden” money?

Furthermore, what is Najib’s  credibility in calling  for a global movement of moderates when he is unable to rein in the “brain-washing” indoctrination unit,  the Biro Tata Negara, in the Prime Minsiter’s Department from continuing to preach the worst forms of extremism?

As Din Merican said in his blog:  “BTN had turned into a Frankenstein that has gone berserk and done harm to millions of people who call Malaysia their one and only home”, there is only one way “to strap down the monster” – “abolish the detested BTN”.

So long as outfits like BTN continues to exist in the very bowels of the Najib administration, Najib does not possess the credentials and credibility to call for a global movement of moderates against extremists.

Is Najib prepared to announce the dissolution of BTN in a Prime Ministerial statement in Parliament on Monday?

I commend Din Merican’s blog yesterday entitled
“Biro Tata Negara: An Incubator or Bigotry and Intolerance”
 for Najib’s perusal and action:

The Biro Tata Negara (BTN) or National Civics Bureau has been hogging the limelight lately for all the wrong reasons. Ostensbily created for the purpose of fostering patriotism and “commitment to excellence”, the BTN has become an incubator of bigotry and intolerance. It turned out to be nothing more than “communal brainwashing” and is anything but civic.

It started off as an obscure agency in 1974 with an innocuous-sounding name: Youth Research Unit. It mutated into BTN at the time when Mahathir Mohamad had just assumed power. And unbeknownst to the public, the devils in the BTN had been subtlely and at times blatantly poisoning the minds of scholars, public servants, university students and youths sent there for training over the past quarter of a century.

For decades, BTN had been training and producing “graduates” to become future leaders who would come out well-rounded intellectually, emotionally, spiritually. The courses they studied had noble objectives: enhancing patriotism, strengthening self-reliance, building character and discipline, promoting excellent work ethics, and fostering a spirit of camaraderie “regardless of race”.

The goals were fine on paper but it appears they were not put into practice or had become totally irrelevant. Once shut up within the four walls of BTN, it is a  fact that the “students” were subjected to racial and political indoctrination.

The products of the BTN system were there for all to see: A school principal in Johor reportedly said “Chinese students should go back to China” and likened Indian prayer strings to dog leashes. A special officer openly said that “Indians came to Malaysia as beggars and Chinese, especially women, came to sell their bodies”. A high-ranking BTN officer shocked the nation when he allegedly called Chinese “slitty eyed” and Indians “alcoholic”. These are the tip of the iceberg: more muck will float when incendiary remarks made in public or in private functions see the light of day.

The courses were also political in nature, emphasising Malay supremacy and loyalty to national leaders. According to one BTN alumnus, a song was taught with the lyrics: “the land that you walk upon is owned by others”, insinuating that the non-Malays have grabbed all the land and that it was time the Malays asserted their rights and reclaimed lost ground.

Another alumnus was put off when the trainers tarred the Chinese as the “Jews of Asia” who were engaged in a conspiracy to topple the government. Yet another participant was shocked when one lecturer blatantly declared that the Malays “were the most supreme race in the world… while the others were insignificant”. The opposition was mercilessly flayed to bring home the message that it did not pay to vote for the other side.

The BTN continues to exist in its monstrous form. Apologists like Ahmad Maslan, deputy minister in the prime minister’s department, and Mahathir were quick to defend the ogre. Maslan dismissed the whole hullabaloo as a mere slip-up by one lecturer, while Mahathir had nothing but high praise for the BTN for “inculcating the values of discipline and hard work in public servants and scholars”. Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin came out from the dark to say BTN programmes “inculcate nationalism and unity… in line with the 1Malaysia concept”. These are weak responses. Even the recent directive to all heads of government departments to check their officers from making sensitive statements is an exercise in futility. It does not address the glaring abuses in the system.

Undoubtedly, BTN has failed to discharge its duty responsibly. It has created at taxpayers’ expense and released hundreds, perhaps thousands, of bigots into the civil service and other sectors, who will continue to spew racial slurs and undermine the very concept of patriotism.

Love of country cannot exist in a cauldron of hate and spite. Moral and ethics cannot take root when public servants themselves do not show exemplary conduct. Team spirit cannot be built on the mucky soil of racism. Unity in diversity is a lost cause when the doctrine of Malay supremacy is worshipped as a national ideology. BTN is an antithesis of everything that is good, unifying, principled, decent.

BTN was recast largely in the image of Mahathir. When the aging doctor took it under his wings in the Prime Minister’s Department, the creature underwent a series of operation. Drastic changes were introduced to ensure that all who attended the courses would come out with the look of the devil in their eyes.

BTN had turned into a Frankenstein that has gone berserk and done harm to millions of people who call Malaysia their one and only home. There is only way to strap down the monster and put it to sleep: abolish the detested BTN. This calls for firm, decisive action. BTN aka Frankenstein must be consigned with all haste to the dung heap of history.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 7 October 2010, 12:16 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.