Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 15 Aug 2013 03:56 PM PDT

We do have a few thousands who died on May 13, 1969. We have an attitude of not wanting to know or discuss about it, seemingly for the benefit of the next generation. The business as usual on May 13 every year is like a collective amnesia with little or no impact on the next generation as a pertinent history lesson.

Kuo Yong Kooi, MM

World Environment Day is celebrated every year on June 5 to raise global awareness of the need to take positive environmental action. It is run by the United Nations Environment Programme.

Every August 6, "A-Bomb Day", the city of Hiroshima holds the Peace Memorial Ceremony to console the victims of the atomic bombs and to pray for the realisation of lasting world peace.

By the same token Malaysia is in desperate need for a day or even a week to raise awareness on "positive steps to mend inter-religious and race relations".

Blogger Anas Zubedy's "let's re-colour May 13" is a great starting point. It just needed a lending hand from some popular public figures so that we can expand and publicise the project and experiment it on a nationwide scale.

It is important that if we do choose to have a day or a week of interfaith dialogues annually, we need to open ourselves to many questions so that we can have more understanding on what spiritual growth and religiosity is.

We can have different themes annually to highlight the need for Malaysians from all walks of life to understand some basic terminologies. Themes like "What is the difference between spirituality and religious dogma?"

Once we can distinguish these two different terms is when we start to understand what is needed to be done on a personal level in instilling personal spiritual growth. In another year we can have another theme like "Is religiosity an inward journey or an outward journey?"

Malaysians from all walks of life can participate in a ceremony similar to the one in Hiroshima or the 9/11 commemoration day. We can modify that programme to suit our theme of May 13 victims.

The United States has got its ground zero memorial or The National September 11 Memorial & Museum. They hold their anniversary every year at ground zero to reflect and remember the 3,000 victims of 9/11.

We do have a few thousands who died on May 13, 1969. We have an attitude of not wanting to know or discuss about it, seemingly for the benefit of the next generation. The business as usual on May 13 every year is like a collective amnesia with little or no impact on the next generation as a pertinent history lesson.

Australia and New Zealand have an annual public holiday called Anzac Day on April 25. As a resident in Australia, I do not remember if I ever took part in an Anzac Day parade or the dawn service before. Initially I found it amusing where people commemorate their fallen soldiers who fought and died in other people's wars. After a while I begin to realise that this is a good way to engage the younger generation to participate in learning and relating to history.

If we do have a commemoration day on May 13 which is widely participated all across the nation, it can be an effective learning and reflective tool for us to relate to this tragic event in our nation's history. At the moment we are being spoon-fed history from the Umno perspective only. Some other alternative perspectives are available on this site.

On that commemorative day if the rakyat chooses to use May 13 as the day, the mass media or the alternative Internet media (if the present government does not wish to participate) can replay documentaries on real accounts of events or interview people who survived and witnessed what happened.

Interview historians and politicians on their account of that day; like the one Lim Kit Siang wrote to counter "Tanda Putera's" dramatised account of what happened. It is a good reference point for open participation and interpretation of history. After all history belongs to all of us, not to a specific political party.

A sombre day that encourages all participants to reflect on what happened on May 13, 1969 can be a good starting point for us to reflect as this year's Ramadan has highlighted a new height in deteriorating inter-faith and race relations.

If we do not work on the annual "collective introspection" seriously, we are not likely to learn from history. We are not encouraging our young to actively participate and relate to an event that changed the direction of our nation's history.

If we do make an effort, we may be able to contribute positively and make new history because we can instil that into our collective national psyche for generations to come.

The way we handle things

Posted: 15 Aug 2013 03:40 PM PDT

If we prefer to do things the emotional, confrontational and punitive way, I am afraid our country may not survive the repeated torments. Over the past one month alone, we have seen one after another religiously sensitive incidents taking place in our country, where people resort to abusive language to vent their anger and dissatisfaction while the authorities punish the perpetrators with arrests and court charges.

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew

The "surau dijadikan tokong" incident could have given different results if we had handled it differently. Unfortunately, things don't always move the ideal way.

Since the very beginning, the video clip of Buddhists meditating in the surau was posted on YouTube and the clip soon spread like wildfire within the Muslim community, thanks to a little help from sensationalising comments.

People only see one side of the story, and receive only fragmented information.

After that, the mainstream Malay media and web users quickly followed suit, and a conclusion was reached before long, that it was an act of instigation trying to blaspheme the Islamic faith and Muslims.

The subjective and unitary impression has taken shape, and is hard to reverse.

Malay groups and individuals protested boisterously. The emotions of the country's Muslims ran wild just as non-Muslims felt alarmed.

Both the government and police were under tremendous pressure to hand down stringent actions.

But the biased views in our society remained unresolved because of this. Instead, the feelings gained in intensity and people got polarised.

The subsequent developments moved almost in one similar direction, trying to fix the problem through heightened emotions and penalties in the absence of amicable communication and understanding.

I was thinking, what would happen if we dealt with this from a different approach?

Some people found out what actually took place at the surau, but he made it into a malicious video. He should have notified the religious clerics or local leaders. Such a sensitive matter should be laid in the hands of people who are more knowledgeable and responsible.

Upon the arrival of the clerics and local leaders, they would have told the Buddhists this surau is a place of worship for Muslims and it is not right to hold a Buddhist meditation there. The participants should have been advised to hold their activity at more appropriate venues.

And when the police came, they should act as mediators to keep things in order.

Further understanding revealed that the resort's manager, along with the meditators, were all Singaporeans who might not be as sensitive as we are in religious matters, while the priest chairing the session could have come from somewhere else and had little knowledge of Islam.

As such, we can deduce that the incident was not a blatant act of religious instigation but just an isolated unintentional incident.

As for the other spectators, perhaps the clerics and local leaders could explain to them and appease their frustration.

After that, the clerics could conduct a religious class for the resort management, informing them of the religious teachings and taboos in Malaysian society in an attempt to evade any similar incident in the future.

Things could have come to an end by now.

Which do you think is the better way of handling this matter?

If we prefer to do things the emotional, confrontational and punitive way, I am afraid our country may not survive the repeated torments. Over the past one month alone, we have seen one after another religiously sensitive incidents taking place in our country, where people resort to abusive language to vent their anger and dissatisfaction while the authorities punish the perpetrators with arrests and court charges.

In the end, we consume the residual tolerance in our society as negative sentiments infiltrate every part of our life.

If we have allowed more communication and moderation to come in, people from different religious backgrounds would also learn to be more accommodating and our society more progressive.

Dr M, prime minister for life

Posted: 15 Aug 2013 03:22 PM PDT

Mahathir fed the Malays a false premise that Malaysia was their land and that the world owed them a living.

Mariam Mokhtar, FMT

The political analysts who postulate that former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad prevented reform within Umno Baru are wrong; Mahathir is the major obstacle for any meaningful reform in Malaysia, not just for Umno Baru.

Like it or not, we are all Mahathir's children – that man and his policies have affected all of us, in one way or another, in the same manner the behaviour of an errant and irresponsible father, will impact on his children.

Mahathir's existing policies make non-Malays despise many Malays, because the Malays are reticent about speaking up against the injustices and attacks against other religions and cultures.

Mahathir's policies make Malays arrogant and so they demand that those who refuse to bow to Malay needs and Muslim doctrine, should leave the country or have their citizenship revoked.

Mahathir's racist policies may unite all in Umno Baru, but it is the nation which is left divided. Mahathir may not be in government, but his henchmen ensure that his legacy is preserved and that his family dictatorship continues with his son, Mukhriz.

Mahathir is like the prime minister for life, who refuses to leave office with dignity. His supporters are so deferent to him, that they treat him like a de-facto monarch.

The impact of the Iranian revolution in the late 70s also marked a turning point in our history. In 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini swept into Iran and the Iranians embraced him having suffered years of oppression at the hands of the corrupt Shah of Iran, a puppet of America.

The resurgence of Islam throughout the world, may have energised PAS but it was Mahathir who felt threatened. He had to make Umno Baru more Islamic than PAS, in an attempt to entice the Malays who had drifted to PAS.

Mahathir fed the Malays a false premise that Malaysia was their land and that the world owed them a living. He tinkered with the education system, so that Malays became uncompetitive.

To proceed unhindered, Mahathir removed the controls which should have prevented corruption. With his men in the judiciary, the police, the civil service and the media, these institutions voiced only his thoughts and suppressed all other opinions.

Mahathir's closest allies are beholden to him. He gave them an economic leg-up and like the transformation which Cinderella underwent, they became billionaires overnight. Why bite the hand that feeds them? Reform is the last thing on their minds.

A confused sore loser

Further down the Umno Baru pecking order, the party member or politician may not realise that he is part of a slick well-organised syndicate, run along the lines of the mafia.

One who is loyal to the party will be amply rewarded, but one who decides to opt out of the "family" is sought-out and destroyed.

As long as he is loyal to the party, he will be afforded protection and riches, as well as power. With this in mind, why would Umno Baru politicians and active supporters desire reform?

With apologies to American Express cards, the Umno Baru slogan might as well have been "Making the Impossible, Possible". How else would a TNB meter-reader become a Cabinet minister? How else would a son of a minister have a special role in the Tourism Ministry? How else would members of this elite club get away with crimes ranging from financial mismanagement, abuse of taxpayers' money, sexism, racism, nepotism, cronyism, extremism, murder and money-laundering?

Would a CEO of a public listed company dare to admit that it is his prerogative to say when he will retire?

All these injustices happen because the rakyat are compliant. Mahathir triumphs because few dare oppose him.

In the past few days, Mahathir said that in a mature democracy, losers should accept defeat and wait for the next election to try again.

For a start, Malaysia is not a mature democracy. In fact, it is not a democracy. Elections are rigged. Leaders refuse to leave willingly. The will of the people is not respected. He should have also said that in a mature democracy, the ruling party does not cheat in the elections.

Mahathir is a sore-loser. When he lost to a PAS candidate in 1969, he blamed the Chinese for switching allegiance from Umno to PAS. Did he have a hand in instigating the race-riots of 13 May? By the end of the year, he was sacked from the Umno Supreme Council and expelled from Umno. He then wrote his racist book, "The Malay Dilemma".

When Mahathir and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah locked horns in an Umno election in 1987, Umno was declared an illegal organisation following litigation. Mahathir acted with venom when he won by a tiny margin; he purged people from his ministry, he stripped the judiciary of its independence, he ordered a crackdown on his detractors. Mahathir does not accept defeat willingly.

At a press conference organised after the Perdana Global Peace Foundation conference on the Palestinian cause, Mahathir said the rakyat had to pay for the price of freedom with an increase in gun crime and shootings.

Is Mahathir a little confused? He equates freedom with an increase in shooting. Does he think the Palestinians, who are being shot at and who do some of the shooting, have much freedom?

READ MORE HERE

The actual Malay dilemma

Posted: 15 Aug 2013 11:15 AM PDT

Can't you see that you are being played and made a fool of by your own people? And these are your own people who confess to be your leaders and are apparently protecting your interests?

Zan Azlee, TMI

It seems that one of the big discussions amongst Malaysians at the moment is if we are actually getting too sensitive. This is because of the "offence" that we have been taking over all kinds of issues.

First of all, there was the Alvivi case where this idiotic Chinese couple took a picture of themselves eating bak kut teh which they spread online and offended the Malays in the country.

Then there was the case of a Malay woman making a video with her pet dogs which caused a stir and offended the Malays in the country.

After that, an owner of a private resort allowed a group of Buddhists to meditate in a room which was also allocated as a surau. And this offended the Malays in the country.

At a first glance, I can see the reason why many people are starting to think that Malaysians are actually getting too sensitive for their own good.

But at a second glance, I think I'm beginning to see a trend here. Can you see it? It seems like those who constantly get offended happen to be Malays.

Sure, they constitute about 60% of the country's population. But it would still be unfair to extrapolate and conclude that Malaysians as a whole are becoming too sensitive.

What about the remaining 40% of Malaysians? The Chinese, Indians, indigineous groups and the "dan lain-lain" are as equally Malaysians as well.

I know I always try my best to stay clear of categorising issues according to racial lines since I believe that we need to be blind towards racism for it to cease to exist.

But in this context and situation, I can't help but ask the question, why are Malays in Malaysia becoming too overly sensitive over things (petty things, if I may add)?

READ MORE HERE

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Jumaat, 16 Ogos 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan