PKR members should know what to do.
Friday, 24 September 2010
Tuesday, 21 September 2010
Sekarang Semuanya Treeleeyon, Treeleeyon! Takpe lah dengar aje...
Not so long ago Bodohwi announced his RM1.30 trillion Economic Corridors. As recent as 10th May 2010 he insisted his Corridors are still on track.
Today, Najib's Jala unveiled a new RM1.40 trillion Economic Transformation Plan and tells Malaysians to keep the faith. He is the same guy who said Malaysia will be phok kai by 2019 if we do nothing about current subsidies.
I do not think many are quite so impressed but we must keep the faith don't we? After all, we are also told UNCTAD's figures of plunging FDI for Malaysia are wrong. By the way is FDI considered private sector funding? What about EPF, SOCSO and ermm... Petronas?
Read the following Malaysia Insider and Malaysiakini reports and you decide lah:
Today, Najib's Jala unveiled a new RM1.40 trillion Economic Transformation Plan and tells Malaysians to keep the faith. He is the same guy who said Malaysia will be phok kai by 2019 if we do nothing about current subsidies.
I do not think many are quite so impressed but we must keep the faith don't we? After all, we are also told UNCTAD's figures of plunging FDI for Malaysia are wrong. By the way is FDI considered private sector funding? What about EPF, SOCSO and ermm... Petronas?
Read the following Malaysia Insider and Malaysiakini reports and you decide lah:
******************************************************************
Idris Jala asks Malaysians to keep the faith
By Lee Wei Lian September 21, 2010
 |
| Idris wants the people to believe in the country. |
He said it was important to have “positive energy” and believe in the country in order to give confidence to investors.
“If there is no hope for the future, there is no power in the present,” said Idris.
The former Malaysia Airlines CEO acknowledged the fractious racially-tinged debates that appeared to dominate national discourse but called on Malaysians to move on.
“When we compete with many nations, if we get vortexed into discussions (on affirmative action) that are not constructive, we can’t get to implement the entry-point projects,” he said, referring to the perennial debates over whether there should be a level playing field for all races.
The issue of confidence comes as private investment is reported to be on the decline over the past four years even as the Economic Transformation Programme calls for the private sector to drive the economy.
Observers note that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has been pushing for economic reforms but resistance from conservative groups has appeared to prevent the radical restructuring needed to turn the nation into a high-income developed economy.
When pressed by the media on whether ethnic quotas will be lifted, the Pemandu CEO acknowledged that the “specific privileges” given to Bumiputeras under the constitution will continue but said any assistance would be based on merit.
“Affirmative action will continue but redefined to be much more transparent and fair,” he said. “It will focus on need and merit. We all agree — whether Malays, Chinese or Indians — that the poor need to be helped.”
He added that not all Bumiputeras required assistance and those who didn’t should compete on a level playing field.
“Those Bumiputeras who do not need to be helped, we would like them to compete on an even playing field with non-Bumiputeras,” he said. “That is how you become strong.”
Idris noted that in the labs conducted by Pemandu, there were no racial issues that came into play during discussions on how to transform the economy.
“Under the New Economic Model, all of us need to share in prosperity that goes on for a long time,” he said. “It is clear we need to start growing the economy.”
Idris said national unity was essential for the nation’s advancement and that the country needs to be mindful of global competition.
“No football team can be champions without being united,” he pointed out. “We are competing in a global race where there are a lot of good competitors.”
He also made an impassioned plea for Malaysians to avoid “destructive talk and wasteful academic and philosophical debates” on racial issues.
“The private sector is prepared to put in money but they want the government to put in support,” he said.
******************************************************************
Bold RM1.4 trillion plan to transform economy
Royce Cheah Sep 21, 10 12:21pm
Malaysia on Tuesday unveiled ambitious plans to boost its economy by mobilising hundreds of billions of dollars of private investment, although questions remained over whether the money would materialise.
The plans ranged from a new mass transit system to relieve congestion in the capital, Kuala Lumpur, to building a huge oil storage facility next to neighbouring Singapore to form a regional oil products trading hub.
A government thinktank said it had identified investments worth RM1.376 trillion (US$444 billion) over 10 years, of which 60 percent would come from the private sector, 32 percent from government-linked companies and 8 percent from government.
The investment aims to double per capita income and push Malaysia into the ranks of "developed" nations by 2020, rebalancing Asia's third most export-driven economy towards domestic demand and the service sector.
These numbers 'pie in the sky'
"The plan does not provide a clear sense of where the money is coming from. A lot of these numbers are pie in the sky," said Bridget Welsh, a Malaysia specialist at Singapore Management University.
Malaysia is competing for investment with other fast-growing countries in Southeast Asia and neighbouring Indonesia recently unveiled plans to boost infrastructure too.
In the past 10 years, private companies invested just RM535 billion (US$172.4 billion), according to official data and Malaysia's private investment rate of around 10 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) is among the lowest in Asia and a third the level it was before the 1998 Asian financial crisis.
The government, which in 2009 ran its biggest budget deficit in 20 years as a percentage of GDP, contributes around half the investment in Malaysia and the minister in charge of presenting the investment plans said the new targets were credible.
"I don't think the government would publish a document that thick if there is no political will. It's a risky strategy to expose yourself so publicly when you have no plan to do it," Idris Jala told a public presentation on the plans.
The plan relies heavily on domestic capital as foreign direct investment in this country which in the early 1990s accounted for almost 40 percent of the Southeast Asian total accounted for just 3.8 percent in 2009, according to United Nations data.
Malaysian companies like leading bank CIMB and telco Axiata have started building a regional presence in large, fast growing countries, such as Indonesia.
Economists warned without a new policy framework to encourage investment the Malaysian plans would be hard to realise.
"It will be difficult to achieve the private investment growth target set by the government if there are no additional tax incentives given to the focus sectors," said Gundy Cahyadi, regional economist at investment bank OCBC.
New jobs would be 'middle-class'
The plans aim to create another 3.3 million jobs by 2020, many in the high-value service sectors such as Islamic finance. Idris said 46 percent of the new jobs would be "middle-class".
Despite churning out tens of thousands of graduates, Malaysia's education system has failed to deliver and is becoming increasingly polarised by arguments over language between the majority Malay population and minorities such as the large ethnic Chinese population.
The government thinktank that designed today's investment plan said that in 2003 Malaysia had just 21,000 finance and accounting professionals qualified to be employed by multi-national companies compared with 341,000 in India and 127,000 in the Philippines.
"How can you create middle-class jobs when you do not have an education system that works," said Singapore Management University's Welsh.
There is also policy risk in Malaysia. Recent plans for a radical overhaul of the country's costly subsidy regime proposed by the same thinktank that outlined the investment plans were shot down by government politicians who feared unpopularity.
Monday, 20 September 2010
What Are They Up To?
It was a quiet Sunday today. After sending JJ to Sentral this morning because he was supposed to witness an ad shoot or something, I was home the whole day. By the way, JJ is still out there somewhere but it's OK because he is getting relevant exposure in his chosen line of work.
Sometime in the late afternoon, someone rang the doorbell and looking out the window I saw four young-looking people. At first impression, I thought they were students doing some part-time survey or promo thingy. There was a guy and three girls. They told me they had something to share (regarding Christianity of course) and asked for a few minutes of my time. On closer scrutiny, none of them looked anything above 23 (Krystyn's age) and curiosity got the better of me so I invited them in.
The group said they had just graduated. My initial evaluation after a brief introduction was through visual impression. The guy (from Sarawak) who looked typically nerdy said he graduated overseas (did not say what discipline).
The three girls had distinctly different looks from each other. A prettier one with bright eyes who had graduated from Universiti Malaya in accounting (looked to, and did have a better command of English); a born Christian. Another who looked definitely ordinary had a degree in marketing from UPM or UKM; she looked the type who would feel at home in a Christian fellowship. The third (also from Sarawak) was a graduate in finance and economics I think. She was definitely in need of professional skin care. The second and the third girls appeared more enthusiastic and they revealed later that they were not born into Christian families but had recently converted to the faith.
The guy was the leader and I prompted him to begin his "sharing". They must have been taught by their church elders some form of canned presentation; everytime he mention a seemingly "salient" point the second and third girl would chorus his words in tandem as if cued. Anyway, they were trying to sell me Jesus...
Guy: "Uncle, all you have to do is to embrace the Spirit" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "How do I do that?"
Guy: "Just say three simple words" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "Wah! So easy wan ah. Say what ah?"
Guy: "The Lord Jesus"
Me: "You sure or not? So simple only ah. Just say the words and I can go to Heaven ah?"
Guy: "No lah, you have to accept Jesus in your mind (he did say "mind") by saying the three words then the Spirit will grow in you and you are on your way".
They were obviously all reasonably intelligent kids but I suppose still very naive and vulnerable to persuasive church elders. I was of course amused by the whole thing but felt I should stop wasting their time because they were certainly wasting mine. Moreover, I was already laughing in my mind because they reminded me of Boney M singing "The Rivers of Babylon":
What concerned me was that these 4 Chinese youth who admitted to not having had any life-shaking upheavals in life yet, are so besotted and obsessed with their religion which they obviously had not sufficiently studied in depth. There they were trying to teach me about my afterlife when they had not really begun to live their own real-life!
I was thinking they should be channeling their energy and devotion towards joining hands with other youths of Malaysia in demanding a better future for themselves in THIS promised land called Malaysia.
The session ended with me advising them to study Christianity in greater width and depth, and more importantly, also study the religions of others. But most important of all; find out in wider perspective what the increasing numbers of "Non-believers" believe. Gain more knowledge before deciding to put on the blinkers!
The guy was of course not very pleased that he was made to look rather unconvincing in front of his "flock". Hope they learnt something.
Hmmm... JJ is still out in KL somewhere. I know he has the same degree of dedication as the 4 youths but his is to learn as much, in the shortest possible time by creating opportunities and at the same time, not wasting opportunities that come his way.
Watch the following video too and see what many other Malaysian youth are doing:
...and this was a prequel:
Sometime in the late afternoon, someone rang the doorbell and looking out the window I saw four young-looking people. At first impression, I thought they were students doing some part-time survey or promo thingy. There was a guy and three girls. They told me they had something to share (regarding Christianity of course) and asked for a few minutes of my time. On closer scrutiny, none of them looked anything above 23 (Krystyn's age) and curiosity got the better of me so I invited them in.
The group said they had just graduated. My initial evaluation after a brief introduction was through visual impression. The guy (from Sarawak) who looked typically nerdy said he graduated overseas (did not say what discipline).
The three girls had distinctly different looks from each other. A prettier one with bright eyes who had graduated from Universiti Malaya in accounting (looked to, and did have a better command of English); a born Christian. Another who looked definitely ordinary had a degree in marketing from UPM or UKM; she looked the type who would feel at home in a Christian fellowship. The third (also from Sarawak) was a graduate in finance and economics I think. She was definitely in need of professional skin care. The second and the third girls appeared more enthusiastic and they revealed later that they were not born into Christian families but had recently converted to the faith.
The guy was the leader and I prompted him to begin his "sharing". They must have been taught by their church elders some form of canned presentation; everytime he mention a seemingly "salient" point the second and third girl would chorus his words in tandem as if cued. Anyway, they were trying to sell me Jesus...
Guy: "Uncle, all you have to do is to embrace the Spirit" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "How do I do that?"
Guy: "Just say three simple words" (followed by girls' chorus on cue).
Me: "Wah! So easy wan ah. Say what ah?"
Guy: "The Lord Jesus"
Me: "You sure or not? So simple only ah. Just say the words and I can go to Heaven ah?"
Guy: "No lah, you have to accept Jesus in your mind (he did say "mind") by saying the three words then the Spirit will grow in you and you are on your way".
They were obviously all reasonably intelligent kids but I suppose still very naive and vulnerable to persuasive church elders. I was of course amused by the whole thing but felt I should stop wasting their time because they were certainly wasting mine. Moreover, I was already laughing in my mind because they reminded me of Boney M singing "The Rivers of Babylon":
What concerned me was that these 4 Chinese youth who admitted to not having had any life-shaking upheavals in life yet, are so besotted and obsessed with their religion which they obviously had not sufficiently studied in depth. There they were trying to teach me about my afterlife when they had not really begun to live their own real-life!
I was thinking they should be channeling their energy and devotion towards joining hands with other youths of Malaysia in demanding a better future for themselves in THIS promised land called Malaysia.
The session ended with me advising them to study Christianity in greater width and depth, and more importantly, also study the religions of others. But most important of all; find out in wider perspective what the increasing numbers of "Non-believers" believe. Gain more knowledge before deciding to put on the blinkers!
The guy was of course not very pleased that he was made to look rather unconvincing in front of his "flock". Hope they learnt something.
Hmmm... JJ is still out in KL somewhere. I know he has the same degree of dedication as the 4 youths but his is to learn as much, in the shortest possible time by creating opportunities and at the same time, not wasting opportunities that come his way.
Watch the following video too and see what many other Malaysian youth are doing:
...and this was a prequel:
Friday, 17 September 2010
Professor Dr Azmi Sharom Being Crystal Clear
http://bfm.my/assets/files/MarketWatch/2010-09-14_CA_AzmiSharom.mp3
Monday, 13 September 2010
Be Careful Who You Call
A few months ago, we ordered pizza from Canadian Pizza. Being regular customers our contact information was on their database system.
I usually try to use such occasions to show Krystyn and JJ ways to handle telephone conversations with customer service personnel at the other end of the phoneline. To cut the story short, the person on the other end showed attitude and I put him in his place (without fuss nor profanities).
Fast forward almost the same number of months, on one Sunday I received 3 anonymous phonecalls at 4.00 am. The phone calls were obscene and the person threatened to kill me and all that shit. I merely laughed at him and he said he knew where I stay, etc. I was laughing because his mobile number was showing on my phone.
At 3.00 pm the same day I lodged a police report at the nearest station. The Investigating Officer happened to be from King Edward VII School Taiping! My alma mater too!. It was not the culprit's lucky day. He had picked the wrong guy to threaten!
By about 11.30 pm the same day, the culprit was already roped into the balai. Who says the PDRM is not doing its job? The offence is punishable with 3-7 years jail. It turned out to be the Canadian Pizza guy a few months back! He had carried a grudge for that long and he said he was drunk when he called!
Two questions; (1) What does that make Canadian Pizza? (2) What do I do with the culprit (who is 26 years old); send him to jail for 3 years?
It suffices to say the culprit did not have a good two weeks until I decided what to do with him. I believe he learnt his lesson so I sent him to his temple to make 2 vows: (1) Never to repeat such stupidity and (2) Since he was to get married the following year; vow to be good to his wife and kids. I dropped the complaint.
What about Canadian Pizza? Well, what about Canadian Pizza.
I usually try to use such occasions to show Krystyn and JJ ways to handle telephone conversations with customer service personnel at the other end of the phoneline. To cut the story short, the person on the other end showed attitude and I put him in his place (without fuss nor profanities).
Fast forward almost the same number of months, on one Sunday I received 3 anonymous phonecalls at 4.00 am. The phone calls were obscene and the person threatened to kill me and all that shit. I merely laughed at him and he said he knew where I stay, etc. I was laughing because his mobile number was showing on my phone.
At 3.00 pm the same day I lodged a police report at the nearest station. The Investigating Officer happened to be from King Edward VII School Taiping! My alma mater too!. It was not the culprit's lucky day. He had picked the wrong guy to threaten!
By about 11.30 pm the same day, the culprit was already roped into the balai. Who says the PDRM is not doing its job? The offence is punishable with 3-7 years jail. It turned out to be the Canadian Pizza guy a few months back! He had carried a grudge for that long and he said he was drunk when he called!
Two questions; (1) What does that make Canadian Pizza? (2) What do I do with the culprit (who is 26 years old); send him to jail for 3 years?
It suffices to say the culprit did not have a good two weeks until I decided what to do with him. I believe he learnt his lesson so I sent him to his temple to make 2 vows: (1) Never to repeat such stupidity and (2) Since he was to get married the following year; vow to be good to his wife and kids. I dropped the complaint.
What about Canadian Pizza? Well, what about Canadian Pizza.
 |
| Once upon a time tough guy |
 |
| "Tough guy" begging for mercy |
Saturday, 11 September 2010
Nine Years After 9/11
My blogger friend Estrelita Soliano Grosse posted this on Facebook today, "watching the 9/11 commemorations. Sad. Solemn. Where were you that night?"
I commented: "On the computer at home till I saw it as breaking news on one of the news sites. Then turned on CNN on TV and began missing Jeannie who was on assignment in Hong Kong after turning down New York where she would have been at the Marriott next to the two towers!"
What I did not add was that Jeannie decided to quit her travels after 9/11 because she suddenly realized she missed the family too much and her flight cancellations in the subsequent global airlines panic made terrorism too close to home.
She later related that she had turned on the TV just in time to see the plane hit Tower 2 and thought to herself, "What a realistic movie!".
Why am I thinking of Jeannie today? Because 9/11 affected us All.
Postscript: Just read that the moron Pastor Terry Jones has called off his Quran burning plans. I was sure his threat to perpetuate the madness was a publicity stunt. He succeeded.
What I did not add was that Jeannie decided to quit her travels after 9/11 because she suddenly realized she missed the family too much and her flight cancellations in the subsequent global airlines panic made terrorism too close to home.
She later related that she had turned on the TV just in time to see the plane hit Tower 2 and thought to herself, "What a realistic movie!".
Why am I thinking of Jeannie today? Because 9/11 affected us All.
Postscript: Just read that the moron Pastor Terry Jones has called off his Quran burning plans. I was sure his threat to perpetuate the madness was a publicity stunt. He succeeded.
Milestones
Jeannie had always looked forward to being at Krystyn's graduation and on 21st August, she was. I am sure Krystyn would have preferred Jeannie's physical presence at the convocation but it marvels me to observe the mother and daughter occasion playing out on a spiritual level from the day before, till the day after. Krystyn gives a new meaning to a Degree in Communication!
Krystyn had always been Jeannie's pride and joy, not only as a daughter that she mentored but also as great friends, especially the last two years of Jeannie's life. There was just no way Jeannie would miss Krystyn's convocation!
Jeannie and JJ. What can I say...the two are so similar in so many ways. She encouraged his interest in music and the two were often dueting on karaoke at home and outside. Jeannie was tough on JJ yet she cared for him the most. She brought him up to be a man and she would be proud that at 20 now he has the makings of a fine man. The values she taught him are intact.
I would expect that Krystyn and JJ will really come into their own in the next couple of years. There will be more milestones as they progress forth and I know the values Mummy has ingrained in their hearts will remain their beacon.
Friday, 10 September 2010
What Now?
First in The Star Paper: "Umno rejects Perkasa".
Then in the Malaysia Insider: "Perkasa severs ties with Umno"
A perceptive friend then commented: "Does this confirm the ties Perkasa had with UMNO earlier?"
Monday, 6 September 2010
Well Spoken And Charming...
Compare this...
...to this:
One talks direct and the other talks down. Who would you be inclined to trust?
...to this:
One talks direct and the other talks down. Who would you be inclined to trust?
Sunday, 5 September 2010
In The Words Of My Future Prime Minister: "Malaysia or Malaysaja?"
Checkmate! Perkasa. Nurul Izzah made an offer to Perkasa it could not accept yet could not refuse.
The "Ultimate Malaysian Debate" has become the ultimate gambit to expose Perkasa for what it actually is; a huge propaganda exercise meant to propagate seige mentality that will imprison majority Malay minds in order for the continued personal gains of the minority.
The expected Perkasa response, "Perkasa declares Malay rights not for debate" is the choice between the lesser of two evils for Perkasa in it's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. In this effort to give an impression of a stalemate and to salvage dignity and manhood, the "jantan" Perkasa has had to sacrifice its cojones. Yet the only thing stale is the increasing smell of its defeat.
And as if to balance the gender odds, it was probably instrumental in getting another woman (the vanquished ex-Lembah Pantai MP, Sharizat Jalil) to weigh in with her two sen.
Perhaps Nurul Izzah's most telling statement in her debate offer to Perkasa is the question: "...what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?". I think the answer obviously lies in the hidden agenda of Perkasa.
My own hope is that the end-game will see Nurul Izzah installed as the first woman Prime Minister of Malaysia. That would herald a new chess game which I hope will see ALL Malaysians on the same side. Please read this from the Malaysian Insider:
The ultimate Malaysian debate: Malaysia or Malaysaja? — Nurul Izzah AnwarAugust 31, 2010
AUG 31 — Perkasa claims to defend Malay rights in a multi racial Malaysia. And these Malay rights are inalienable, non-negotiable and permanent. Those that disagree with their interpretation of these Malays rights are deemed treacherous and should leave Malaysia.
In the spirit of Ramadhan and Merdeka, I would like to invite Perkasa to a Constructive Engagement for a new beginning for Malaysia with me.
I would like to ask Perkasa, several key questions to better understand, and together seek real solutions for the crisis it claims the Malays are facing.
I believe that Perkasa is the current vocal, and not necessarily the majority voice of the Malays. And by all indication, Perkasa is the alter-ego of Umno.
If Perkasa can be engaged constructively and a resolution found, then we would have answered the acid-test of Malay concerns once and for all?
To have an honest Constructive Engagement or dialogue, I suggest that we must decide on four fundamental principles.
First, we must base our dialogue on an agreed standard reference document. Should it be the Malaysian Constitution? The Umno constitution? Or the Perkasa constitution?
If we are unable to decide then our dialogue becomes futile and a monologue at best.
However, looking at how Perkasa continues to refer to Article 153 (even brandishing a copy of the constitution in media events) we can infer that the Constitution indeed is the preferred standard reference document for this dialogue.
Second, once we decide on the standard reference document, then we have to address the issue of constitutional interpretation?
For example, nowhere in the written constitution is it mentioned specifically of the existence of the term ‘Malay rights’. Instead the only term spelled out is the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays in Article 153.
The Article contains specifically, of the powers vested in the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning along with quotas in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
Another case in point is interpreting to reconcile the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays provisions with other non-Malay citizens with Article 8(1): “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.
It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues.
The role of the King is central to the issue of constitutional interpretation, as Article 153 of the Constitution states that: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”
However, it should be noted that the existing judiciary already acts as an interpreter of constitutional matters in Malaysia.
For the purpose of this dialogue, both sides can present their interpretation of the constitution to be rebutted subsequently.
Third, the dialogue be made public and presented to the people for feedback and validation.
Again, it would have been ideal if a Referendum Process is legalised whereby such fundamental issue can be decided and resolved by the citizens and made binding to all.
As an alternative, the public feedback for comments and recommendation mechanism through letters or the internet would have to do. It is not binding but it would be a measure of public participation, which can only enrich our democratic process.
Fourth, the dialogue format is suggested as follows, I shall submit my point of view in the form of this open article to Perkasa for a rebuttal, and also later for Perkasa to provide their version for my subsequent rebuttal.
The outcome shall be presented to the public for comments and recommendations.
Then as a test of sincerity I invite Perkasa to a Publicly Televised Debate.
Dialogue Safeguards
I propose both Perkasa and I will indemnify all political parties from our views.
Maybe Umno might disagree with Perkasa’s views or PR mine. And all political parties can participate at the comments and recommendations stage if it wishes.
To avoid being seditious, I propose that our views are qualified as an attempt to seek clarification and not to challenge or repeal the Constitution.
I believe that Perkasa and I are true Malaysians and Patriots, but that only our views may differ, hopefully for now.
However, if Perkasa refuses to engage on this matter at all, then it is sufficient for the people and history to judge this dialogue as my sincere attempt to reach out to them for the sake of our country.
My first question is; who is a Malay?
Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution, defines Malay as being one who “professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on the 31st of August 1957.”
Therefore, constitutionally, a Malay is one who speaks the language, practices the religion of Islam, and performs the rights and rituals of its culture.
My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?
My second question is; what are Malay rights?
Malay rights is an ideological and philosophical and not a legal and constitutional construct.
Article 153 only mentions the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays, and not the ‘Special Rights’ of the Malays.
The term Malay rights is alluding to the unwritten ‘Social Contract’ that defines a ‘Malay Agenda’ which has been extended to include the term ‘Malay rights’.
The Social Contract outlines certain privileges that the Malay community enjoys in exchange for granting citizenship rights to non-Malays during independence by the founding fathers as contained in Articles 14-18, Chapter 1 Part III- Citizenship, of the constitution.
These privileges collectively, are referred to as the ‘Malay Agenda’ which includes provisions on the status of Malay rulers to be preserved, with the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be elected from His Majesties. Islam would be the national religion, and the Malay language would be the national language. The ‘Malay Agenda’ also includes provisions of economic privileges accorded by Article 153.
It is also pertinent to note, that according to the Reid Commission that drafted the constitution, Article 153 was intended as temporary preferences to seek racial parity, subject to be reviewed after 15 years by Parliament as to its continued need.
It then should have been reviewed in 1972 but was preceded by the 1969 race riots. Efforts were made, that no sunset clause be included for Article 153, and that under the Sedition Act (1971), it is illegal to be discussed even by Parliament.
These economic privileges in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots, was then institutionalised into the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was then extended as the New Development Policy (NDP) from 1990-2000 and currently we are in the final year of the 3rd Outline Perspective Plan (OPP3 2000-2010) which also includes the National Vision Policy.
However, we welcome the announced change from a race-based to a need-based affirmative action policy as outlined in NEM, but if past practices are any indication, the initial affirmative action stance along with an affiliation-based discrimination will still remain. We will continue to find that the actual wealth distribution will still be skewed to the cronies of the ruling elite.
This has become a ‘Malay Right and Entitlement’ and the cornerstone of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, which continues to even overshadow the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by the Najib government today.
My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay Rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?
My third question is; what is the Perceived ‘Malay Anger’ about?
Can it be that the ‘Malay Anger’ built on ‘Malay Insecurities’, may appear to be racist in form, but in essence is a ‘Malay Siege Mentality’ defensive reaction, to the failure in achieving the NEP goals (reborn as the NDP in 1990, followed by the OPP3 and refined as the current NEM) after 40 years of implementation?
Can it also be that the false sense of losing Malay Entitlement and Privileges has crystallised into a political ideology of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, that further divides the nation?
Can it be that the Malays feel that they are getting poorer, marginalised and disillusioned in their own country in spite of the NEP and billions spent?
Can it really be that the ‘Malay Anger’ is conveniently blamed on the industry of the non-Malays and reformed minded Malays?
It seems that the ‘Malay Anger’ is centred on economic entitlements rather than on cultural, royalty, language, legal, educational, religious or political power deficiencies, where the Malay remains dominant and rightfully unchallenged, as seen from the official affirmative action policies, institutions and civil service population composition.
Could it be that the real question nagging the Malay psyche is, what then is the value and utility of having the Malay traditional dances, Royal institutions, Malay language, Malay medium schools, Federal and State Religious bodies, Syariah court system, civil service and the Federal and State governments remain dominantly Malay, when the Malay feels poor?
It is this imbalance of achievements that creates a dysfunctional Malay identity of being only Political Masters in name and not in wealth that keeps ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ alive.
The ‘Malay Anger’ is purposely focused on the dismal achievements of NEP goals and targets that is used as the justification to continue it ‘permanently’ at all cost and beyond reason.
Instead the angry Malays should focus on the diminishing ‘enabling’ factors to equitable and sustainable economic growth (as increasing the economic pie to achieve NEP targets is the main premise to wealth redistribution policies in NEP) caused by cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse that in reality subverts and undermine achieving the well intended NEP goals.
My questions to Perkasa are;
Where does the real blame for the ‘Malay Anger’ lie? Is it with the NEP results or is it with its selective implementation, where only the ruling elite few and their cronies benefit to the detriment of the Malay majority?
How can Perkasa explain just one example, which is the well documented NEP leakage of RM52 billion in equities originally allocated to the Malays that have been sold off?
What impact has cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse have in shaping the ‘Malay Anger’?
Who has really betrayed the ‘Malay Agenda and Malay Rights’?
My fourth and last question is; what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?
In my final analysis, only through free and fair elections that the people can decide if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ or ‘Ketuanan Rakyat’ shall define Malaysia.
Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences.
What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.
We are truly at a monumental cross-road for the soul of our nation.
As a reminder of a possible way forward out of this ‘Malay Dilemma’, a Malaysian statesman, the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once argued that “the question (of the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays) be left to the Malays themselves because as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ‘special position’.” Ismail believed the special position was “a slur on the ability of the Malays.”
After 53 years, are we Malays not educated and self-confident yet?
After 53 years, are we Malays still ignorant to the real causes of our problems yet?
After 53 years, are we not Malay enough to act as the protector and provider of justice, equality, dignity, fraternity, liberty and peace for all who choose to co-exist as partners and fellow citizens yet?
In conclusion, we the Malays must stand up and do what is right for Malaysia and our children as they face the challenges of a competitive borderless world.
Would we be so blind and selfish to risk their future for our sins of the past and our deliberately induced insecurities of the present day?
Then my last question to Perkasa is; Will you allow our country to remain in name as Malaysia or be renamed as Malaysaja?* Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai.
The "Ultimate Malaysian Debate" has become the ultimate gambit to expose Perkasa for what it actually is; a huge propaganda exercise meant to propagate seige mentality that will imprison majority Malay minds in order for the continued personal gains of the minority.
The expected Perkasa response, "Perkasa declares Malay rights not for debate" is the choice between the lesser of two evils for Perkasa in it's "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemma. In this effort to give an impression of a stalemate and to salvage dignity and manhood, the "jantan" Perkasa has had to sacrifice its cojones. Yet the only thing stale is the increasing smell of its defeat.
 |
| Nurul Izzah just before she defeated incumbent Sharizat for Lembah Pantai |
Perhaps Nurul Izzah's most telling statement in her debate offer to Perkasa is the question: "...what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?". I think the answer obviously lies in the hidden agenda of Perkasa.
My own hope is that the end-game will see Nurul Izzah installed as the first woman Prime Minister of Malaysia. That would herald a new chess game which I hope will see ALL Malaysians on the same side. Please read this from the Malaysian Insider:
The ultimate Malaysian debate: Malaysia or Malaysaja? — Nurul Izzah AnwarAugust 31, 2010
AUG 31 — Perkasa claims to defend Malay rights in a multi racial Malaysia. And these Malay rights are inalienable, non-negotiable and permanent. Those that disagree with their interpretation of these Malays rights are deemed treacherous and should leave Malaysia.
In the spirit of Ramadhan and Merdeka, I would like to invite Perkasa to a Constructive Engagement for a new beginning for Malaysia with me.
I would like to ask Perkasa, several key questions to better understand, and together seek real solutions for the crisis it claims the Malays are facing.
I believe that Perkasa is the current vocal, and not necessarily the majority voice of the Malays. And by all indication, Perkasa is the alter-ego of Umno.
If Perkasa can be engaged constructively and a resolution found, then we would have answered the acid-test of Malay concerns once and for all?
To have an honest Constructive Engagement or dialogue, I suggest that we must decide on four fundamental principles.
First, we must base our dialogue on an agreed standard reference document. Should it be the Malaysian Constitution? The Umno constitution? Or the Perkasa constitution?
If we are unable to decide then our dialogue becomes futile and a monologue at best.
However, looking at how Perkasa continues to refer to Article 153 (even brandishing a copy of the constitution in media events) we can infer that the Constitution indeed is the preferred standard reference document for this dialogue.
Second, once we decide on the standard reference document, then we have to address the issue of constitutional interpretation?
For example, nowhere in the written constitution is it mentioned specifically of the existence of the term ‘Malay rights’. Instead the only term spelled out is the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays in Article 153.
The Article contains specifically, of the powers vested in the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning along with quotas in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.
Another case in point is interpreting to reconcile the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays provisions with other non-Malay citizens with Article 8(1): “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2): Except as expressly authorised by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.
It would be ideal to have a mandated entity such as a Constitutional Court or at least a Constitutional Council appointed by the King to act as the final interpreter of any constitutional issues.
The role of the King is central to the issue of constitutional interpretation, as Article 153 of the Constitution states that: “It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities in accordance with the provisions of this Article.”
However, it should be noted that the existing judiciary already acts as an interpreter of constitutional matters in Malaysia.
For the purpose of this dialogue, both sides can present their interpretation of the constitution to be rebutted subsequently.
Third, the dialogue be made public and presented to the people for feedback and validation.
Again, it would have been ideal if a Referendum Process is legalised whereby such fundamental issue can be decided and resolved by the citizens and made binding to all.
As an alternative, the public feedback for comments and recommendation mechanism through letters or the internet would have to do. It is not binding but it would be a measure of public participation, which can only enrich our democratic process.
Fourth, the dialogue format is suggested as follows, I shall submit my point of view in the form of this open article to Perkasa for a rebuttal, and also later for Perkasa to provide their version for my subsequent rebuttal.
The outcome shall be presented to the public for comments and recommendations.
Then as a test of sincerity I invite Perkasa to a Publicly Televised Debate.
Dialogue Safeguards
I propose both Perkasa and I will indemnify all political parties from our views.
Maybe Umno might disagree with Perkasa’s views or PR mine. And all political parties can participate at the comments and recommendations stage if it wishes.
To avoid being seditious, I propose that our views are qualified as an attempt to seek clarification and not to challenge or repeal the Constitution.
I believe that Perkasa and I are true Malaysians and Patriots, but that only our views may differ, hopefully for now.
However, if Perkasa refuses to engage on this matter at all, then it is sufficient for the people and history to judge this dialogue as my sincere attempt to reach out to them for the sake of our country.
My first question is; who is a Malay?
Article 160 of the Malaysian Constitution, defines Malay as being one who “professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay customs and is the child of at least one parent who was born within the Federation of Malaysia before independence of Malaya on the 31st of August 1957.”
Therefore, constitutionally, a Malay is one who speaks the language, practices the religion of Islam, and performs the rights and rituals of its culture.
My question to Perkasa is, spiritually and intellectually, does a Malay accepts injustices, power abuse, corruption, racism, anti-democratic laws, state institutional degradation to ensure that the Malays are a Supreme Race in Malaysia, with first class citizenship privileges not to be shared with other non-Malay citizens?
My second question is; what are Malay rights?
Malay rights is an ideological and philosophical and not a legal and constitutional construct.
Article 153 only mentions the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays, and not the ‘Special Rights’ of the Malays.
The term Malay rights is alluding to the unwritten ‘Social Contract’ that defines a ‘Malay Agenda’ which has been extended to include the term ‘Malay rights’.
The Social Contract outlines certain privileges that the Malay community enjoys in exchange for granting citizenship rights to non-Malays during independence by the founding fathers as contained in Articles 14-18, Chapter 1 Part III- Citizenship, of the constitution.
These privileges collectively, are referred to as the ‘Malay Agenda’ which includes provisions on the status of Malay rulers to be preserved, with the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be elected from His Majesties. Islam would be the national religion, and the Malay language would be the national language. The ‘Malay Agenda’ also includes provisions of economic privileges accorded by Article 153.
It is also pertinent to note, that according to the Reid Commission that drafted the constitution, Article 153 was intended as temporary preferences to seek racial parity, subject to be reviewed after 15 years by Parliament as to its continued need.
It then should have been reviewed in 1972 but was preceded by the 1969 race riots. Efforts were made, that no sunset clause be included for Article 153, and that under the Sedition Act (1971), it is illegal to be discussed even by Parliament.
These economic privileges in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots, was then institutionalised into the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was then extended as the New Development Policy (NDP) from 1990-2000 and currently we are in the final year of the 3rd Outline Perspective Plan (OPP3 2000-2010) which also includes the National Vision Policy.
However, we welcome the announced change from a race-based to a need-based affirmative action policy as outlined in NEM, but if past practices are any indication, the initial affirmative action stance along with an affiliation-based discrimination will still remain. We will continue to find that the actual wealth distribution will still be skewed to the cronies of the ruling elite.
This has become a ‘Malay Right and Entitlement’ and the cornerstone of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, which continues to even overshadow the New Economic Model (NEM) initiated by the Najib government today.
My question to Perkasa is, has the concept of ‘Malay Rights’ now become a permanent convention that supersedes even the written constitution in policy and practice that has to be accepted by all non-Malay citizens?
My third question is; what is the Perceived ‘Malay Anger’ about?
Can it be that the ‘Malay Anger’ built on ‘Malay Insecurities’, may appear to be racist in form, but in essence is a ‘Malay Siege Mentality’ defensive reaction, to the failure in achieving the NEP goals (reborn as the NDP in 1990, followed by the OPP3 and refined as the current NEM) after 40 years of implementation?
Can it also be that the false sense of losing Malay Entitlement and Privileges has crystallised into a political ideology of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’, that further divides the nation?
Can it be that the Malays feel that they are getting poorer, marginalised and disillusioned in their own country in spite of the NEP and billions spent?
Can it really be that the ‘Malay Anger’ is conveniently blamed on the industry of the non-Malays and reformed minded Malays?
It seems that the ‘Malay Anger’ is centred on economic entitlements rather than on cultural, royalty, language, legal, educational, religious or political power deficiencies, where the Malay remains dominant and rightfully unchallenged, as seen from the official affirmative action policies, institutions and civil service population composition.
Could it be that the real question nagging the Malay psyche is, what then is the value and utility of having the Malay traditional dances, Royal institutions, Malay language, Malay medium schools, Federal and State Religious bodies, Syariah court system, civil service and the Federal and State governments remain dominantly Malay, when the Malay feels poor?
It is this imbalance of achievements that creates a dysfunctional Malay identity of being only Political Masters in name and not in wealth that keeps ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ alive.
The ‘Malay Anger’ is purposely focused on the dismal achievements of NEP goals and targets that is used as the justification to continue it ‘permanently’ at all cost and beyond reason.
Instead the angry Malays should focus on the diminishing ‘enabling’ factors to equitable and sustainable economic growth (as increasing the economic pie to achieve NEP targets is the main premise to wealth redistribution policies in NEP) caused by cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse that in reality subverts and undermine achieving the well intended NEP goals.
My questions to Perkasa are;
Where does the real blame for the ‘Malay Anger’ lie? Is it with the NEP results or is it with its selective implementation, where only the ruling elite few and their cronies benefit to the detriment of the Malay majority?
How can Perkasa explain just one example, which is the well documented NEP leakage of RM52 billion in equities originally allocated to the Malays that have been sold off?
What impact has cronyism, corruption, wastages, leakages, wrong resource allocations (big projects phenomenon), racism, anti-democratic laws and state institutional degradation and abuse have in shaping the ‘Malay Anger’?
Who has really betrayed the ‘Malay Agenda and Malay Rights’?
My fourth and last question is; what is the end-game scenario that the unresolved ‘Malay Anger’ will lead to?
In my final analysis, only through free and fair elections that the people can decide if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ or ‘Ketuanan Rakyat’ shall define Malaysia.
Once the next general election outcome is determined, and if ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ is victorious, then some may choose to vote with their feet (emigrate with massive brain drain and a diminishing tax base), and some will choose to vote with their wallet (domestic capital flight compounded with decreasing FDI that further stunts our economic growth), which in turn will indicate the makings of a potential failed state with irreversible consequences.
What is left will be a shell of a former Malaysia that could have been a great example of a democratic and pluralistic nation to the world.
We are truly at a monumental cross-road for the soul of our nation.
As a reminder of a possible way forward out of this ‘Malay Dilemma’, a Malaysian statesman, the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman once argued that “the question (of the ‘Special Position’ of the Malays) be left to the Malays themselves because as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ‘special position’.” Ismail believed the special position was “a slur on the ability of the Malays.”
After 53 years, are we Malays not educated and self-confident yet?
After 53 years, are we Malays still ignorant to the real causes of our problems yet?
After 53 years, are we not Malay enough to act as the protector and provider of justice, equality, dignity, fraternity, liberty and peace for all who choose to co-exist as partners and fellow citizens yet?
In conclusion, we the Malays must stand up and do what is right for Malaysia and our children as they face the challenges of a competitive borderless world.
Would we be so blind and selfish to risk their future for our sins of the past and our deliberately induced insecurities of the present day?
Then my last question to Perkasa is; Will you allow our country to remain in name as Malaysia or be renamed as Malaysaja?* Nurul Izzah Anwar is the MP for Lembah Pantai.
Saturday, 4 September 2010
Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah Interview On BFM89.9
A voice in the UMNO wilderness? Voicing out for the Nation. An ideal personality for Prime Ministership in these uncertain times...
Do listen to this BFM89.9 interview with TRH on 1st September 2010, a day after Merdeka Day.
Could his new NGO be the rallying point for the rakyat to take back Malaysia through the ballot box? A vehicle for Haris Ibrahim's concept of A Third Force perhaps?
http://bfm.my/assets/files/Breakfast%20Grill/2010-09-1_BreakfastGrille_ChuangNoelle_TengkuRazaleigh_FULL_Podcast.mp3
Do listen to this BFM89.9 interview with TRH on 1st September 2010, a day after Merdeka Day.
Could his new NGO be the rallying point for the rakyat to take back Malaysia through the ballot box? A vehicle for Haris Ibrahim's concept of A Third Force perhaps?
http://bfm.my/assets/files/Breakfast%20Grill/2010-09-1_BreakfastGrille_ChuangNoelle_TengkuRazaleigh_FULL_Podcast.mp3
Thursday, 2 September 2010
That Anarchist Namewee Again! Part 2
I am not particularly a fan of Khairi Jamaluddin but in the case of Namewee I seem to be in agreement with his opinion. My position on Namewee remains the same; two wrongs do not make one right.
My previous blogpost on Namewee was posted before KJ's comment on the same appeared in Malaysiakini about 2 hours later.
I concur that Siti Inshah and her other colleague must be made accountable and more importantly Malaysians at large must be told how those comments came about. They give the teaching profession a bad name and the incidents must not repeat. Are'nt all Malaysian children supposed to be 1Malaysia children?
As for Namewee, lets make an example of him as a lesson for all the Chinese racists in Malaysia.
This was what KJ said:
KJ nails down contentious line in Namewee's song
Sep 1, 10 5:36pm
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin believes that Wee Meng Chee @ Namewee's overt insinuation that Malays played a minor role in Malaysia's economic growth was racist in nature.
The lyrics to the song 'Nah' which had landed Wee into trouble with the police contains a line in Malay which reads: "You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" (Don't you know? Who made Malaysia prosperous?)
In a statement today, Khairy (right) said that Wee's assertion in attempt to criticise school principal Siti Inshah Mansor for recently uttering racial remarks against Malaysia's minorities were inapproriate.
"The implication (here is) that the Chinese are the reason for Malaysia's prosperity and as such Malays like Siti Inshah have no business asking the Chinese to 'return' to China.
"The same message could have easily been conveyed by stating that no one should be telling anyone else to 'return' because Malaysia belongs to all its citizens without suggesting that a particular ethnic group has contributed more or less," he said.
"Malays not being too sensitive"
Khairy argued that Wee's actions has instead now exposed himself as a racist.
"Now, my position on the Siti Inshah matter is crystal clear. If she did utter the words as claimed, she should be severely punished.
"But let there be no doubt, Namewee's insinuation that the Chinese are solely responsible for this country's growth is just as blatantly offensive.
"Neither is it a question of Malays being too sensitive. Hurt and anger are to be expected when one community is essentially told they play a minimal role in this country's progress," added Khairy.
Citing an example on how Wee's (left) argument was counterproductive, Khairy said others may be inclined to say that the Chinese should be eternally grateful to the Malays for their citizenship.
"He or she would be mistaken of course, but the point is we cannot allow dis-empathy to feed on itself. We cannot let this vicious cycle go on in perpetuity.
"We cannot play the game of the extremists and the racists on both sides of the spectrum if we are to forge a better path than what they offer," he said.
We know he won't vote BN, but...
"I am utterly against extremism, dis-empathy, insensitivity and racism of any kind - I have spoken out against the likes of Perkasa, Al-Islam magazine and Siti Inshah, often at great political risk.
"And today I am speaking out against Namewee, not because of his race, religion or even the probability that he will not vote BN. But because he was explicitly insulting."
Wee's latest video has sparked a deluge of complaints and slew of police reports.
Last night, he was grilled for nearly three hours at a police station in Petaling Jaya where his statements were recorded.
According to the police, Wee is being investigated for sedition.
My previous blogpost on Namewee was posted before KJ's comment on the same appeared in Malaysiakini about 2 hours later.
I concur that Siti Inshah and her other colleague must be made accountable and more importantly Malaysians at large must be told how those comments came about. They give the teaching profession a bad name and the incidents must not repeat. Are'nt all Malaysian children supposed to be 1Malaysia children?
As for Namewee, lets make an example of him as a lesson for all the Chinese racists in Malaysia.
This was what KJ said:
KJ nails down contentious line in Namewee's song
Sep 1, 10 5:36pm
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin believes that Wee Meng Chee @ Namewee's overt insinuation that Malays played a minor role in Malaysia's economic growth was racist in nature.
The lyrics to the song 'Nah' which had landed Wee into trouble with the police contains a line in Malay which reads: "You tak baca? Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" (Don't you know? Who made Malaysia prosperous?)
In a statement today, Khairy (right) said that Wee's assertion in attempt to criticise school principal Siti Inshah Mansor for recently uttering racial remarks against Malaysia's minorities were inapproriate.
"The implication (here is) that the Chinese are the reason for Malaysia's prosperity and as such Malays like Siti Inshah have no business asking the Chinese to 'return' to China.
"The same message could have easily been conveyed by stating that no one should be telling anyone else to 'return' because Malaysia belongs to all its citizens without suggesting that a particular ethnic group has contributed more or less," he said.
"Malays not being too sensitive"
Khairy argued that Wee's actions has instead now exposed himself as a racist.
"Now, my position on the Siti Inshah matter is crystal clear. If she did utter the words as claimed, she should be severely punished.
"But let there be no doubt, Namewee's insinuation that the Chinese are solely responsible for this country's growth is just as blatantly offensive.
"Neither is it a question of Malays being too sensitive. Hurt and anger are to be expected when one community is essentially told they play a minimal role in this country's progress," added Khairy.
Citing an example on how Wee's (left) argument was counterproductive, Khairy said others may be inclined to say that the Chinese should be eternally grateful to the Malays for their citizenship.
"He or she would be mistaken of course, but the point is we cannot allow dis-empathy to feed on itself. We cannot let this vicious cycle go on in perpetuity.
"We cannot play the game of the extremists and the racists on both sides of the spectrum if we are to forge a better path than what they offer," he said.
We know he won't vote BN, but...
"I am utterly against extremism, dis-empathy, insensitivity and racism of any kind - I have spoken out against the likes of Perkasa, Al-Islam magazine and Siti Inshah, often at great political risk.
"And today I am speaking out against Namewee, not because of his race, religion or even the probability that he will not vote BN. But because he was explicitly insulting."
Wee's latest video has sparked a deluge of complaints and slew of police reports.
Last night, he was grilled for nearly three hours at a police station in Petaling Jaya where his statements were recorded.
According to the police, Wee is being investigated for sedition.
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
That Anarchist Namewee Again!
Too much has been written about this little prick who is essentially a publicity hound. I found his previous clip on TNB revolting and attracted quite some flak from certain Muarians (residents of Muar) when I blogged about it.
Don't get me wrong, I am against racism as he says he is, but he could have applied his obvious creativity in a less vulgarly controversial but perhaps more effective way. By this I mean, he could have chosen to write a rap song as coming from the young, impressional students of Siti Inshah. The lyrics could say, depict them asking their headmistress whom they respect why she let them down? What is really in her heart? What should they learn from her? What kind of adults does she want them to become? What is 1Malaysia then? Something like this would certainly tug at the heartstrings of and resonate better with more Malaysians than his profane clip.
He posted his clip on You Tube and that made it public. I went through his clip again:
What did he seek to achieve? Was he just venting or was he trying to incite? One thing is for sure though, he was seeking attention but was he being racist? Many people do not think so but I beg to differ.
Racism is also about stereotyping and profiling. Namewee also showed himself to be a racist by just one line in his clip. See below:
Don't get me wrong, I am against racism as he says he is, but he could have applied his obvious creativity in a less vulgarly controversial but perhaps more effective way. By this I mean, he could have chosen to write a rap song as coming from the young, impressional students of Siti Inshah. The lyrics could say, depict them asking their headmistress whom they respect why she let them down? What is really in her heart? What should they learn from her? What kind of adults does she want them to become? What is 1Malaysia then? Something like this would certainly tug at the heartstrings of and resonate better with more Malaysians than his profane clip.
He posted his clip on You Tube and that made it public. I went through his clip again:
What did he seek to achieve? Was he just venting or was he trying to incite? One thing is for sure though, he was seeking attention but was he being racist? Many people do not think so but I beg to differ.
Racism is also about stereotyping and profiling. Namewee also showed himself to be a racist by just one line in his clip. See below:
"Siapa buat Malaysia kaya?" Does he mean only the Chinese made Malaysia rich? Or does he imply the Malays (and others) count for nothing in adding to the nation's economy? Namewee, your arse is showing and it is on the line. I hope it gets whipped!
And congratulations! You have effectively directed the Siti Inshah racial slur limelight directly to your sorry arse and away from the main issue; what made her do what she is alleged to have done? How many are talking about what Siti Inshah is alleged to have said now? You selfish dumb ass!
Tiger Datuk Abdul Razak Musa
The first time I met Tiger Datuk Abdul Razak Musa in person was about a year and a half ago in an old boys meeting at the Curve, PJ. The OBA was looking for someone of integrity and standing to chair a committee for a proposed trust fund for the old school. I was his senior at school and therefore did not know him well personally. He was a quiet and unassuming man; did not talk very much that day. It was certainly not the first time one of our own has risen to a position of distinction but nevertheless we were proud of his achievement.
At the time, the MACC was already very much in the public spotlight and the skepticism about its impartiality was already apparent. In any case, Tiger Abdul Razak Musa is one of our own so we MUST give him the benefit of the doubt!
We did not meet again after that first time but I did notice him in the news occasionally. However, in the last couple of weeks he has suddenly shot to fame in the Teoh Beng Hock inquest for all the wrong reasons.
I followed the proceedings that fateful day (18th August, 2010) on the Malaysian Insider tweets and remember cringing at the words that were being reported almost real-time. Obviously he was doing his job by trying to discredit Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand which is supposedly as good a strategy as any. It was the way he went about doing it that was surprising. He had instead ended up discrediting himself, the MACC, our education system and worse of all the nation! I remember thinking this shit will hit the fan and with all the bad Press thereafter, I refrained from watching the video of the incident more so out of Tiger loyalty and deference than anything else!
This morning, I chanced upon the series of court videos and decided to watch them. After that, I am even more appalled by Tiger Abdul Razak Musa's performance. Maybe he would be more comfortable if he had used Bahasa Malaysia instead, but it was not all about language. He appeared clueless! Not only did Dr Pornthip's answers make mincemeat of his questions, it reminded me of an Asian Schools Rugby Tournament game I played in, in Hatyai, December 1978. Eventual champion, Thailand's Vajiravudh College beat us soundly and thoroughly!
It was a game I would want to forget and I think Tiger Razak Musa would want to forget 18th August, 2010 too.
You judge for yourself:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)