Nakal, Jangan Ulangi Lagi
A Kadir Jasin
[Komen menggunakan pengenalan “anonymous” tidak akan dilayan. Penting! Bagi memastikan laman ini "current" dan tidak tersangkut (hang), sila klik "refresh" dari semasa ke semasa. Pilih antara Internet Explorer dan Mozilla Firefox yang mana satu lebih pantas dan “reliable”.]
NAKAL [naughty], kata Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Abdul Razak.
Jangan ulangi lagi [don’t repeat it], kata Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Dengan itu nampaknya, sepanjang mengenai dua pemimpin tertinggi kita, selesailah isu fitnah dan hasutan Menteri Mentor Singapura, Lee Kuan Yew terhadap negara kita.
Kuan Yew tidak mohon maaf. Tetapi ini tidak menghalang sesetengah komponen media massa arus perdana kita memutar-belitkan fakta untuk memberi gambaran bahawa dia memohon maaf.
He did not apologise. Dia tidak meminta maaf. Dia sekadar berkata: “I am sorry” (saya dukacita) kerana kenyataannya telah menyebabkan “discomfort” – ketidakselesaan – kepada Perdana Menteri kita.
Oleh sebab Perdana Menteri kita tidak menghebahkan kandungan suratnya kepada Kuan Yew, jadi kita tidak tahu istilah siapakah “discomfort” itu.
Adalah ia istilah Kuan Yew atau Menteri Mentor Singapura itu sekadar mengulang pakai sentimen Perdana Menteri kita.
Setelah membaca surat Kuan Yew kepada Abdullah yang “di carbon-copykan” kepada kita melalui media massa kita, rasanya teringin pula hendak membaca surat Perdana Menteri kita kepada Kuan Yew. Itu pun kalau boleh.
Dalam suratnya, Kuan Yew sekadar berkata: “I am sorry that what I said has caused you a great deal of discomfort.”
Dalam bahasa yang mudah, Lee sekadar menganggap Perdana Menteri kita mengalami rasa kurang selesa amat sangat, lebih kurang macam orang yang perutnya meragam kerana terlalu banyak makan waktu berbuka puasa.
Atau orang yang rasa mahu buang air, tak kira kecil atau besar, ketika kenderaannya tersangkut dalam kesesakan lalu lintas Bandar Raya Kuala Lumpur selepas hujan lebat.
Bukan sahaja Kuan Yee yang nakal (naughty) itu tidak memohon maaf (apologise) kerana menuduh Malaysia meminggirkan rakyat keturunan Cinanya, malah dia tidak pun menarik balik tuduhan itu.
Sebaliknya dia mengambil kesempatan mempertahankan kenyataannya dan membuat tuduhan baru, termasuk terhadap bekas Perdana Menteri kita, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Jadi sepanjang mengenai Kuan Yew, dia tetap mempertahankan kenyataannya bahawa Malaysia secara sistematik meminggirkan orang Cina dan menuduh Malaysia membuat kenyataan yang serupa mengenai kaum minoriti di Singapura.
Kata Kuan Yew: “I had no intention to meddle in your politics. Indeed, I do not have the power to influence Malaysia's politics or to incite the feelings of the Chinese in Malaysia.”
Aduhai, bodohnya kita jikalau kita termakan kata-kata manis dan putar-belit bekas pemimpin kuku besi Singapura itu.
Tidak berhasrat campur tangan dalam politik negara kita? Rupa-rupanya Kuan Yew juga amat peka mengenai niat dan hasrat. Abdullah pernah ditajuk-beritakan sebagai berkata: “Jangan Pertikai Niat Ikhlas Saya.”
Berniat atau tidak, kenyataan fitnah Kuan Yew itu bukan sahaja mencetuskan rasa marah rakyat Malaysia, malah telah menyebabkan mereka bertelingkah antara satu sama lain.
Kalau itu bukan campur tangan, apakah muslihat Kuan Yew? Hakikatnya dia bukan sahaja campur tangan dalam hal ehwal negara kita, malah telah menghasut (incite) orang Cina Malaysia sehingga ada di antara mereka yang secara terbuka mengkritik negara mereka sendiri dan memihak kepada Kuan Yew.
Atas perbuatan jahat itu, Kuan Yew hanya dianggap “naughty” (nakal) dan dimarahi dengan kata-kata “jangan ulangi lagi.”
Alangkah gembiranya kita kalaulah kita Kuan Yew. Kita boleh memfitnah sebuah negara berdaulat dan kita hanya dianggap nakal dan diberi amaran jangan mengulanginya lagi.
Kuan Yew membuat kenyataan di negaranya dan disiarkan oleh media massa dunia. Apa yang beliau hujahkan bukan dokumen rasmi. Ia sekadar laporan akhbar.
Tetapi apabila Perdana Menteri kita menulis surat kepada Kuan Yew meminta beliau memberi penjelasan, surat beliau adalah dokumen rasmi.
Kuan Yew menjawab surat Perdana Menteri kita. Surat Kuan Yew itu adalah dokumen rasmi. Perdana Menteri kita tidak berkongsi suratnya dengan kita. Kuan Yew berkongsi suratnya dengan kita dan dengan dunia.
Ini macam cerita budak jahat buat fitnah mengenai anak cucu kita. Budak jahat tak kena apa-apa, anak cucu kita yang bergaduh sama sendiri, diherdik dan dirotan.
Aduhai, seronoknya jadi Kuan Yew. Walaupun sudah 16 tahun tidak menjadi Perdana Menteri dia masih dilayan sebagai orang terpenting di Singapura.
Andainya tidak, masakan Ketua Kerajaan sebuah negara dengan 24 juta penduduk, tergesa-gesa menulis surat kepada beliau yang hanya “guru” (mentor) kepada sebuah negara kecil dengan penduduk seramai 4.02 juta?
Atau seperti kata pembahas “shar101”: “Since LKY 'wrote' to all of us, shall we not reply to him?”
I think we should. We should tell him that his statement was malicious and he should apologise for meddling in our affairs.
We should also tell him to concentrate on taking care of his compliant 4.02 million countrymen and women, 77 per cent of whom are Chinese, 14 Malays and 7.6 per cent Indians instead of instigating our people.
The following is his address:
LEE Kuan Yew
Prime Minister’s Office
Istana Annexe, Orchard Road, Singapore
238823 68356217 68356218
lee Kuan Yew@pmo.gov.sg
datuk, saya rasa toksahlah kita menulis pada kiasu lee tu. adalah lebih baik kalau kita tak endahkan dia sebab dia takkan pedulikan kita. kalau kita banjiri alamat e dia, naik tocang si bangka kutuk tu.
ReplyDeletemasalah kita rakyat malaysia bukannya lee kuan yew. masalah kita ialah pemimpin kita yang tak pandai nak bezakan kawan dengan lawan. kita perlu berbicara dengan pemimpin kita. kita bilang dengan mereka yang kita malu dan kita marah disebabkan pemimpin yang dayus, yang kecut dengan si kedut tua yang tak pun berapa bijak sangat. (dia nampak bijak sebab lawannya buruk belaka!).
mungkin datuk tak terfikir untuk mengajak kita semua menulis kepada perdana menteri abdullah badawi sebab khuatir dia takkan baca luahan perasaan kita. saya rasa kalau itu sebabnya, mungkin datuk dapat full marks. malah mungkin abdullah tak pernah buka e-mail dia pun.
tapi kita boleh menulis pada
1/ najib razak, orang nombor 2 kita. i think najib needs to hear what the people want him to do. kalau najib masih nak duduk atas pagar berduri, lantaklah. kalau dia tak jatuh tersungkur, duri yang mencucuk dagingnya. najib quite net-savvy. sekurang-kurangnya press secretaries dia boleh tolong compile-kan surat2 kita. kita bagi tau dia kita pilu dan kita silu sebab bos-nya tak berdaulat langsung. sebagai anak seorang perdana menteri, najib perlu lebih berani dan lebih nekad dari abdullah.
dan kita tulis kepada
2/ dr mahathir, bekas perdana menteri. kita tahu tun akan baca e-mail rakyat, surat rakyat. dan dia takkan duduk diam. sekurang-kurangnya, dia akan gunakan feedback dari rakyat untuk goyangkan pokok kerajaan abdullah, sampai beruk2 yang bergayut kat atas tu semua jatuh macam nangka busuk. sekurang2nya, kita tulis untuk bagi tau dr m yang rakyat masih pandai menilai pemimpin (tun sendiri silap nilai pak lah, bukan?)
so, datuk, saya syurkan datuk sertakan di blog datuk ni e-mail najib dan tun (dan buang e-mail address si singa tua tu).
minta setiap yang menulis kepada najih maupun tun buatkan salinan kepada datuk kadir supaya datuk boleh siarkan dua atau tiga pucuk yang sedap didengar.
lupakan lee kuan yew. biar dia tinggal jadi mimpi ngeri abdullah badawi pada setiap malam. the rest of of should not lose sleep over that episode. we need to move on and take down the beruks on the pokok. banyak. last saya kira ada dekat sepuloh yang besar-besar seKali.
Mengapa harus menulis kepada Najib dan Tun Dr M kalau yang berbuat salah itu LKY dan Abdullah Badawi?
ReplyDeleteMengapa perlu menyusahkan bekas Perdana Menteri yang sudah tidak ada kuasa lagi dan dianggap "jahat", "beruk tua", "iblis"? Sejahat-jahat dan seiblis-iblis Tun Dr M pun, beliau ada maruah dan harga diri. Ulasan beliau terhadap perilaku LKY jelas mencerminkan ketinggian pemikiran beliau.
Surat sepatutnya dialamatkan kepada LKY dan Abdullah Badawi kerana kedua-duanya yang bertanggungjawab ke atas suasana kurang tenteram di kalangan rakyat Malaysia!
Assalamu'alaikum Datuk AKJ dan semua.
ReplyDeleteMengapa anjing menyalak pada manusia yg lalu lalang di jalanan?
Untuk menakutkan manusia(agar manusia tak ganggu anjing tersebut)
Kalau yg kena salak seorang yg penakut, anjibg akan lebih menyalak malah akan kejar manusia tersebut(kalau dapat anjing akan gigit kaki atau punggong orang itu).
Kalau manusia itu berani dia akan pusing menghadap anjing lalu mencapai seketul batu atau kayu dan di acah ke arah anjing pasti anjing akan berpusing dan lari tapi tetap menyalak juga.
LKY umpama anjing . PM kita manusia kategori mana?
Dato' dan para sahabat yang mulia,
ReplyDeleteNothing happens without a reason. LKY would not utter those offending statements without reason and our "leaders" would not react they way they did, also without reason.
Reasoning Dato' is the function of the brain and the depth of reason is the power of the intellect.
Dogs do not bark for no apparent reason. Let us learn something about barking dogs so that we may understand our own species better.
"Why do dogs bark?:
Dogs bark to say that there is something strange happening and to be alert. In the wild the barking tells puppies to hide and calls the adults over for action. At home, our dog may bark at us or at a burglar. The barking signals that something is happening; once the new arrival has been identified, either a greeting takes place or an attack.
A fearless dog that is intent on attacking is silent. It doesn't waste time barking, that is, sounding the alarm. It just rushes over and bites. On the other hand, a dog that wants to flee instead will also be silent as it runs away.
A more common occurrence is when a dog is not quite sure -- it is feeling a little fear while it thinks about attacking. This dog will snarl and retract its lips to reveal its teeth. It is the tinge of fear that converts the silent attack into a snarling one. The urge to attack is still strong, however, so this is not a dog to be trifled with!
If the dog is more fearful, it will alternate barking with growling. If fear gains the upper hand, the growling will stop, replaced by loud barking, until either the threatening situation goes away or reinforcements arrive.
Apparently, barking was improved during the process of domesticating the dog. Wolves bark, but not as loudly as dogs, although they can learn to bark more loudly if they live around domestic dogs. It seems likely that humans bred the louder puppies to create better guard dogs. All dogs bark, except the Basenji, which was bred thousands of years ago as a silent hunting dog."
So, dear Dato' with which type of dog do our "leaders" identify with?
BTW Dato', explation about why dogs bark in my earlier comment was not my creation. I am not a dog person.
ReplyDeleteIt came from www.crazyfordog.com.
Tetapi orang Melayu pun tahu tentang anjing, justeru itu pepatah Melayu berkata:
1. Ibarat menolong anjing tersepit;
2. Anjing menyalak, bukit tidak akan runtuh.
Bila melepaskan anjing tersepit, datuk nenek kita menasihatkan kita berjaga-jaga.
Anjing tersepit bila dibebaskan mungkin menerkam dan menggigit kita. Gigitan anjing gila boleh membuatkan kita gila dan mati akibat rabies.
Anjing menyalak, memang bukit tidak runtuh. Tetapi penghuni bukit mungkin ketakutan atau tidak tahan bising sangsung lari meninggalkan bukit.
My sincerest hope is that in this episode with LKY we do not end up like a dog with its tail tucked in between its hind legs.
From www.dogtraininginstitute.com:
"You will also notice among those dogs, some whose tails are tucked between their hind legs on meeting another dog during its walk. This is a clear sign of submission."
Saudara dan Saudari,
ReplyDeleteAlamat laman web Pejabat Perdana Menteri adalah www.pmo.gov.my
dan Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana (Tun Dr Mahathir) adalah www.perdana.org.my
Terima kasih.
Just to digress a little Datuk,
ReplyDeleteIf LKY is correct that "Malaysian Chinese work hard and are successful but are marginalised by the Government, how do we explain the latest ranking that puts UKM ahead of UM.
To my knowledge, UM is a mixed uni. In some courses, the Chinese outnumbered the Malays. UKM is predominantly Malay. So what about the so-called meritocracy?
Can some one explain?
Dato', saya menunggu-nunggu tulisan editor-editor besar akhbar utama menulis mengenai LKY supaya mendapat pandangan dari perspektif yang berbeza. Malangnya, tak ada. Sudah banyak isu saya perhatikan, editor seolah-olah tidak faham apa yang kita sebagai pembaca harapkan. Mereka faham atau tidak, kita hari ini hidup dalam era apa? Jangan fikir pembaca ni kolot. Biasanya, masa Dato' dulu, bila ada isu besar, dah tentu Dato' menulis untuk memberi perspektif baru, tak kiralah sama ada sokong atau bantah sekali pun. Tak kiralah sama ada orang setuju atau tidak dengan pandangan Dato'. Tapi keberanian menulis itu tetap ada. Tapi, apa nak jadi dengan editor-editor akhbar hari ini...dalam Berita Minggu hari ini sebagai contoh, editornya tulis pasal bekas banduan yang dibebaskan setelah dapat pengampunan. Tak kurang dari tujuh berita dan laporan mengenainya dalam akhbar itu...(kalau tak silaplah). Rasanya rencana atau berita seperti itu ditulis oleh wartawan saja sudah lah. Itu pun ada orang yang berbeza pendapat mengenai pemaparan kisah-kisah begini. Tapi, tak apalah juga..mungkin sekali sekala. Kalau editor pun tumpang semangkuk, nampak macam dia tak tau menilai isu, tak tahu menilai prioriti dan tak tau di manakah moral seorang editor. Disebabkan Dato' mengenali editor ini dan tentunya anak didik Dato', saya harap sangat secara profesionalnya Dato' nasihatkan dia supaya menulis sebagai seorang editor yang mampu membuat analisis yang mendalam dan berbeza dari pandangan penulis biasa lain. Saya dulu menulis juga sekali sekala untuk Berita Harian dan Berita MInggu pada zanan Dato'. Bukan apa Dato', saya melihat dari segi mutu. Jika dalam blog-blog saya nampak banyak tulisan yang merangsang minda, mengapa dalam akhbar perdana, tulisan editor dah macam karangan pelajar sekolah menengah. Sebagai pembaca akhbar, saya rasa kita tidak boleh lagi mengharapkan sesuatu yang berbeza dari editor-editor hari ini. Saya terasa sangat perbezaannya dulu dan sekarang. Dulu, kita menunggu-menunggu apakah pandangan editor-editor terutamanya tulisan Dato' dan yang lain-lain..tapi sekarang terlalu lemah. Saya takut, jika memang ini yang kerajaan harapkan dengan menyimpan editor-editor yang tidak berupaya, ia merugikan seluruh masyarakat. Tapi, saya tidak fikir ini perancangan kerajaan. Saya lebih yakin, editor sendiri yang tidak berupaya menulis atas jawatan seorang editor besar.
ReplyDeletetruly insightful and well argued. i agree with u tt it wasn't a letter of apology at all.
ReplyDeletebut how do u counter kuan yew's point tt malaysian politicians have always lambasted the position of the malays in singapore in the past? kuan yew cited examples in the annex to his so-called letter of apology to badawi.
furthermore, kuan yew also said tt he has not said more than what he had written in his memoirs.
cheers
Singapore News
ReplyDeleteSingapore, Malaysia can move forward in bilateral relations: PM Lee
By May Wong, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 11 September 2006 1039 hrs
PM Lee said he had a good meeting with Mr Abdullah, where they discussed bilateral ties. On building closer cooperation, Mr Lee said Mr Abdullah brought up the developments in Southern Johor. He said: "He described what he was doing in Southern Johor, some of the projects going on there and how he talked about Singapore being like Hong Kong and Southern Johor should be like Shenzhen. So I say I fully agreed and we supported Johor becoming prosperous and successful with Singapore and we hope we'd be able to work together on this."
....................................................
Thestar online
Sunday September 10, 2006
Morale not affected, says Ghani
SUNGAI PETANI: The decision of the Government to scrap the bridge project has not affected the morale of Johoreans.
Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman said the people had come to realise that the decision would benefit both countries. “The people also realise that it was appropriate for the Government to abort the project since Singapore did not want to co-operate. “Singapore is reluctant to co-operate with Malaysia in many other unilateral agreements as it is not a neighbour-friendly country,” he said after opening the Merbok Umno divisional meeting here yesterday.
“If our leader is doing the right thing, we should support his decision all the way. But if we see he is heading for the wrong track, we should voice out our stand,” he said.
………………………………….
Though I am just an ordinary citizen, but the current going-on is perplexing. I don’t understand what is going on. I really hope that we are not taken for a ride.
Dato, and friends.
Sdr Mdnor,
ReplyDeleteTerima kasih atas ulasan Sdr. Kadang kala, elok juga kita diingatkan mengenai zaman kanak-kanak kita apabila kita dijentik atau dipulas telingat, disuruh buat ketuk ketampi atau berdiri di luar bilik darjah dan diberi kata dua "jangan buat lagi".
Sdr Berita Dari Gunung,
Itu kata Lee Junior. Dia PM. Tapi Lee Senior dia lebih daripada PM. Dia macam "Tok Guru". Dia spiritual leader Singapura. Lebih kurang macam orang yang mengimamkan solat.
Saya selalu kata, Singapura ada tiga Perdana Menteri -- Shien Loong, Kuan Yew dan Chok Tong. Sebab itulah mereka kuat. Kita kalau boleh nak buang bekas-bekas pemimpin kita ke Laut Khalzum. Sebab itulah negara kita tak sekuat yang sepatutnya.
Shien Loong tahu apa jua pembangunan besar di Malaysia akan menjejas Singapura. Singapura sebenarnya vulnerable. So they will play along. Cuma kita saja tak tahu cara dan takut.
If it cannot beat us, it will join us. After all Singapore Government has billions of dollars of reserves that it can use to buy into Malaysian projects and companies.
Singapore even gives subsidies to industries in Singapore to stop them from migrating to Port of Tanjung Pelepas.
Our leaders should talks about this. Unless of course they don't know that Singapore is doing this.
I have no doubt that Singapore loves to have a lion share of any major development in Malaysia if we allow them to.
Kepada Pihak KErajaan Malaysia:
ReplyDelete1. JGN ULANGI LAGI MMEBUAT KEPUTUSAN CEPAT YG AKHIRNYA MEMEREANGKAP DIRI SENDIRI
2. JGN BUAT LAGI BENDA YANG AKAN MEMUDARAT DAN EMMALUKAN RAKYAT DAN NEGARA KITA
3. JGN DAN JGN DIPERBODOHKAN OLEH SINGAPURA INI.
4. JGN TERPERANGKAP DENGAN KATA PUJI DAN LAMBUNGAN KEHORMATAN YG DIBERIKAN OLEH SINGAPURA.
5. TAPI, JGN LUPA LIHAT SEMULA PADA SEJARAH HUBUNGNA 2 NEGARA - Siapa yang lebih menyusahkan siapa? dan siapa yang suka melengahkan penyelesaian masalah antara 2 negara ini? siapa yang suka bersyarat melampau lampau?
Dato,
ReplyDeleteSaya bersetuju dengan pandangan "dinarmas". Kita tidak seharusnya hanya melihat hal ini dari sudut perkauman atau kebodohan kepimpinan sahaja.
Ia sebenarnya satu lagi cubaan menyerang ekonomi dan kedaulatan negara. LKY cuba menghasut negara China dan Taiwan supaya lebih memilih Singapura daripada Malaysia dan Indonesia sebagai destinasi pelaburan kerana di Malaysia dan Indonesia ini berlaku penindasan kaum berbangsa Cina yang ada pertalian darah dengan masyarakat di China dan Taiwan itu.
LKY juga cuba menghasut masyarakat pelabur dunia yang lain supaya tidak melabur di Malaysia dan Indonesia kerana kedua-dua buah negara ini mengamalkan dasar perkauman dan menindas kaum lain yang semestinya bertentangan dengan mantra globalisasi dan perdagangan bebas.
LKY cuba mengambarkan bahawa di Malaysia dan Indonesia, golongan bukan Melayu yang berjaya dalam bidang ekonomi dan perniagaan akan ditindas oleh kerajaan mereka.
LKY cuba membuktikan komitmen Singapura terhadap perdagangan bebas atau free trade dengan menghentam negara-negara yang kononnya mengamalkan diskriminasi ekonomi di hadapan "tok guru-tok guru" IMF dan World Bank. Tindakan LKY ini mungkin sebagai bukti bahawa Singapura masih sanggup menjadi anjing suruhan IMF dan World Bank itu.
Singapura bukan sahaja terpaksa menjadi anjing suruhan IMF dan World Bank, malah mereka juga terpaksa menjadi anjing suruhan kepada Amerika Syarikat dan Israel. Tanpa menjadi anjing suruhan ini, Singapura risau mereka akan ditinggalkan oleh "tuan-tuan" mereka. Tindakan-tindakan LKY dan Singapura yang terpaksa patuh kepada kuasa-kuasa besar ini jelas menunjukkan bahawa mereka ini walaupun sebuah negara merdeka tetapi sebenarnya tidaklah bebas dan berdaulat.
Agaknya itulah yang amat LKY cemburui kepada Malaysia dan Tun Dr Mahathir. LKY seorang intelek dan mempunyai personaliti yang kuat sepatutnya boleh bercakap dengan bebas tanpa dibayangi oleh Amerika Syarikat dan Israel tapi apa kan daya, untuk survival negara Singapura, beliau tidak berupaya untuk meluahkan isi hatinya sepertimana yang Tun Dr Mahathir lakukan.
Mungkin LKY dan Singapura berasa bangga dan bongkak dengan limpahan wang ringgit yang ditaburkan oleh Amerika Syarikat dan Israel kepadanya, tetapi ibarat seorang pelacur yang menjadi mewah dari hasil pensundalan, LKY dan Singapura sebenarnya tahu, kemewahan mereka itu menjijikan dan tidak ada apa yang perlu dibanggakan.
LKY's letter is calling for checkmate on Malaysia's government through the annex in his letter.
ReplyDeleteWhat do we have to ask for an apology when our fellow Malaysians have made numerous marginalisation comments on Singapore without being reprimanded. Guess they just have to keep quiet about it or else it will be another scenario of "a thief shouting for another thief".
Lesson learned, it is just "a chess game" and LKY is smart in his predictions on our move. We have shut our own back door with no ways to retrieve.
Pandainya mereka berbahasa
ReplyDeleteDato
ReplyDeleteYour latest posting on old man Lee touch a raw nerve. I must say that Pak Lah’s wimpy response and Najib’s weak statement does not go far enough to placate our anger and frustration on this tragic event. While many also, have the opinion that old man Lee’s statement should just be forgotten, but I beg to differ. Lee’s annexure showed events and statements made by UMNO politicians for Malaysia’s domestic consumption only. What cannot be forgiven is that Lee made that statement on the marginalization of the Chinese in Malaysia and Indonesia in an official IMF forum as Minister Mentor of Singapore; this is akin to economic subversion of both Malaysia and Indonesia. It does deserve a strong response from the AAB Government; a diplomatic note of protest is not good enough.
What Lee is doing is like the pot calling the kettle black. Lee engineered the systematic marginalization of the Singapore Malays since 1959. That is understandable as in a democracy, the majority rules while the minority is always marginalized. The minority can do business and become rich control the economy, whatever but they can never rule nor expect power to be shared with the majority. In Singapore the majority are the Chinese, so in that democracy the Chinese rule, and the Malays and Indians are marginalized. This majority/minority rule is universal and can be applied to almost all democracies of the world.
Over to Malaysia the Malays are the majority so in this democracy the Malays rule, and the Chinese and Indians are marginalized, but then again we have the hugely successful Barisan Nasional formula where each race have a say in the running of Malaysia. I must add that in Malaysia the Malays rule and engineered safe and stable country good enough for the Chinese and other races to prosper economically. Hey, we even have Chinese and Tamil vernacular school and I believed we are the only democracy that allows its various races to choose their own school and what language their children are taught in.
I can only add that in spending the remainder of his days, old man Lee could not resist taking a last swipe at the Malaysian Chinese who in 1964 rejected his PAP in favor of the MCA, such a man cannot comprehend the rejection and will remember it to the end. Lee is being arrogant and too proud of what he did for Singapore. Actually, history will judge and will not give Lee too much credit for Singapore’s success. Singapore’s success has more to do with its strategic geographic location and the massive infrastructure invested by the British colonial government then. It is just a city-state and tell me which city-state in the world has ever failed, Macau, Monaco, Hong Kong? Any dim wit with some political shrewdness will be able to rule Singapore as its destiny as an economic powerhouse is on autopilot since the Brits left.
That is one of the reasons that when Lee went to China, the mainland Chinese does not listen to him much as his experience in Singapore is uniquely Singapore’s and is not applicable anywhere else.
If the AAB Government does not respond forcefully to Lee, I guess I have to wait for the next GE to show my displeasure, until then Dr Mahathir’s response to Lee in Terengganu is good enough for the moment, sure got old man Lee so riled up that he mentioned our grand old man many times in his public letter of reply to Pak Lah letter of clarification. Dr Mahathir sure has the wits to put down old man Lee didn’t he Datuk Zam.
Datuk,
ReplyDeleteThank you for answering to what I would categorise as a rethorical question and providing LKY's contact address.
Debating the facts put forward in LKY's public reply and/or the alternative facts as contained in the annexure from our politicians will be like the three blind men describing an elephant. All truths but who is correct?
This is not what I was trying to
emphasise.
Quite simply, it was the manner which LKY chose to respond to AAB i.e. by going public without seeking AAB's prior agreement.
1)LKY cannot say that the matter was already public knowledge since AAB did not disclose the content of his letter in the first place. Being seen to be doing something does not imply the public knows for a fact what actually is being done.
2)LKY placed his intention to publicise his reply in a footnote. In matters of bi-lateral diplomacy, this should be embodied within the main points of his letter. Not as an afterthought. It clearly shows LKY's frame of mind on how he depicts AAB i.e. an inconsequential impediment to his true purpose of exposing AAB's weak leadership and taking a swipe at TDM as well.
3)LKY is a lawyer by training and a politician by profession. Both are noble careers when practised in good faith. LKY offered none. His 'sorry for causing discomfort' was merely another nail he's hammering into the coffin.
As an analogy, it is like two neighbours arguing at the fence, one speaking and the other replying with a megaphone
So, datuk, do we write to LKY? No need lah. LKY probably has his people keeping tabs on your blog. But I do wonder if our leaders are equally vigilant before we vote them out of office.
Datuk,
ReplyDeleteIngin juga bertanya pendapat Datuk dan rakan2 sekalian...apakah ciri2 yang patut ada pada pemimpin zaman sekarang? Begitu besar tanggungjawab!
Dok terpikir juga siapa pula yang nak jadi pengganti lepas nie.Kalau nak jadi cerita AAB tersingkir...ada ke calon yang sesuai?
Kalau lah Pak Lah ambil inisiatif lebih sikit untuk BELAJAR dari KELEMAHAN bukankah lebih baik?
"A great leader is supposed to learn from the past... and be able to analyze the problems of the present and provide guidance for the future."
Datuk and friends,
ReplyDeleteAt the time when the Government, Umno and the mainstream media that they control are dedicating themselves to domonizing our beloved Tun Dr Mahathir and demolishing his legacy, it's refreshing to note that outsiders around the world continue to look up to him.
As you had said some time ago, hanya jauhari mengenal manikam. Obviously there aren't that many jauharis around who are willing to speak up and defend the truth.
I am delighted to read a Bernama report from Bangkok about how appreciative the Thais are of the role Tun is playing in trying to bring about peace to Southern Thailand.
I think with Singapore-loving Thaksin gone and with the revered Thai King and Gen. Sondhi keen on peace, I think Tun should play his role to the fullest.
Tun had served us for 22 years. It's not time for him to dedicate himself to being a man of peace, especially in speaking up for the Muslims and for the developing world.
Biarlah Si Luncai-Si Luncai terjun ke sungai tengan labu-labu mereka. Biarkan, biarkan.
The following in an extraction of the Bernama report which I was referring to:-
"Wan Kadir also confirmed that he had met former Malaysian Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and several Thai military officials several months ago, saying that he welcomed such talk as it would be a good start to bringing lasting peace to the restive southern provinces.
"Tun Mahathir is well respected in the region, and in Thailand too. I will certainly come personally if a talk with the Thai authority is arranged through him...I see him as an experienced and trusted man," said Wan Kadir.
Bersatu is made up of several organisations like the BRN (National Revolutionary Front), Pulo (Patani United Liberation Organisation), BIPP (Patani Islamic Liberation Front) and GIMP (Muslim Mujahideen Movement of Patani).
Some groups like Pulo emerged in the 1970s during the armed struggle by ethnic Malays in the southernmost provinces of Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat seeking independence from Thailand.
Peace was restored in the last decade but more than 1,700 people had died since separatists launched a campaign of bombings and shootings in January, 2004.
Last week, Mahathir confirmed that he had initiated a roadmap to peace in southern Thailand following his visit to Bangkok late last year where he met Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej and then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.
He said the Perdana Global Peace Organisation (PGPO) and Honorary Royal Thai Consul Datuk Shazryl Eskay Abdullah had prepared a draft of the Joint Peace and Development Plan for South Thailand and a copy was delivered to then Thai Deputy Prime Minister Chitchai Vanasatidya in August."
Thank you.
Let us add another dimension to LKY's supposedly moral high ground for Red Dot Com(Singapore).
ReplyDeleteMr Andy Xie, the chief economist in Asia for Morgan Stanley, recently resigned from his post.
This was attributed to an internal e-mail by him meant for internal consumption within the organisation which contained his observations on the recent IMF summit in Singapore.
Mr Andy Xie wrote:
a)Actually, Singapore's success came mostly from being the money laundering center for corrupt Indonesian businessmen and government officials.
b)Indonesia has no money. So Singapore isn't doing well.
c)To sustain it's economy, Singapore is building casinos to attract corrupt money from China.
Mr Andy Xie's resume includes a doctorate in economics, masters in civil engineering from M.I.T. He served in the corporate finance division of Macquarie bank in Singapore before joining Morgan Stanley in 1997 and was an economist with the World Bank.
Whatever his motive(s), he paid a high price or perhaps, was prepared to pay a high price for his opinion.
We can speculate if it was an unfortunate indiscretion but given his background and status in Morgan Stanley, his damning remarks on Red Dot Com has serious implications.
References on this matter can be found in Bloomberg and Financeasia websites although I would recommend a blogger website, 'mrbrown', if you wish to read the purported full text of Mr Andy Xie's e-mail(under comments section).
Dato & Abu Azam Isman
ReplyDeleteI have a hunch and the recent exposure of Tun's involvement in South Thailand is shedding more light o my belief that what is actually happening in South Thai has "Singapore" murderous hands.
Understanding the money minded kiasu neighbour of ours, I believe there is money and power in the equation to justify Singapore's involvement. Perhasp, I am guessing that it has something to do with the ever going dream of the Kra Canal and Singapore may want a piece of the action.
I also believe that the sovereignty related issues Tun is talking is more than just about Singapore, perhasp up North.
Dato' AJK, izinkan saya mengucap terima kasih kepada dinarmas, sinbad dan dog whisperer. Analisis munasabah dan bernas mereka menambah warna isi renungan.
ReplyDeleteanakhujanbatu
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSdr Naha,
ReplyDeleteMohon maaf saya tidak dapat menyiarkan komen Sdra dengan sepenuhnya. Ada beberapa hujah yang mungkin boleh ditakrifkan sebagai perkauman dan menghasut.
Namun Saya setuju dengan Sdr bahawa “Kalau benar pun Malaysia meminggirkan kaum lain secara sistematik pun, apa hak dia (LKY)nak melalak sebab setiap negara ada dasar dan undang-undangnya sendiri.”
Saya juga boleh menerima hujah Sdra “(Kalau) dia (LKY) simpati dengan (orang) Cina Malaysia dan Indonesia, buatlah satu dasar jemput semua (mereka) masuk dan ambil kerakyatan Singapura.”
Tetapi saya rasa bukanlah penyelesaian atau langkah yang baik “buat penukaran dengan (orang) Melayu di sana yang memang terpinggir.”
Saya rasa itu bukan maksud kita. Orang Melayu Singapura perlu menyelesaikan “masalah” mereka di negara mereka dan dengan kerajaan mereka sendiri. Lari daripada masalah tidak menyelesaikan masalah.
Saya juga rasa tidak tetap dan tidak elok bagi sesiapa pun menyuruh mana-mana kaum di Malaysia berhijrah ke Singapura walaupun mereka mungkin berbangga dengan Singapura seperti Sdra katakan.
Lagi pun saya rasa tidak semua rakyat Malaysia yang “banggakan Singapura” akan diterima oleh Singapura kerana negara itu mengamalkan meritocracy. Hanya yang cerdik, berjaya atau yang kaya sahaja dialu-alukan.
Singapura tentu tidak mahu penanam halia Bentong kerana Singapura tiada kawasan untuk tanam halia. Orang Melayu Malaysia pun macam itu juga. Bukan semua boleh beli rumah berjuta ringgit di Perth, Australia atau London.
Sebenarnya lebih banyak orang Melayu yang miskin daripada orang Cina dan India. Sebenarnya, orang Melayu dan Bumiputera lain lebih terpinggir daripada kaum-kaum lain di bidang ekonomi.
Saya setuju dengan Sdr bahawa “Singapura hanya sebuah pulau kecil dan sebesar mana pun kemajuan di sana masih kecil dalam peta dunia.”
Sdr Pengganggurpaksa bertanya apa ciri-ciri yang perlu ada kepada pemimpin zaman sekarang. Jawapannya mudah saja – Ilmu (knowledge).
Kalau pemimpin tak tahu apa “ground zero” macam mana dia nak faham teknologi persenjataan, khasnya senjata nuklear? Kalau dia tak ada economic intelligence macam mana dia nak bersaing di dalam perdagangan antarabangsa?
Pokok pangkalnya ilmu dan contoh teladan yang baik.
Terima kasih
Datuk,
ReplyDeleteCina kaya kata 45%.
Melayu kaya kata 18%.
Cina miskin kata..."wa pun ta tau wo!".
Melayu miskin kata.."Biaq pi aa!"
Hantu Gigi Jarang
Datuk,
ReplyDeleteHere's an article "The Charade of Meritocracy" by Michael D. Barr, that explains what is Singapore's meritocracy system. Maybe some of Jeff Ooi's readers should also read this article.
http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006/0610/free/p018.html#top
Melayu Singapura tidak pernah di marginalised, kerana tidak ada da margin nak di beri. Semua da diambil oleh kaum lain.
ReplyDeleteTo my fair gentleman,
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for the link about Red Dot Com.
In fact, the other two essays made extremely good reading as well. For the benefit of our friends here, permit me to add:
"Singapore's founding myths vs freedom" under -
http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006
0610/free/p013.html
"Financial center pipedreams" under -
http://www.feer.com/articles1/2006
0610/free/p023.html
From essays like these, we must be able to apply critical analysis and extract every valuable piece of political and economic strategies that are relevant for Malaysia to progress. It also begs the fundamental question whether our elected leaders and their think-tankers are in sync with realities. Or, do we, as ordinary citizens, have to, once again, point them in the right direction.
Lambasting RDC with information contained within these essays would be counter-productive and make us no different. Let us, together, raise our own benchmarks instead.
Datuk, how true it is when you mentioned that "knowledge is the only criteria a good leader needs" or to put in another way "READ" - the first word Nabi Muhammad (pbuh) heard.