Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Removal of Defamatory Links
- British Victims of Investing in Malaysia
- Reply to Fernandez
- Pakatan's 'cake diplomacy' not so sweet
- "Kami nak serang malaysia..."
- Two weeks standoff outrageous
- The M’sian Chinese are becoming arrogant
- Orang Asal, Native and Bumiputera are not one and the same thing
- Pot calling the kettle black
- Tanda Putera: UMNO Hegemony Finally Shaken
| Posted: 26 Feb 2013 03:41 PM PST
Your news articles contains defamatory content and defamatory headings which is illegal posting under the Malaysian Penal Court. You must delete these posts because it's a very serious issue otherwise a court order will be issued against your website. Kindly take this matter seriously and remove those links as earliest. Riswan Habib riswanhabib@brooklinshaw.com I would like to bring a very serious matter to your attention. There has been several links on your website against "NAJIB TUN RAZAK" Honorable Prime Minister of Malaysia. These Links are consistently harming his reputation in a negative manner. It seems to be illegally posting under the defamation act of 1957 act no. 286 under the section 7. So, terminate these links before it moves to some large legal court action. The defamatory links on your website are: http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/40515-wikileaks-releases-cables-on-najib-and-altantuya http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/54332-shahrizat-blows-it-for-umno-in-swak http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/54421-deepak-wants-najib-out-muhyiddin-in http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/54183-kpru-najib-as-the-most-indecisive-prime-minister-of-malaysia http://malaysia-today.net/archives/archives-2012/50454-yet-another-nail-in-najibs-coffin http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/54354-the-decline-and-fall-of-najib Advocate Riswan Habib, Senior Legal Advisor, Office of The Prime Minister Main Block, Perdana Putra Building, Federal Government Administrative Centre, MALAYSIA
|
| British Victims of Investing in Malaysia Posted: 25 Feb 2013 06:07 PM PST
60 British Investors supported by British MPs, file a civil suit against the ex-Treasurer of UMNO, Dato Azim Zabidi and his company Doxport Technologies Sdn. Bhd. for alleged fraud. This follows on from 5th October 2011 when British investors lodged a police criminal case in Malaysia against the directors of Doxport Technologies Sdn Bhd. Investors allege that Doxport Technologies solicited funds on a false basis using fraudulent invoices and documents and misappropriated funds amounting to some US$4,000,000. Several British MPs have expressed their deep concern to the Malaysian Attorney General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail with the scope and speed of the police investigation. 14 months after lodging the criminal complaint, only one suspect has been interviewed by the police and the Money Laundering Investigation Division have, after a baffling delay of 14 months, only just started their investigation into the activities of Doxport Technologies. 60 British investors backed in the UK by Lord Ahmed of Rotherham and their MPs, have lodged a civil case at the High Court of Malaya in Kuala Lumpur to retrieve over US$4,000,000 of funds from Doxport Technologies Sdn. Bhd. and its directors, employees and representatives including Dato Azim Zabidi (Chairman & Director); Sivalingam Thechinamoorthy (Director) and Gurmeet Kaur (Accounts Department & Shareholder).
A Press Conference will be held on Wednesday 27th February 2013 at 11am by the Malaysian MP Zuraidah Kamaruddin at the PKR Headquarters, A-1-09, Merchant Square, Jalan Tropicana Selatan 1, 47410 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. The British High Commission in Malaysia will also have a representative present at the Press Conference and a Press Statement by Lord Ahmed of Rotherham will also be read/given out. In addition, a Press Conference will also be held in London at the House of Lords in early March 2013 attended by British investors, their representative Lord Ahmed of Rotherham, their respective MPs and by UK and Overseas Press, News and Media organisations.British investors are represented in Malaysia by The Chambers of Kamarul Hisham & Hasnal Rezua. Tel: 603 6201 3566 ****************************************** Notes to Editors: A Press Conference will be held on Wednesday 27th February 2013 at 11am by the Malaysian MP Zuraidah Kamaruddin at the PKR Headquarters, A-1-09, Merchant Square, Jalan Tropicana Selatan 1, 47410 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. The British High Commission in Malaysia will also have a representative present at the Press Conference and a Press Statement by Lord Ahmed of Rotherham will also be read/given out. To attend or for further information on the Malaysian Press Conference please contact: Please send any articles or video which you may undertake or web links to these to articles@BVIM.org.uk To attend or for further information on the UK Press Conference please contact: Some of the British investors have initiated a website outlining the case, for further details see: www.BritishVictimsofInvestinginMalaysia.org.uk
|
| Posted: 25 Feb 2013 02:13 PM PST
By Chong Tet Loi (Published in Daily Express Forum as "Never let extremists have their way" on 24 February 2013) Many were amused by the article "Both these sultans never owned Sabah" by Joe Fernandez (Forum 17 February 2013). I personally was compelled to respond because the writer had not even had the courtesy to explain a bit on the criticism he leveled against me. The article I wrote and Joe Fernandez referred to was "Ancestors of Migrants came via front door." The content was case-specific. Similarly, I intend to keep this exchange case-specific and not deviate into a brain storming, show-off style. Fernandez appears to deliberately ignore historical events in Sabah, especially the fact that Brunei extended its influence over Sabah for more than seven centuries. Moreover, the Chartered Company did not acquire Sabah in a once-and-for-all transaction but a number of moves ranging from the 1870's to 1905. Whether the sultans formerly owned Sabah or not, I leave it to all to judge for themselves. Their rights over Sabah were certainly respected by the colonialists and they painstakingly took care of the hurdles to their administration. Thanks to their prudence and contribution, the people of North Borneo could enjoy a long period of pax Britannica except the interruption of the Japanese occupation. Historians look at the historical events and only then they form an opinion on the history of a particular place. Fernandez seems to confuse sovereignty or overlordship with forms of governance such as "Kerajaan Sungei." As overlords of the territory, it was the sultans that could parcel out concessions in the form of "kerajaan sungei," or they kept to themselves by collecting tolls themselves along the water ways under their influence. "Kerajaan Sungei" had been prevalent in the Malay Peninsula and their existence had been well documented. A number of leading Chinese pioneers were awarded such over tributaries in Malaya. James Brooke first acquired the territory around Kuching and the parcel was most likely fashioned after "Kerajaan Sungei." His later acquisitions in Sarawak were definitely no more of that nature. Had "kerajaan sungei" ever existed in North Borneo? The state of economy then could not sustain such. The historical literature and documents I have access to completely lacks such an example. Please alert me if anyone comes across one. Malaya had it. Is it always right to assume that North Borneo was in the same region and therefore must also have the same things? It is just not accurate to arrive at statements about history of a particular place by mere inference or logical extension. Fernandez made an interesting survey on the meaning of "land," particularly in relation to ideas advanced by anthropologists and ethno-cultural theorists. He brought us a tour to America, New Zealand, Palestine, and Malaya, impressive indeed in knowledge of a global outlook. I have always lamented that a lot of our learnt are so well-versed about the outside while displaying conspicuous lack of understanding about their own land. No matter how captivating, models in foreign countries are alien concepts and therefore highly inappropriate for adoption. While they are illuminating, they are also confusing us. In order to be fit for local consumption, its formulation must be based on and derived from indigenous knowledge or intellectual resources. I have on and off come across local researchers expounding rudiments of this indigenous understanding of our land. If a comprehensive attempt is made to galvanize their findings, I am pretty sure a coherent system of the indigenous concept of land can be formulated. Such an outcome will easily bring about consonance and resonance among the various stakeholders and players, hence contributing to forging a convincing argument to consolidate cases of native customary right claims. It is obvious that Fernandez had failed to appreciate the role of rhetoric and polemics which I choose to employ to convey intended messages. His criticism of merely and summarily saying that is "pointless" has not been kind to me especially in my discretion / wisdom in electing the type of literary genre to put across my message. Rhetoric and polemics are established literary works that are popular and readily acceptable among the masses. They are powerful tools of communication. In very brief and simple text, I convey my ideas. They serve my purpose. As a writer more accustomed with academic fashion, rhetoric and polemics are not my cup of tea. But I wrote this piece rhetorically and polemically because of the merits / demerits of the issue at hand. I was responding to an anonymous writer, a "faceless" character. His / her story would have been radically different if real name was used. The said writer had touched an emotional subject in the sense that the illegals and the relevant political machination have inflicted serious wounds on the Sabahan society. The majority of the people of Sabah as a result become victims. Even if a deliberate attempt is initiated now to redress the problem, our wounds may also take two generations to heal. Many people would like a stop of any further provocation that can worsen such wounds. The glorification of characters who perpetuated the infliction must be portrayed as an act of the wholly "OTHER." In dissociating ourselves from the wholly "OTHER," many thinking Sabahans definitely and resolutely take an uncompromising position in resisting these "OTHER." In his subsequent discussion, Joe Fernandez seems to harbour ill-will and envy against the half-natives especially the Sino. Cross marriages have been common and widespread in Sabah since the coming of the Chinese travelers dating back as early as a thousand years ago. Cross marriages take place across racial as well as religious borders; even Muslims and non-Muslims inter-marry liberally here. The community of half-natives is numerous indeed. Their numerical strength has contributed immensely to the integration and assimilation of the Sabahan society. They are well represented also. During the nation-founding negotiation, Donald Stephens, a half-native, led the charge in the promotion of the interests of both the natives and the half-natives. Stephens and his half-native company succeeded in gaining for the said community bumiputra status and their privilege had been enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution. This epochal brilliant feat ushered well for racial integration in Malaysia. Racial relation in Sabah had always been harmonious. Only after the formation of Malaysia and the development of racial politics along that of Malaya, we have a divisive society. Amidst all the communal turbulences in the nation, we are lucky for the existence of this large and critical mass of half-natives and their role in cementing the delicate fabric of our society. When the extremists advance their agenda at the expense of everybody, in Sabah, under influence of inter-racial blood ties, our sensible politicians and community leaders always rise to the occasion and serve the country well. On the merit of biological ties, don't half-natives have their birth rights also? In Sabah, the Orang Asal accept their half-brothers and sisters as equal members of their extended families. They are equally proud of each other and do not discriminate against each other. Because of this immense wealth of good will and harmony, the society in Sabah is the genuine epitome of One Malaysia, a concept which, ironically, is the battle cry of the hypocrites and lead politicians in Barisan Nasional. Incitement will not work and the closely knit Sabahan society will remain as united, solid and stable as ever. ******************************************** Reply to Fernandez 2 By Chong Tet Loi In responding to my article "Ancestors of migrants came via the front door" (Daily Express Forum 3 February 2013), apart from free and liberal exchange, Joe Fernandez in his "Both these sultans never owned Sabah" (Daily Express Forum 17 February 2013) also started a game or whatever he wants to call it. I took his initiative to engage me in free and liberal exchange as well as his criticism of my flaws seriously. In my article "Never let extremists have their way" (Daily Express Forum 24 February 2013), I defended my flaws. Whether we are aware or not, all dissertations have flaws, especially when we encroach into frontiers that are not our field. My said article also hints at his flaws with all intents and purposes expecting that we all close the loopholes in future treatises such that this free and liberal exchange can be meaningful, enlightening and edifying to all, particularly the readers. Upon his issuance of "Orang Asal, Native and Bumiputra are not one and the same thing" (Malaysia today), regrettably, the sentiment and spirit of the exchange has turned highly inconducive, rendering it unworthy of the invaluable and sacred space the relevant media generously accord both of us. Anyway, I thank Joe Fernandez for the publicity he gives me by mentioning my name many times. |
| Pakatan's 'cake diplomacy' not so sweet Posted: 25 Feb 2013 12:11 PM PST
If Nik Aziz thinks presenting a cake to a Christian will placate the Christians over infringement of their freedoms, he should think again. If Nik Aziz thinks receiving a cake from Karpal means the latter will soften his opposition to the imposition of hudud, he should think again, again. These 'diplomatic exchanges' do not reflect any softening of positions. Eunece Teh Recently, PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz presented Catholic Bishop Sebastian Francis with a cake, and soon after DAP's Karpal Singh gave Nik Aziz a birthday cake. But this 'cake diplomacy' has not brought Karpal Singh or Bishop Francis and their followers any closer together. It is far from a sweet offering. PAS remains adamant in wanting to impose hudud should Pakatan come to power in GE13. But Karpal is dead against it, and so must Bishop Francis. It has always been PAS' policy to apply its brand of Islam to all aspects of government administration. Make no mistake, not only Muslims will be affected if PAS imposes its brand of Islamic governance. The rest of Malaysians, 40% of whom are non-Muslims, will also be affected, one way or another. Their fundamental freedoms, their current way of life, their social life, their businesses, and their places of work will be impacted in more ways than they realise. If Nik Aziz thinks presenting a cake to a Christian will placate the Christians over infringement of their freedoms, he should think again. If Nik Aziz thinks receiving a cake from Karpal means the latter will soften his opposition to the imposition of hudud, he should think again, again. These 'diplomatic exchanges' do not reflect any softening of positions. What's even more worrying is this: How will the PAS-PKR-DAP coalition come to any consensus on the formulation of policies for the benefit of the people? If there is no agreement on even seemingly minor matters, how will they come to terms on major issues? Their record of cooperation so far has been dismal. If Nik Aziz's actions and pronouncements so far are anything to go by, then non-Muslims under a Pakatan government will be: • Subjected to separate queues and separate payment counters in supermarkets • Face gender segregation in swimming pools • Denied the right to openly celebrate Valentine's day • Segregated in hair salons Of course, Muslims themselves will face further restrictions. Already they are forced to abandon their traditional wayang kulit, and those who are Umno members continue to be insulted as 'kafirs'. Nik Aziz has also had a record of saying some dim things about women. Remember what Nik Aziz said about how women would be at a lower risk of being raped if they abandoned their lipstick and perfume? No amounts of icing on the cake will sugar-coat PAS's extreme measures that Nik Aziz will impose on an unsuspecting public. After all, Pakatan was cobbled together by three parties that are divided by fundamental differences and united, not by their concern for the welfare of the rakyat, but only by their leaders' unquenchable thirst for political power.
|
| "Kami nak serang malaysia..." Posted: 25 Feb 2013 11:46 AM PST
Fais Al-Hajari Kapal Friget baru Tentera Laut Diraja Malaysia sedang meronda dan berjaya menahan sebuah perahu kecil yg sedang dikayuh oleh empat orang Mat Indon menghala Pelabuhan Klang. Kapten Friget menggunakan loudhailer utk menyahut perahu itu: "WOI! Perahu! Korang ni nak pi mana?" Seorang Mat Indon meletakkan kayu pengayuhnya ke tepi lalu berdiri menjawab: "Kami nak menyerang Malaysia untuk merampas balik tanah2 yg ditakluki Malaysia dahulu." Semua anak kapal friget TLDM terus tergelak sampai terguling2 di atas kapal. KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH KAH Akhirnya Kapten berjaya mengawal diri, lalu bertanya semula kepada perahu itu: "Nak serang Malaysia? Korang berempat jer?" Mat Indon tu menjawab lagi: "Oh, kami cuma yg terakhir... 4 juta yg lain semua sudah sampaiiii...siap ada IC lagi".. Fais Al-Hajari
|
| Posted: 25 Feb 2013 11:09 AM PST
This long wait - two weeks now is already outrageous, how long more for people of Sabah to wait until the security situation is back to normal? Haji Amde Sidik KOTA KINABALU, February 25, 2013: The silence on the impasse of foreign army invading Lahad Datu needs very urgent response; otherwise the government would be accused of doing it on purpose. The authority is scaremongering voters from coming out to vote in this forthcoming General Election, worse, when the intruders are saying they are to stay to do or to die. This long wait - two weeks now is already outrageous, how long more for people of Sabah to wait until the security situation is back to normal? Home Minister is leaving it to Foreign Minister? Why not Defence Minister handles this issue right from the beginning. The intrusion of this foreign army into our land at broad daylight is no less severe than surrendering our territory to crooks.  Where does 50 years experience of border security take us?Why can't the Chief Minister Musa Aman as Chief of Security officer of the State be more assertive in pressing the Federal leaders to be serious? What about the rest of the UMNO leaders in Sabah, why are they not saying anything? Is this not evidence of how incapable our State leaders are who succumbed to push button by Kuala Lumpur and now our State security is compromised? Dragging this case too long is bad for the economy. Yet surveillance by Malaysian Marine on seas is also madness that would not do any good to allay people's fear to go out for the routine livelihood in the seas.
|
| The M’sian Chinese are becoming arrogant Posted: 23 Feb 2013 10:10 PM PST
Muhyiddin Yasin (not the TPM) I find this article totally absurd - The Chinese Owe BN Nothing by Kee Thuan Chye (see link http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/54560-the-chinese-owe-bn-nothing). Political desire is one, but to condemn the whole BN like this is unbecoming of a PR journalist. Spinning the truth is not acceptable. Today the ten richest men in Malaysia, being seven Chinese along with two Malays and one Indian, show that this writer is riding on a political garbage agenda for the opposition. It is practically hypocritical of this writer to blame BN wholly when the Ali Baba trade was introduced and enhanced by the Chinese with a bribe syndrome for their own material gain. Kee Thuan Chye says "The Chinese owe it to BN that they were compelled to leave Malaysia to seek fairer opportunities oversea". Really!!! What fairer opportunities are you talking about - $$$ or human rights? This writer needs to take his bullshit elsewhere. The Malaysian Chinese are the biggest benefactors of the BN policies with their Ali Baba trade over the last 55 years and now they claim that they don't owe BN anything. As a Malay, I feel ashamed because I should have aligned with the Malays and the Indians because we are not ungrateful people. For whatever the mistakes BN has done politically, it does not warrant such a statement that the Chinese do not owe anything to BN. It is not a matter of owing, but the Malays and the Indians are not totally driven with $$$ agenda but rather a conscious one unlike how Kee Thuan Chye is portraying the exact notion and motivation of the politically twined Chinese community. As much as I dislike BN and their policies, this Kee Thuan Chye is oblivious that for 56 years since independence, BN has ensured the tolerance, goodwill and stability for the community is sustained to a large extent with the Chinese being the biggest benefactor monetarily. If this is the route a PR journalist takes, I hope that fair thinking Malaysians can see this is not the truth for regular Malaysians in Malaysia without a kiasu political Chinese agenda. I am not a supporter of BN, nor do I condone corruption or nepotism that is rampant. But in the same instance, I can't comprehend when truth is compromised and toyed around for political will like this idiot with a blanket statement like this to create instability amongst Malaysians.
|
| Orang Asal, Native and Bumiputera are not one and the same thing Posted: 23 Feb 2013 09:53 PM PST
Orang Asal also means Native but as the Native Interpretation Ordinance shows, the term also includes people who are clearly not Orang Asal. In short, all Orang Asal are Natives but not all Natives are Orang Asal. Joe Fernandez Reader Chong Tet Loi claims in "Never let extremists have their way" (Sunday Forum 24 Feb, 2013 Daily Express) that MANY (people?) were amused by my take in "Both These Sultans Never Owned Sabah" (Sunday Forum 17 Feb, 2013). No doubt he conducted an instant Sabah-wide survey after my letter to conclude that "MANY" were "amused" by it and probably he would have liked to add that quite a few even died from laughter. I don't know Chong from Adam. I hope that he is not a coffeeshop lawyer. If he's a lawyer, heaven forbid! I don't know either if Chong is smart. If he's smart, he's not too smart either. No offence meant. Nothing personal. We all make mistakes. To err is human, to forgive is divine. Ignorance is bliss, a little knowledge is dangerous. That doesn't prevent many people from ventilating their ignorance in public for MANY, as Chong pointed out, to be "amused". If only these MANY would come forward and state their piece! In fact, I readily "concede" that I am one of those "guilty" of routinely "ventilating my ignorance in public", as the accusations go. In that sense, I am a glutton for punishment as well. Chong, if it's any consolation, is in good company. But if my ventilation of "ignorance" remains unrebutted or unchallenged beyond a shadow of doubt, surely then it must enter the realms of being the Gospel Truth, for want of a better term. The writer has accused me of a cardinal sin: writing to impress (show-off is the word he used), no doubt rather than writing to express. This is really so ridiculous that it should not be dignified with any comment. Is Chong trying to convince us that he's a subject matter expert in the English language and things Borneon? I always mean what I say and say what I mean. I never write to impress but only to express. I never use one word more, when one word less will do. Never a difficult word when there's a simpler word for it. Chong is also gravely mistaken when he claims, in a highly politicised and emotionally-charged take, that I harbour ill-will towards half-Natives and particularly Sinos. Nothing could be further from the truth. What has ill-will, even if true, got to do with anything? My purported ill-will alone will not be sufficient to deny the half-Natives their human rights. So, why bring up any purported ill-will to detract, disrupt and distract from the issue? Why not clarify and defend the Sino-Natives if I have infringed on any of their rights? Inter-marriage, harmony, and goodwill, or the lack of it, is not the issue here either. I reiterate my earlier statement, at the risk of being labelled an extremist, that many Sino-Natives in Sabah don't have even a drop of Orang Asal or other Native blood in them. Those who don't believe this statement can just take a walk to the nearest Amanah Saham Bumiputera (ASB) counter where Chinese-looking "Sino-Natives" with Chinese names are made to run the gauntlet. We can hear them cursing and swearing in Chinese among themselves, much to the amusement of the others, as they are often made to wait for as long as three hours while checks are made into their background. This matter can easily be settled, on a case-by-case basis, by Sino-Natives producing a DNA report. If no Dusunic, Murutic, Suluk or Bajau DNA, don't claim to be Sino-Native in Sabah! I was careful not to use the Sino-Native as an example in my Feb 17 take and instead referred to the Indo-Natives who are really very tiny in number in Sabah when compared with the former. All I am saying is that one cannot be Chinese and Native in Sabah at the same time. Either one opts to be a Native or a Chinese. There are procedures for this and I have already spelt them out. If there do seem any contradictions between this take and my earlier one on Feb 17, consider this as the true and correct version. If the long-suffering Sino-Natives want to stop being a political punching bag, they should not leave their fate entirely in the hands of their myopic leaders and self-appointed opinion leaders like Chong who keep elephant-sized egos as pets. Since it doesn't serve any purpose whatsoever, I have no similar DNA advice for the obviously just-arrived from India Tamil Muslims, for example, who queue up at the ASB counter proudly clutching their unit trust books. The Constitution allows Indian Muslims in Malaysia to claim Malay, and by extension Bumiputera status, but does this privilege also extend to those who just got off the boat from Tamil Nadu or from elsewhere in the Indian sub-continent? Why they are not made to run the gauntlet by ASB just like the Sino-Natives is a bit of a mystery. The National Registration Department (NRD) in a recent statement in the local media clarified that they don't decide on Native status. It's right in a way. We should all re-read the Chief Secretary's circular of Nov 2010 on the issue. The NRD, it must be noted, is a Federal Government Department, and is duty-bound to comply with any policy directive from the Chief Secretary. The said circular does not refer to Natives but half-Bumiputera. Having said that, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. The NRD, no doubt in its confusion, does not re-issue birth certificates to half-Bumiputera with the entry Bumiputera under race. The only exception I know is a half-Orang Asal girl who was issued with a birth certificate which carried the term, "Bumiputera Sabah Bukan Islam" in the entry for race. That was two decades or more before the Chief Secretary's said circular. This particular girl was even questioned recently on her race by a puzzled Immigration at the Kota Kinabalu International Airport. But that's a different story. In Sabah, the NRD will only enter Dusun, Murut etc or Suluk, Bajau etc when re-issuing birth certificates to half-Bumiputera. That's getting into Orang Asal and other Native territory and clearly a contradiction in terms if the half-Bumiputera concerned is not at least partly of Orang Asal stock. In Sarawak, the Immigration Department will enter Iban, Bidayuh, Melanau, and Orang Ulu for half Bumiputera in their passport details despite these applicants holding birth certificates without these classifications. The NRD Sarawak routinely refers all applications from half-Bumiputera for re-issuance of birth certificates – as per the Chief Secretary's policy circular -- to the Native Court for a declaration. Here, no half-Orang Asal will be declared Orang Asal. Let's make a distinction between Orang Asal, Native and Bumiputera based on Adat, history and jurisprudence. Let's not get into myths, fairy tales and bad political propaganda. Orang Asal need not be defined by the Constitution or law – Acts, Enactments, and Ordinances, administrative -- but only by history and Adat. That's why the Orang Asal of Sabah refused to be entered and defined in the Native Interpretation Ordinance. They considered that the Supreme Insult. There's no need for DNA studies, notwithstanding my earlier take on DNA reports for Sino-Natives, since the entire population of Southeast Asia is descended from dark-skinned Dravidians (archaic whites) who made their way from South India along the Asian coast to South China and Taiwan and mated with the Mongolian (yellow-skinned by now after specialisation) tribes living there. These Mongolian tribes were descended from one branch of the Dravidians who broke away from the main group in Afghanistan which entered the Indian sub-continent. Orang Asal in Sabah refers only to the Dusunic including Kadazan or urban Dusun and Murutic groupings. These are the people to first settle down in the empty expanse of a geographically defined area – Sabah, Brunei, northern Sarawak, and the headwaters in Borneo where three nations meet – and did not leave remnants of their population outside this defined area, and if so, not in any great numbers. Orang Asal means Original People or Indigenous – also in using the terms employed by the United Nations -- as in Adat and history. Orang Asal also means Native but as the Native Interpretation Ordinance shows, the term also includes people who are clearly not Orang Asal. In short, all Orang Asal are Natives but not all Natives are Orang Asal. In Sabah, the terms Orang Asal and other Natives should suffice but a further difficulty was introduced when Tunku Abdul Rahman in Malaya coined the term Bumiputera, a Sanskrit word meaning "son of the soil". The reason for coming up with this term was because the Malay-speaking communities in Malaya – Bugis, Javanese, Minang, Acehnese, Arab Muslims, Indian Muslims etc – are not the Orang Asal of the peninsular. Neither are they considered Natives. The Federal Constitution merely defines the term Malay. This definition is not ethnic but political, subsequently constitutional, and in essence denotes a Malay Nation in Malaysia without Territory. Malaya and Malaysia, incidentally, are named after the Malay language which began as a dialect in Cambodia and was developed by the Hindus, later the Buddhists, to become the lingua franca of the Archipelago. The Hindus infused Sanskrit words into Malay and the Buddhists did the same with Pali (a Sanskrit dialect) terms. The existence of the Malay language by no means denotes the existence of a Malay race. Malay aside, Indians and Chinese are Nations in Malaya and Malaysia without territory. Orang Asal, Sabah and Sarawak are Nations in Malaysia with Territory. With one stroke of the bureaucratic pen on Bumiputera, Tunku included the Malay-speaking communities in Malaya in the same category as the Orang Asal and other Natives in the country for the purpose of doling out Government aid to certain communities. One could argue further that Bumiputera are not Natives and certainly not Orang Asal. In that sense, the NRD is right when it said that it does not decide on Native status. The Chief Secretary's circular merely refers to Bumiputera status. However, all Orang Asal are Native and Bumiputera while other Natives are Bumiputera but not Orang Asal. The term Bumiputera does not exist in law or the Constitution despite what Chong claims about "Stephens and his half-Native company". The best definition for Bumiputera can only be a citizen by operation of law who is the issue of a citizen by operation of law. This means that the majority of the Indians and Chinese, among others in Malaysia, are Bumiputera. I will rebut the rest of Chong's take in his Feb 24 letter in a separate piece. Again, if there do seem any contradictions between this take and my earlier one on Feb 17, consider this as the true and correct version.
Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| Posted: 23 Feb 2013 09:41 PM PST
When it suits them they all seem to have the wisdom to recognize someone else has to go but don't feel they must go and let others lead. Rahul Varma Before Tun M stepped down, there were many people saying he has overstayed and is power crazy, holding on to his position and whatnot. In fact, the same was said about Samy Vellu as well. Now for decades, the opposition leaders have been in position and not intending to give up even when their health is frail. For instance, YB Karpal Singh should have called it quits when he became wheelchair bound or Kit Siang when he lost his sight temporarily. Even Nik Aziz, being so frail, should give up his position. But they all are like the old English saying, the Pot calling the Kettle black. When it suits them they all seem to have the wisdom to recognize someone else has to go but don't feel they must go and let others lead. Just see how many elections they have been contesting and still want to contest for GE13! They have the audacity to hurl all sorts of things at the government. When will these people ever learn and when will younger leaders surface? And poor Malaysians are expecting change from the pact that has never changed at all! |
| Tanda Putera: UMNO Hegemony Finally Shaken Posted: 23 Feb 2013 09:37 PM PST
Is Tanda Putera art? Will it win any Oscars? Is TP a contribution to Malaysian history? If TP is supposed to be objective, why is it only fit to be shown to a Malay audience and not open to public scrutiny? Dr Kua Kia Soong, Director of SUARAM For the first time after 55 years of domination, UMNO's hegemony has finally been shaken. Through all these years of Alliance/BN rule, UMNO has been able to sustain it's relative success and cultural hegemony by presenting their definition of reality to the masses through the mainstream media – newspapers, textbooks, TV and films. They have tried to create a 'consensus' that the reality they have created is the only way of seeing the world and of viewing historical facts. Any groups who present an alternative view are therefore marginalized for after all, "history is written by winners" as Alex Haley said. Thus, before every general election since May 13, 1969, the official propaganda organs, especially the mainstream press and television, have without fail, saturated their coverage with the spectre of chaos and bloodshed should the opposition win. This has been taken to a repulsive extent when scenes of arson and corpses during the May 13 incident have been used in official adverts by the ruling coalition, for example in the 1990 general election in which I participated as a candidate. Such adverts have been invariably accompanied by racist commentary on episodes such as the May 13 pogrom, aimed at engendering chauvinistic feelings among the majority Malay population against the Chinese who have been portrayed in official propaganda as the upstart "immigrants".
Why Always Show Bukit Kepong? All these years, FINAS (the film corporation paid for by Malaysian taxpayers) has provided only one film that has been shown at prime time before every general election, namely, "Bukit Kepong". This was the episode during the Emergency when the insurgents – portrayed in the film as wholly Chinese – had attacked the police station at Bukit Kepong. Not surprisingly, all the mata-mata were all portrayed in the film as Malays. The rationale for showing "Bukit Kepong" before the general election was never spelt out, although the crude intention to sow racist hatred among the Malay masses toward the "Chinese communists" was crystal clear. UMNO's "cultural hegemony" worked well for years, until the contradictions inherent in the Umnoputra-weighted New Economic Policy began to create irreparable fissures in the Malay community. Along came the affable PAS stalwart, Mat Sabu who introduced Mat Indera as the Malay leader in the Bukit Kepong assault to an erstwhile historically naïve public. He further pointed to the elephant in the room – namely, that the Bukit Kepong assault by the Mat Indera-led insurgents was against the British colonial power that controlled the country at the time and should be viewed as a patriotic act! The even more tragic episode in Malaysia's history is of course, the May 13 pogrom. The official rendition has been to portray the events as the result of "Opposition" (read "Chinese") arrogance and insensitivity to "Malay" feelings, as well as being Communist inspired. Thus, "May 13" has been the most frequently used ghost story (in the words of the Tunku) in UMNO's "soft" arsenal. The message before every general election was that "May 13" bloodshed would/might recur if the Opposition ever came to power…
Declassified Documents on May 13 My 2007 title was an attempt to bring to light the available documents on the May 13 incident and to provide an alternative to the official version which has now been thoroughly discredited. The declassification of the official May 13th records in the British Archives in 1999 had provided a welcome opportunity to research this painful incident more thoroughly. I would love to have similar access to the Malaysian Special Branch records for the period, if only they possessed the same integrity for historical records. (Would a victorious Pakatan Rakyat government declassify these records in the name of transparency and Freedom of information, I wonder?) The British Foreign Office records drawn from files of confidential memoranda, embassy exchanges, correspondents' despatches (banned in Malaysia at the time) certainly debunk the official Malaysian government's version that the bloodshed was caused by "Chinese provocation" against Malays, that the communists had a hand in it, and that the fatalities only numbered 137. The thesis in my book is that the pogrom was orchestrated by the emergent state capitalist class in UMNO to secure their interests, which they have succeeded in doing until the present day, not least because of the threats of fascist violence used and reused at suitable junctures since then.
Tanda Putera: For Malay Eyes Only! Judging from the online interview given by the director of Tanda Putera (TP), it is clear that this film had been produced in an attempt to counter the impact of my 2007 title. My authoritatively researched book invited Malaysians to review for themselves, the evidence that debunked both UMNO's ghost stories and the notion that opposition votes in the 2008 general election would lead to mayhem. The reality was that the political tsunami happened and there was no mayhem. Unfortunately for the makers of TP, as Abe Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history." Or as Peter Carey, the writer has put it: "History is like a bloodstain that keeps on showing on the wall no matter how many new owners take possession, no matter how many times we paint over it." Also, unfortunately for the director of the film, her film has been unceremoniously put on hold from general release for political expediency. It seems her political masters cannot afford to show this to the Chinese voters or it would be disaster for the 13th general election! Would an artist with integrity put up with such an indignity? Would an artist with integrity tolerate being treated like a mercenary to be used at the whims and fancies of her paymasters for their own narrow ends? We now know that TP has recently been shown to a select captive audience of Felda settlers who happened to be in Kuala Lumpur for an official function. While journalists were asked to leave, some through their professional persistence, managed to stay and see the film. Thus we can only go by their reviews of the film, viz. that the Chinese are portrayed as the aggressors in the aftermath of the 1969 general election; that the Chinese had gone to Malay kampungs shouting arrogant and insensitive slogans; a scene of Chinese youth urinating on a flagpole at the Mentri Besar's residence; Chinese youth vandalizing campaign materials; a Chinese crowd shouting "Malays go and die"; A Chinese crowd disallowing two Malay youth on motorbikes to pass through, claiming that Selangor belonged to them; that the communists had a hand in orchestrating the mayhem; that foreign correspondents at the time fielded unreliable despatches… all blood racing stuff to arouse Malay emotions.
May 13 Tragedy, Tanda Putera Farce Is Tanda Putera art? Will it win any Oscars? Is TP a contribution to Malaysian history? If TP is supposed to be objective, why is it only fit to be shown to a Malay audience and not open to public scrutiny? Voltaire said that "history can be well written only in a free country." Our country is not even free enough to screen the film! At the moment, it can only be shown for "Malay eyes only". From the review of the film, the webpage of the film and the utterances of the film director so far, I would conclude as Marx did in The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: "All great historical facts and personages occur, as it were, twice ... the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce."
|
.jpg "https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjoi5VfuA6JZMyJMgzBO3_NgJKQ3GYWvB-4wsaJLZQNA4Zu16HxXaEn2yOe5Ny4z43LUSRLVTVXhD9HzCPf4ZdTKG7EirVJzRGSkmZoOd0eED4_MASNrJWGzp7AtbiWflcYj6Xz643m-E/s400/Richest+Man+in+the+neighbor+country+(Malaysia).jpg")
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan