Not a Perakian but...

Watched NTV7 7PM news the other day about Courtroom bickering regarding who the "real" Perak's Menteri Besar should be. NTV news gave these two lists (provided by the respective counsel) for comparison:

NTV7: On why DS Nizar should be MB?

1. DUN not yet dissolved.
2. He has not resigned yet.
3. No vote of "unconfidence" made towards him.

NTV7: On why DDr Zambry should be MB?

1. Forgotten. Too long to be committed into my poor memory...
2. Forgotten. Too long to be committed into my poor memory...
3. Forgotten. Too long to be committed into my poor memory...

Basically, what NTV7 news tried to explain, I think, was (from various other sources):

1. PR had 28 ADUNs, BN had 28 ADUNs, the 3 Bebas were “partiless” BN supporters.
2. DS Nizar didn't gain the confidence of the majority, because [repeat no. 1].
3. The Sultan "expected" DS Nizar to resign, because [repeat no. 2].
4. The Sultan had chosen another to be MB, so [repeat no. 3].
5. It was considered disloyalty not to resign because [repeat no. 4].

Why can't NTV7 make simple person like me to understand? :D Ah, perhaps I'm plain stupid, not to mention demented! Of course, how could I NOT realize that?! ;)

BTW, where's the “Against the Constitution” part? *blur* :S Ah, perhaps it was hidden in the “forgotten” part...

---

Probably unrelated news:
Perak’s day of infamy and bedlam
Nizar claim today's sitting 'null and void'
What does the standoff in Perak mean?

[UPDATED May 11, 2009] High Court ruled DS Nizar was real MB but DDr Zambry could appeal.

[UPDATED May 12, 2009] DDr Zambry succeeded in appealing for a stay on the High Court rule in his favour. So DS Nizar may become unreal MB?

Awang oh! Awang - Bukan Cerita Kanak-kanak

Wake up on boring Sunday. My first act was to check the news today from The Malaysia Insider. Stumbled upon this unlikely news. “Believe it! You moron!” I heard myself talking back to me. Since I have nothing better to do, I’ve decided to write this piece of crap. Not that anyone will read this junk I think. It may even be considered racist, I am actually hoping for the word “insignificant”. Ah well, why don’t I just go ahead and see for myself? ;)

Awang oh! Awang. He did it again (provoking other races’ intellect)! Said he wasn't surprised with their reaksi keterlaluan (excessive reaction?) of the headline story. Sure, only someone who was PREPARED to face such reaction would not be easily surprised, which means the person had DELIBERATELY done the very thing that led to the EXPECTED reaction.

Said the report was disalah tafsir (taken out of context?) and digambarkan seolah-olah satu provokasi kepada kaum lain (depicted as if it was a provocation to other races?). No comment there old boy. Whatever the front pager means was not CLEARLY stated in the front page headline. How can people know what was ACTUALLY MEANT when the front pager wrote something but it ACTUALLY MEANT something else?

Said the report was only as response to the various statements and demands by certain parties (whoever you mean) including akbar bahasa ibunda (non-Malay press?) and blogs. Claimed that the headline story (only?) encouraged Malays to be united in the context of “Malay Unity is the tonggak (foundation? pillar?) for Stability for All Races” in this country. (Running back to fetch the April 15 newspaper.)

Er, which paragraph did you say as your claim? There are only few statements that MAYBE says what you mean:

1. Ketua Pembangkang Dewan Undangan Negeri Selangor, Datuk Seri Dr. Mohamad Khir Toyo berkata, hak orang Melayu tidak harus dilepaskan dalam usaha kerajaan memenuhi kehendak masyarakat pelbagai kaum. (Selangor DUN Opposition Leader, said, Malay’s rights should not be dilepaskan (sacrificed? “released” sounds very inappropriate.) in the efforts of government to fulfill the demands of multiracial community.) [Nah, I don’t think this is what you mean.]

2. Timbalan Presiden Gabungan Pelajar Melayu Semenanjung (GPMS), Syed Anuar Syed Mohamad berkata, walaupun kerajaan mahu menekankan konsep Satu Malaysia yang menyatukan rakyat pelbagai kaum, langkah juga perlu dilakukan bagi mengembalikan keharmonian di kalangan orang Melayu sendiri. (Deputy President of GPMS said, even though government wants to stress the concept of One Malaysia that unites the multiracial rakyat, steps to return the harmony within Malays themselves need to be done.) [Nope! Don’t think this one either.]

3. [3 paragraphs in one] Ketua Umum Badan Bertindak Perpaduan Melayu (BBPM), Osman Abu Bakar yang sependapat dengan GPMS berkata, ... kerjasama antara dua parti politik itu bukan sahaja akan memberi faedah kepada orang Melayu sahaja tetapi juga kaum lain. Tambahnya, penyatuan UMNO dan Pas perlu menjadi batu loncatan untuk mengeratkan semua rakyat berbilang kaum di negara ini. (OAB (General Leader?) of BBPM said ... cooperation between the two parties (UMNO and PAS) will not only benefit the Malay but also other races. He added, the unity of UMNO and PAS needs to be the stepping stone to strengthen (the relation) of all races in this country.) [Ah, perhaps THIS is what you mean. But then why single out only TWO parties? What of Malays from OTHER parties? It must have hurt their feeling by leaving them out.]

He asked is it wrong if Malays are united and why gundah (feeling discomfort/disgruntled?) of Malay unity? No at all, old boy. ;) United THEY should (not you of course since you are already IN and not OUT), for the good of the country. People only gundah if you INCLUDE Malay Unity (although most of the time your newspaper articles stop at the word Malay, the unity thing only sometimes mentioned) and VERSES other races in the same sentence, or in the same context. Shall I quote from the headline story? Ah, I’m sure you know that already. ;)

[Skip 2 paragraphs] No comment on that. One Malaysia is a “new” concept proposed by PM. So everyone has his/her own interpretation, or misinterpretation (if others disagree with someone’s interpretation), of the concept. Can’t really blame Awang if he just senyum sambil geleng kepala (smiled while shaking his head), on top of feeling of menghairankan (flabbergasted/astonished?), of others’ evaluation and analysis and attempt to relate 1Malaysia concept and the report (he used mengaitkanNYA, not sure NYA means the report or something else).

Said he, the (sad) reality of today, Malay press seakan perlu tunduk kepada tekanan gerakan politik bukan Melayu (seemed they have to bow to the pressure of Non-Malay political movement). Not really. You have done everything in your power to continue publishing, er, “may be misinterpreted” to seditious and racist articles.

Said he, “Jika akhbar berbahasa ibunda menyiarkan laporan dan berita yang amat berbaur perkauman, ia hanya dianggap sebagai kebebasan media atas nama demokrasi. Tetapi jika akhbar Melayu melaporkan suara isi hati orang Melayu dan adakalanya menyanggah tuntutan keterlaluan kaum lain, ia dituduh rasis.”

(If non-Malay press publishes SUPER RACIST (can’t help myself choosing this word LOL!) reports and news, it is considered freedom of press in the name of democracy. BUT if Malay press voices the isi hati (desire? thought? aspiration?) of the Malay which is sometimes menyanggah (contradictory? in disagreement? at odds?) with the UNREASONABLE demands of other races, we are accused of being racist.)

Fair argument Awang. Now you’re talking sense. Of course, we may disagree to the FINER POINTS of what UNREASONABLE DEMANDS you mean. For the sake of racial harmony, I’ll agree with you NO ONE should “play” at racism in the name of democracy and freedom of press. Yes, that’s including you and me and the others. ANYONE playing at racism should be PROSECUTED and not PROTECTED. So, you see, not all people are as UNREASONABLE as such the ones that you have met. Er, did you say there’re MILLIONS of them out there? ;)

He said we (I think he mean the ACCUSERS) should make our own research and assured us it will ABSOLUTELY surprise us. He related a friend’s statement, “Laporan mereka jauh lebih dahsyat seolah-olah Malaysia bukan negara pelbagai kaum.” (Their, meaning non-Malay’s, news report are more dahsyat (worse? slanderous? seditious? ULTRA RACIST?) as if (depicting) Malaysia is not multiracial country).

Again, fair argument Awang. No surprise though. We all know there are some IRRESPONSIBLE people out there writing/saying UNETHICAL and RACIST reports or remarks without REGARDS of social harmony. But then again, I hope you can treat this matter as a WHOLE. Not just NOT-UNETHICAL akbar Melayu verses UNETHICAL akbar bahasa ibunda. What about the seemingly disalah tafsir UNETHICAL akbar Melayu?

Said he, “Pada Awang, sebahagian media berkenaan memberikan banyak isyarat berbeza dan mengelirukan. Dalam mereka mendakwa mendokong kerajaan, ia tidak dicerminkan dengan laporan yang secara konsisten boleh dibaca membawa agenda berlainan. Pun begitu, tidak timbul desakan agar para pemimpin Cina mengawal akhbar mereka.”

(To Awang, SOME of those media gives contradictory and confusing indications. While they claim to be supporting the government, their reports are inconsistent (with their claim) and appear to have different agendas. Even then, there’s no insistence/pressure for the Chinese leaders to control their press.)

Ah, now Awang makes his point clearer. No just ANY non-Malay press but SPECIFICALLY the Chinese press, or rather, CHINESE-CONTROLLED PRESS. Why didn’t you say earlier, Awang oh! Awang? Are you playing teka-teki (guessing games) with the readers. You must have a very crooked sense of humor. ;) So, those presses are flip-flopping with their LOYALTY you said? To whom did you say again? Ah, to the government! Thank you for clearing up that one too. Nasib baik (fortunately) you didn’t say disloyalty to the King and Country. ;)

He questioned, “Persoalannya apakah perlu ada piawaian berbeza antara media Melayu dan bukan Melayu? Akhbar Melayu tidak boleh lantang sementara akhbar bukan Melayu mesti diberi lebih kebebasan?” (The question is, is there need to have different standard between Malay media and non-Malay media? So, Malay press cannot be lantang (critical? or loud?) while non-Malay press must be given more freedom?”)

Fair question, Awang. Had you not mentioned this I would NEVER have known there are already different standard between the two medias! Now I know that Malay press is suppressed while the non-Malay press is running amok of unrestricted freedom. Perhaps the government should fix that either by (1) giving both the SAME freedom of press or (2) SUPPRESS both seemingly “misinterpreted as” UNETHICAL and RACIST publications. What do you say in that? It is a very fair solution, right?

Said he, “Malah pada hari ini, semua orang tahu, akhbar bahasa ibunda jauh lebih bebas dan berani memperjuangkan kepentingan kaum mereka berbanding akhbar bahasa Melayu. Apakah kebebasan yang mereka nikmati itu mahu dibiarkan untuk melenyapkan akhbar bahasa Melayu?”

(Even today, everybody knows non-Malay press has been far freer and bolder in fighting for the interest of their races COMPARED TO the Malay press. Does the freedom they enjoy mahu dibiarkan(can be allowed?) so that they can wipe out Malay press?)

(1) That everybody knows: true. (2) That non-Malay press is freer and bolder: true. (3) That COMPARED TO: true. (4) That Wipe out Malay press: Huh? Does he mean Non-Malay press’ “Freedom of Press” EQUALS Wiping Out of Malay press? You must have been withholding certain evidences that can unearth this Conspiracy to Wipe Out Malay press, or you’re just being over suspicious type, and blatantly accuse the non-Malay press of this.

Said he, “Sememangnya ada gerakan terancang terutama parti pembangkang tertentu untuk melemahkan akhbar Melayu khususnya Utusan atas muslihat politik. Ini kerana Utusan selama ini menjadi wadah mempertahankan kepentingan Islam dan Melayu atas rasa tanggungjawab untuk menjamin keharmonian pelbagai kaum.”

(There’s been a choreographed movement especially from certain opposition parties to weaken the Malay press and especially Utusan in their political maneuvering. This is because Utusan has been (forever) a vanguard to protect interest of Islam and Malays in the sense of responsibility to guarantee the multiracial harmony.)

I can’t disagree with you there’s probably movement to weaken Utusan (specifically) but Malay press as whole? *Shrug* So, you do feel responsible in guaranteeing multiracial harmony. It’s just you have been giving, quoting you, “isyarat berbeza dan mengelirukan” (confusing and contradictory gesture). What you did doesn’t reflect what you mean.

Said he, “Pendirian syarikat akhbar ini cukup jelas dan konsisten iaitu menolak ekstremisme kaum dan agama sepanjang 75 tahun sejarah penubuhannya. Sebab itu, Utusan mendokong Umno yang mengamalkan pendekatan kesederhanaan berbanding parti tertentu sebelum ini yang membawa aliran ekstrem.”

(Our stand is very clear and consistent in rejecting racial and religious extremisms for the 75 years of its existence. That’s why Utusan supports UMNO who practices moderation approach compared to certain parties that previously brought extreme flow.)

Ah, you manage to raise my eyebrows. You support moderation you said? Should I say “No comment?” Senyum sambil geleng kepala.

Said he, “Dasar Umno itulah yang menjadi payung berlindung kepada masyarakat pelbagai kaum. Kepimpinan negara dan juga Umno mengambil pendirian yang berani dalam melawan ekstremisme biarpun terpaksa bertembung dengan sebahagian orang Melayu. Dalam hubungan ini, Umno yang memulakan perkongsian kuasa dengan kaum lain sehingga berdekad-dekad lamanya dituduh bekerjasama dengan golongan kafir.”

(UMNO fundamental is the thing that protects multiracial community. The country leadership and UMNO take a bold stand to fight extremism even though they had to confront part of (other?) Malays. In this context, UMNO was the one who started the power sharing with other races and for decades she has been branded collaborating with the non-believers.)

Said he, “Umno juga berjaya menghalang kelompok pelampau yang mahu kekayaan negara dibolot oleh Melayu sebagai kaum teras di negara ini.” (UMNO also succeeded in preventing extremist groups that wanted to rob country riches for Malay as the core race in this country.)

He exclaimed, “Tetapi siapa peduli kepada hakikat sejarah itu termasuk sumbangan Utusan?” (But who cares about this historical fact and what Utusan has contributed?)

Not me. I certainly acknowledge UMNO’s contributions from before Independence until recently.

Said he, “Awang tidak berhajat untuk mengulas panjang kerana akur nasihat Najib agar semua pihak termasuk media tidak memainkan sentimen perkauman. Tiada siapa harus ambil mudah seruan beliau. Apa yang Awang nyatakan tadi sekadar luahan untuk renungan bersama.”

(Awang doesn’t want to make long review because I listen to PM’s advice that all parties including the media not to play racial sentiments. No one should take his appeal lightly. What Awang said just now was only his thought expression for mutual reflection.)

Agree. We all should definitely listen to him. Let me rephrase that, we ALL (including you) should definitely listen to him. Expression of thought is okay, just try to be diplomatic sometimes, same to all the others of course. ;)

Said he, “Inilah masa untuk semua pihak memberikan sokongan padu kepada beliau bagi menangani pelbagai cabaran. Tetapi sokongan itu perlulah ikhlas, bukannya percaturan untuk menguntungkan kaum sendiri sahaja. Najib cukup komited untuk membawa keberhasilan kepada semua kaum menerusi Satu Malaysia.”

(This is the time for all party to give support for him to face all challenges. However, the support must be sincere, not just some maneuver to enrich own race only. PM is very committed to bring keberhasilan (success?) to all races though One Malaysia.)

He concluded, “Bijaklah menghargainya.” (Be wise to appreciate it.)

Sure. We all should be wise to appreciate it. ;) BTW, there’s something about your title “Nasib Akbar Melayu” (The fate of Malay press).

Awang oh! Awang. Can Harakah and Suara Keadilan be considered akbar Melayu? I don't think so. Since the government won't give them permission to publish their "paper" daily.

I remember I used to subscribe to Harakah, back when it was allowed to be sold publicly, and they sold like goreng pisang. No, I am not an opposition voter. I just wanted to read what the non-mainstream media said.

Then suddenly, their permit revoked, er, I mean re-defined. From biweekly became bimonthly publication. I believe they were applying for daily publication at that time (so that their papers can be justified as akbar Melayu harian).

"Wow!" I said. That was sure a blow to the opposition (never mind their majority Malay members), in which the ruling government won landslide victory following that. So, I became non-subscriber, reading Harakah, or SK, only when I visited my opposition friends. Now, I haven't been reading Harakah as often since I left peninsular.

So, Awang oh! Awang, what has become of the nasib of akbar Melayu? Why don't you tell that to the publishers of Harakah and Suara keadilan?

Disclaimer: All interpretation/misinterpretation are written in English. Should any discrepancy found the BM version will always govern the meaning and interpretation. I’m sure Utusan people have superior BM than me. ;)

P/S: I should stop doing this. I’m getting tired of sticking my nose into other people’s bickering. ;)

Kebijaksanaan Kaum Cina Berpolitik - A Reply

[UPDATED: 19 April 2009]

Utusan Malaysia/Mingguan (UM) published a "rencana" by BISIK-BISIK AWANG SELAMAT titled Kebijaksanaan Kaum Cina Berpolitik (Chinese's Ingenuity/Wisdom/Brilliancy in Politicking?). I would say I was slightly pissed off. ;) So, I decided I will lift my “apolitical barrier” just this once. :D I hope Awang is reading this. ;)

It was the title that draw my eyes, Kebijaksanaan Kaum Cina Berpolitik. Initially I thought he meant to praise certain Chinese, perhaps even from both sides, in their ingenuity in their political campaign. After I read the whole article, I knew my initial thought was wrong. But then, it’s my fault to think too highly of Awang. I don’t know if Awang is his real name. Heck, I don’t even know if Awang is male or female!

First he wrote that BN losses in the two Bukits are expected. Okay, he didn’t write that. He said it wasn’t surprising at all. Then he supplied why BN lost:
(1) Strong anti-BN sentiments;
(2) (Wrong?) Candidates (from BN? Or Better from opposition?);
(3) Local issues and Hate sentiments played by the oppositions including slander and personal attacks;
(4) BN Chinese (he didn’t say this but he mentioned MCA and Gerakan, both Chinese majority BN component parties) didn’t work as aggressive and as long-hour as opposition (Chinese?).

“Bukanlah kita mahu menuding jari kepada mana-mana pihak tetapi itulah realitinya dan ia menuntut post mortem yang berani.” he wrote. (We don't want to point finger on anyone but that's the reality and it demands a bold post mortem).

I hope he means ALL four list above as the causes of why BN lost, not just the last one, as the title states. BTW, why the need for another post mortem if the main causes are the top 3 above? Would BN win if the BN Chinese work 24-7 and more aggressive? Personally, I doubt it.

“Umno memang perlu berubah tetapi parti komponen yang lain juga perlu berubah. MIC sudah tentu memerlukan perubahan lebih besar terutama kepimpinannya.” He continued. (UMNO needs to change but the component parties also need to change. MIC must need bigger change especially the leadership (level).)

Wow! He must have certain disagreement to the leadership of MIC, even though MIC leadership is their internal matter. I wonder what gives him right to question other people’s household bickering. Granted, he only thinks for the good of the bigger house (BN), one “rotten” house can bring down the whole lot. But then I think MIC members were as happy as they can be, with their own party election finished, they should be no problem right? But then I don’t think Awang will be satisfied by that.

Next, he wrote, “Dengan prestasi hambar itu maka MCA, Gerakan dan MIC tidak berhak untuk membuat pelbagai tuntutan apatah lagi bagi jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri kedua.” (With the disastrous performance, MCA, Gerakan (BN Chinese?) and MIC (BN Indians?) have no right to make any demand especially the DPM post).

So, who will represent the Malaysian Chinese and Indians if not the BN Chinese and BN Indians (even though they may not get the vote of majority) then? Well, he didn’t say that (again!), I have just taken him out of context. But then, it may seem like that right? Who then can make the “demand” or request on behalf of the (mostly opposition?) Chinese and Indians? Surely not from the opposition Chinese or Indians. I don’t think Awang will agree to that either.

Perhaps Awang will supply his suggestion in his next “rencana”. I just hope he won’t say something like:
(1) Chinese/Indian cannot demand anything;
(2) “The Government” will be able to “understand” your need and will be provided as we see fit.
(3) Why? I and certain race are enough to rule all of you! Don’t need all the other “non-my-race” (With evil grin and wicked eyes.)
No, I hope none of the above. ;)

Then, he suggested that UMNO not to heed or give in all demands by other component parties because it won’t help BN to rise again. He further assured that UMNO is still strong despite all the pressures and restrictions (from other component parties?). To give in to the demands is a blunder, he wrote.

Of course, giving in to any unnecessary demand is not only unwise and stupid, but also may be a cause of “Pembaziran Duit Rakyat,” (wastage of people’s money), not to mention being seen as weak! I would say if BN wants to rise again, it will need a TOTAL rebranding, any subtotal effort will just gets them back to square one. I wonder what Awang think about this?

He also mentioned that Malay votes for BN had increased while non-Malay vote shrink. He further claimed that usually non-Malay voters made many demands during the campaign season but their votes were still going to the opposition. He then listed all the “evidences” for his claim including:
(1) RM 1,000,000 for CHINESE schools;
(2) RM 400,000 for TAMIL schools;
(3) Reserve lands claim (Chinese/Indians only? Or including others?);
(4) and tens of other things.

Awang forgot to mention that usually certain candidates previously also made many promises but never deliver them. Oh, I didn’t mean it’s just from certain political party, I mean just about everyone that did this. Of course, perhaps Awang would like to list ALL the promises the opposition fails to deliver first. But Awang, please list ALL the failed promises, okay? Not just from ONE side only. ;)

Ah, we are straying from the story of course. I was telling about the mau pai (Chinese term means counterfeit/bogus/fake) “Aku Janji” (I Promise) by certain voters. So, Awang, an opposition voter cannot demand anything if they don’t vote for BN? Do you mean BN should punish them if they still vote for opposition by not granting their “demands”?

You said, “Apa makna ini semua? Bukankah ia menampakkan BN terus dipermainkan oleh pengundi bukan Melayu. Pada Awang, keputusan kedua-dua pilihan raya kecil itu dan beberapa yang lain sebelum ini adalah isyarat jelas kepada BN supaya jangan lagi terperangkap dengan muslihat sedemikian.”

(What’s the meaning of all this? Doesn’t it show BN was being toyed by the non-Malay voters? To Awang, the results of the two by-elections and few others before this are the signs so that BN must not fall prey with such trickery anymore.)

Wow! You based your claim on the election statistic (increased non-Malays vote for opposition and the reverse to BN) and then went on to say the non-Malays were toying with BN after flip-flopping on their votes thus earned them the “trickster” status? I would say that was an EXCELLENT mathematical deduction! It confounded me how you could see straight to the core of the problem:

“BN lost because of these “trickster” voters (pengundi bermuslihat.”

“Usahlah mengharapkan sangat perubahan sokongan bukan Melayu. Inilah kesan pendekatan politik pemimpin PKR, Anwar Ibrahim yang berjaya menggugat kuasa politik Melayu. Anwar membuka laluan dan Pas membantu.”

(No need to hope for change of support from the non-Malays. This is the effect of the political approach used by PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim that succeeded in threatening Malay political power/authority. Anwar opened the path and PAS helped.)

” Sebab itu, pengundi Cina dan India sanggup memakai logo dan mengibarkan bendera Pas yang diterjemahkan menerusi peti undi. Ia bagi menjayakan agenda DAP dan PKR yang lebih dominan dalam pakatan pembangkang terutama dalam senario politik Perak.”

(That’s why Chinese and Indian voters dared to wear and waves PAS logo and flags, and then translated through the ballot box. It is to realize DAP and PKR agendas (both) who are the dominant ones in the opposition especially in the political scenario of Perak.)

What Anwar did (gaining support from non-Malay) is for the sake of his politic. What is wrong with that? Politic is what you do to achieve certain goals set by the politicians. But then I understand your fear of “diminishing” political power of the Malay. I thought “Malay Supremacy” (if there is such) was protected by the Constitution.

No even Anwar will forsake his Malay status (I think) even though he is more a Malaysian than a Malay (no offense to any Malay). But then WE ARE all more Malaysian then our races indicate. I am a proud Sino-Dusun (that is Bangsa “Dan lain-lain” (Other races) in the official government forms) but I am more proud to be a Malaysian than my race. That doesn’t mean I am less proud of me being a Sino-Dusun, or a Sabahan. I am a Malaysian, a Sabahan, a Sino-Dusun, and a human.

I will not comment further on the rest of your “rencana”. I think, (1) had you not chosen that title I would just let it go. But then you deliberately tried to provoke, I believe certain people, not me of course, and I decide to reply. Yes, I am a nobody. So what? (2) Had you been more diplomatic in your article, I’ll forgive you, but then you were indiscriminately throwing the word Kaum Cina here and there throughout your “rencana”. Now, I was wondering if you have previously experienced of falling out with another Chinese that you deliberately wrote this piece of faecal matter!

Have a nice day! ;)

---

bashir ahmad commented: (The link on his name goes to MalaysiaAktif.com. Sigh, I thought I could comment on his blog in return.)

Ky Chua, you said it:

``What Anwar did (gaining support from non-Malay) is for the sake of his politic. What is wrong with that? Politic is what you do to achieve certain goals set by the politicians. But then I understand your fear of “diminishing” political power of the Malay. I thought “Malay Supremacy” (if there is such) was protected by the Constitution.''

You're no different from Awang. I'm not sure how many Malaysians think they are Malaysians first and Chinese, Indian, Kadazan, Malay etc. second. I believe it's easy to say I'm a Malaysian first. Anybody can claim so, but their hearts are just like you and Awang.

It's for the same reason that the Singaporean Chinese will never allow a Malay to be their Prime Minister. And their present Prime Minister (a Chinese) is honest about it. So what's wrong if Awang is being honest also.

KY answered:

Dear bashir ahmad, Thank you for your view. Though it may not be to my liking. ;)

Perhaps I'm no different from Awang in our conviction. However, when I wrote that (being a Malaysian first), I truly did (and still) believe what I had said.

Nothing is wrong with Awang being honest. In fact, I am (partly) grateful of that. The only thing I objected to his article is he should be specific which Chinese he means. And the title is a little bit too "racist" to my taste. Did he mean it in good faith, or with malicious intent? It was a little too vague.

Malaysia is different with Singapore. Here, if Anwar won, he would be the PM. Or even if a Chinese become a PM, I think it should be a Muslim Chinese (no offense to non-Muslim non-Malay). Then, there's King's decision to be considered.

Finally, should a non-Muslim non-Malay is to be PM, the criterion should be can s/he protect the interest of Islam & Muslim? If s/he can, with the blessing of the King and Rakyat, s/he can be PM.

---

DeePo commented: (Comment partially shown.)

haha....who reads utusan msia anyway?

KY replied:

DeePo, I hope it's really you, ;) since anyone can use the name DeePo. No comment on that. I believe most columnists/journalists (in this case, "rencana"-ists) are responsible people. Some, I think went the other way. And then, there are responsible Editors/Chief Editors, and others, I bersangka baik (think kindly of them), simply overlook certain articles. ;)

So, read Utusan anyway. They have plenty of good stuffs, especially the Education, World, Science & Technology sections. I improve my BM by reading Berita Harian & Utusan Malaysia.

Then I practice my BM with the BM-speaker, mostly Malays, few other races, but there was one I fondly remember, an Indian BM teacher, Cikgu Mahaletchumi, she spoke BETTER Malay than most people. She was one of the students of, er, should I say, "Supreme" Master/Scholar of Malay language, forgot her name. ;)

BTW, when did this post become BM discussion? :D

---

DeePo said:

KY...it's me...hahaha....both papers are good...in term of other things (except this supremacy-thingy)..but when read about the statement on racial issues, it really disgust me a lot....i just dun understand why always blame this ''kaum2 lain''....reading it always boil my temper...hahaha....lastly, i rarely read it...unless for entertainment corner..haha...

KY replied:

TQ for confirming your identity. ;) Same here (that sentiment of yours)! :D I remember my former teacher (may he rest in peace) once said:

"Kaum di Malaysia terbahagi kepada EMPAT kaum iaitu:

1. Kaum Melayu
2. Kaum Cina
3. Kaum India
4. Kaum BANGSA LAIN-LAIN."

(Races in Malaysia comprised of FOUR races: Malay, Chinese, Indian, and OTHER RACES.)

I miss his sarcastic comments... [Added: 19 April 2009] I forgot to add my former teacher was a peninsular Malay but had a very open-minded and compassionate nature.