What happen to our Uni? Racial Polarization ?

” Racial Polarization Letter at University “

The racial card in Malaysia is never ending! Take a look below! - Malaysia Boleh

This is a letter from University Malaya’s head of Graduates to all the students (maybe certain race only). The first paragraph is okay.. Nothing much.. Wait till we get to the 2nd paragraph of this horrendous letter!

Here it is below! For those not bothered in stressing your brains too much in understanding the written malay

I’ll do the translation: Read Below

Therefore, I as the Head of Graduates of University of Malaya would like to advice all our fellow graduates of University of Malaya to combine forces and prepare ourselves together with all the necessary knowledge and preparation before we continue our fight in the actual battle field. This advice implies mainly to our Malay Graduates. We must treasure the sacrifices made by our ancestors which tried so hard to ensure that Tanah Melayu ( Malay Land ) is free from the intrusion of alien races. We must not fall into the category of those who forgets their roots until they will be taken over by other races. Graduates must prove themselves that we are capable and the best choice to take over the throne of governing the country in the future. This implies with the theme of MPMUM Progressive, Dynamic, Professional. There is nothing more important that can compared to our always-sensitive and improving Graduates. I also would like to advice all Malay Graduates to prepare ourselves in facing all sorts of unpredicted challenges that may occur in near future, relating to the rise of our fellow citizens, in particular to the non-Malay races. Don’t let ourselves slack and allow our “enemies under the blankets to attack us” (direct translation from the Malay idiom). Don’t allow our Malaysia to fall into the hands of those who are irrelevant.

After reading this, I became truly speechless! So stunned, so shocked! Why do I feel a one sided love for my country?

Malaysia …. I love you so.. but what have you become……..

The Liberals and Multi-racialists got to put a stop to it.

‘Samy Vellu ordered temple demolition’

‘Samy Vellu ordered temple demolition’

Syed Jaymal Zahiid | Apr 29, 08 12:30pm

exclusive Since last October, Dr Mohd Khir Toyo has been tagged as the chief culprit behind the controversial demolition of the Kampung Rimba Jaya Hindu temple near Shah Alam – he now claims that MIC president S Samy Vellu had instructed him to do so. “Samy Vellu called me on the night of Nov 15 and told me that Hindraf (Hindu Rights Action Force) people had infiltrated the temple and that it must be demolished that night itself,” alleged Khir, who was Selangor menteri besar at the time. In an interview, Khir Toyo also denied that the temple had been pulled down two days before Deepavali, saying the exercise had been carried out a week after the significant Hindu festival. Furthermore, he said an agreement had been concluded with the priest, in that compensation of RM40,000 would be paid and an alternative site provided to rebuild the temple. The incident has been cited by both opposition and Barisan Nasional (BN) members as a key factor in influencing the outcome of the March 8 polls. BN and Umno took the brunt of voter anger over this and other issues, resulting in the state government falling into opposition hands for the first time in electoral history. Khir then resigned as Selangor Umno head, and is now leader of the opposition in the state legislature. The demolition of the Sri Maha Mariamman temple was carried out in two stages, albeit not intentionally. As the illegal extension was being pulled down on Oct 30, a violent fracas ensued between devotees and enforcement personnel and forced work to be abandoned. The original 100-year-old structure was demolished later – apparently on Nov 15, based on Khir’s account during the interview. Deepavali fell on Nov 8 last year. Samy Vellu had shown up at the site after the illegal extension was torn down, but was reportedly pelted with sticks and stones by angry residents. He then issued an unprecedented statement urging an end to such incidents, warning that the government risked losing Indian Malaysian votes. Although he also banned MIC elected representatives from holding the traditional Deepavali open house as a mark of protest, he quickly rescinded the order. The following excerpts of the interview with Khir have been edited for clarity. The temple incident in Kampung Rimba Jaya was said to be a major cause of BN’s downfall and you have been blamed for it. I would like to explain. The court, after three years of deliberation, decided that it was time to remove the temple as the flats that were being built there were nearing completion and people were ready to move in. The court decided that it was time to remove not just the temple but a surau and some squatter houses. On the day itself, I was told that the surau had been demolished and (the enforcement team) was stopped at the gate of the temple. Samy Vellu then met me and (premier) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi at the Blue Wave hotel (in Shah Alam) and we all agreed to stop the demolition process at the temple gate. Samy then made an announcement in Rimba Jaya, (asking) not to demolish the temple because in two days, the people would evacuate the site. Now the purported version is that the Selangor government on my instructions had demolished the temple two days before Deepavali, and this is incorrect. As I said, the agreement to stop the demolition was agreed to by all parties and was witnessed by many others. When I visited Rimba Jaya after that, the temple was intact. A week after Deepavali – not two days before – Samy Vellu called me on the night of Nov 15 and told me that Hindraf people had infiltrated the temple and that it must be demolished that night itself. And that’s what we did – so it wasn’t before Deepavali. The demolition was done with the agreement of the temple priest and the relevant people were then given replacement land to rebuild the temple and were compensated with RM40,000. I didn’t tell this to the media before, but now that I have been blamed for it, I must explain. Samy was the one who told me to do it. You have made this explanation before. Now the question is why your explanation is not generally accepted while the Hindraf contention has become the sole angle adopted by the Indian Malaysian community. Hindraf does not just talk about temple issues only. The group also protested against the government’s inability to address other problems faced by the community like Tamil schools, education, employment, housing and poverty. What is demanded by Hindraf is more than temple- related matters.. The issue of price hikes had been consistently highlighted by the media, way before the general elections. Did you as menteri besar and BN Selangor chief discuss this matter with the central leaders? Yes, we did. We suggested to the government to reduce the price of oil and stop other projects. But as a mere state leader I cannot make any decisions. But the opposition has been riding on this issue and has consistently associated BN with price hikes. Why didn’t BN respond effectively? I myself don’t understand. We had suggested to the federal government that the oil price be reduced, but they did not respond. Instead they believed in explaining (the issue) to the people, and the people don’t want to hear that. As we remember it, the matter was discussed in depth by BN – this means the party had sufficient time to respond to the matter… Suggestions were made, but there was no reaction. Point taken, but where were the responses? Are you saying that there are no state issues that caused the electoral losses? Not many. The biggest issue in Selangor is public transportation which renders it a must for everyone to own a car. Almost all the households in Selangor have a car, you can see low-cost houses with two or three cars (parked outside) because there is no efficient public transportation system. (It is) something that I have been fighting to get for a long time. Light Rail Transit projects go only halfway because of insufficient funding. When there is a station, it’s so far from people’s houses that they end up buying cars. We actually have a plan to purchase houses and land near train stations, no matter how expensive it is, so we can build low- cost housing, but I can’t say it because I will be accused of trying to teach the government how to run things.

Diversity and Multiculturalism: The New Racism

By Michael S. Berliner, Ph.D., and Gary Hull, Ph.D.

Is ethnic diversity an “absolute essential” of a college education? UCLA’s Chancellor Charles Young thinks so. Ethnic diversity is clearly the purpose of affirmative action, which Young is defending against a long-overdue assault. But far from being essential to a college education, such diversity is a sure road to its destruction. “Ethnic diversity” is merely racism in a politically correct disguise.

Many people have a very superficial view of racism. They see it as merely the belief that one race is superior to another. It is much more than that. It is a fundamental (and fundamentally wrong) view of human nature. Racism is the notion that one’s race determines one’s identity. It is the belief that one’s convictions, values and character are determined not by the judgment of one’s mind but by one’s anatomy or “blood.”

This view causes people to be condemned (or praised) based on their racial membership. In turn, it leads them to condemn or praise others on the same basis. In fact, one can gain an authentic sense of pride only from one’s own achievements, not from inherited characteristics.

The spread of racism requires the destruction of an individual’s confidence in his own mind. Such an individual then anxiously seeks a sense of identity by clinging to some group, abandoning his autonomy and his rights, allowing his ethnic group to tell him what to believe. Because he thinks of himself as a racial entity, he feels “himself” only among others of the same race. He becomes a separatist, choosing his friends—and enemies—based on ethnicity. This separatism has resulted in the spectacle of student-segregated dormitories and segregated graduations.

The diversity movement claims that its goal is to extinguish racism and build tolerance of differences. This is a complete sham. One cannot teach students that their identity is determined by skin color and expect them to become colorblind. One cannot espouse multiculturalism and expect students to see each other as individual human beings. One cannot preach the need for self-esteem while destroying the faculty which makes it possible: reason. One cannot teach collective identity and expect students to have self-esteem.

Advocates of “diversity” are true racists in the basic meaning of that term: they see the world through colored lenses, colored by race and gender. To the multiculturalist, race is what counts—for values, for thinking, for human identity in general. No wonder racism is increasing: colorblindness is now considered evil, if not impossible. No wonder people don’t treat each other as individuals: to the multiculturalist, they aren’t.

Advocates of “diversity” claim it will teach students to tolerate and celebrate their differences. But the “differences” they have in mind are racial differences, which means we’re being urged to glorify race, which means we’re being asked to institutionalize separatism. “Racial identity” erects an unbridgeable gulf between people, as though they were different species, with nothing fundamental in common. If that were true—if “racial identity” determined one’s values and thinking methods—there would be no possibility for understanding or cooperation among people of different races.

Advocates of “diversity” claim that because the real world is diverse, the campus should reflect that fact. But why should a campus population “reflect” the general population (particularly the ethnic population)? No answer. In fact, the purpose of a university is to impart knowledge and develop reasoning, not to be a demographic mirror of society.

Racism, not any meaningful sense of diversity, guides today’s intellectuals. The educationally significant diversity that exists in “the real world” is intellectual diversity, i.e., the diversity of ideas. But such diversity—far from being sought after—is virtually forbidden on campus. The existence of “political correctness” blasts the academics’ pretense at valuing real diversity. What they want is abject conformity.

The only way to eradicate racism on campus is to scrap racist programs and the philosophic ideas that feed racism. Racism will become an ugly memory only when universities teach a valid concept of human nature: one based on the tenets that the individual’s mind is competent, that the human intellect is efficacious, that we possess free will, that individuals are to be judged as individuals—and that deriving one’s identity from one’s race is a corruption—a corruption appropriate to Nazi Germany, not to a nation based on freedom and independence.

May 13? What May 13?

1969 was different. In 1969, opposition meant Chinese and Indians and ruling party meant Malays. So, if you separate Malaysia into opposition and ruling party, then the country gets separated into non-Malays and Malays as well. Therefore, when the ruling party loses and the opposition wins this also means that the Malays lose and the non-Malays win. This is a perfect formula for racial conflict.

Today, ruling party and opposition can no longer be separated by race. It was the non-Malays who suffered most in the recent general election when the ruling party got trounced in many states. And the opposition that trounced it is a mix of Malays, Chinese and Indians. The ruling party loss was not a Malay loss and the opposition win was not a non-Malay win. In fact, four of the five opposition led states have Malay Menteris Besar. How can you say that the Chinese won these states? Furthermore, in states like Selangor and Perak, Chinese votes alone could not have delivered the states to the opposition. The Malays and Indians helped as well. It was either a partnership of all races or nothing at all.

 

The Malays realise that with the fall of the five states they have lost nothing. The Chinese and Indians also realise that the Malays are very important to the cause and that a unity of all races is crucial to an opposition win. Furthermore, Malays, Chinese and Indians all realise that state governments can only be formed and kept in place if PAS, DAP and PKR stay united and don’t break up. It is not to the interest of the Malays, Chinese and Indians to start anything. Anyway, there is no reason to start anything because no one has lost out in the new formula.

 

And this is where the Mamaks come in. Mamaks are Indian Muslims. Some years back, the Indian Muslims and India Hindus in Penang clashed over the proximity of a temple and a mosque which both sides alleged was ‘disturbing’ them. Resulting from this misunderstanding, some bloody clashes erupted which threatened to turn into a blood bath such as what we have frequently-enough witnessed in India. Anwar Ibrahim was forced to personally go down to the ground to prevent what was about to turn into another ‘May 13′.

 

Last Friday, 1,000 or so Mamaks organised a demonstration in front of the Penang State Government headquarters. They were upset that a ‘Chinese’ Chief Minister had announced the end of the New Economic Policy in Penang. The Malays were not upset. The Malays did not come out to protest. In fact, PAS even endorsed the announcement and said that it agreed with the proposal. But the Mamaks were upset and they demonstrated their displeasure last Friday.

 

The Mamaks want the government to pass a law that makes calling them ‘Mamak’ illegal. They want laws passed so that those who continue calling them Mamaks can be sent to jail. And they want a new law passed to declare all Mamaks as Malays and to call them Malays and not Mamaks from thereon.

 

The Mamaks, therefore, have to demonstrate that they are more Malays than the Malays and more Muslim that the Arabs. And to prove this they came out to demonstrate against Lim Guan Eng’s announcement that the NEP in Penang would end even if the Malays themselves could not be bothered and even if PAS supports Guan Eng’s announcement. In a nutshell, the Mamaks are ashamed that they were born as Indians and insist they be classified as Malays.

 

But the Malays will not respond to the Mamaks’ call to take to the streets, in particular the PAS and PKR Malays. In fact, the only reason the PAS and PKR Malays come out is to ensure that the Mamaks do not run riot and start spilling Chinese blood. Yes, May 13 can never happen again in spite of the rise of the Mamaks. The Malays will ensure that that no wannabe Malay Mamaks will upset the peace, stability and tranquillity that exists between the Malays, Chinese and Indian Hindus.

As for the Indian Muslims…..well, they need to earn their Malayness so allow them this little sideshow to enable them to go to the government and say, “Are we Malay enough for you now?”

————————————————————————————————————————–

This only a part of the Article from Malaysia Today ..Can Read the full article HERE.
Thanks to Malaysia Today & RPK for publishing the ground facts through THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Anwar’s game plan strikes fear in Umno

30+ MPs – that’s all Anwar Ibrahim needs to be the probable Prime Minister
—————————————————————————————–

KUALA LUMPUR, March 14 – If there is one name that has pushed Barisan
Nasional leaders out of their comfort zone and caused confusion and anxiety,
it is Anwar Ibrahim.

When he said on Tuesday that the Opposition should be referred to as the
government-in-waiting, he was not referring to five years down the road. He
was referring to the next few weeks or months.

He knows that if he manages to convince 30 Members of Parliament to cross
over, the government of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will fall.

Since the PKR-DAP-PAS alliance that he cobbled together won big on March 8,
taking 52% of the popular vote in Peninsular Malaysia and snaring 82 of the
222 seats in parliament, Anwar has become the most mentioned name in Umno
circles.

Along the corridors of powers and in Umno circles, there is a belief that
the former deputy prime minister will not rest and settle for second-best,
not with the momentum of being a reformer on his side.

He knows that the troops of the BN war machine are demoralised and its
leaders still reeling from the psychological scars of Election 2008. He will
go for the kill, rattling the coalition’s cage, creating the impression of
an inevitable wave that some fickle-minded BN MPs will be tempted to abandon
the BN ship and join the Opposition.

An Umno division chief from Pahang, who requested anonymity because of the
sensitive nature of the information, said: “The talk on the ground is which
MPs Anwar is going to approach to join PKR. Everyone says that Sabah and
Sarawak MPs are being targeted. But I think everyone except the PM and DPM
are targets.”

Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, in a letter asking Abdullah to resign, noted that a
move has been made to woo BN representatives to join the Opposition. The fea
r of crossovers is palpable.

Among the senior leaders of BN, the question being asked is this: who can
take on Anwar?

Increasingly the view is that no one individual is strong enough to
withstand the momentum of the former deputy prime minister. Abdullah is like
a general who has been badly wounded in battle. He needs time to recuperate
from the deep wounds he suffered – time which he may not have.
If Abdullah steps down and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak takes over, the latter
will be vulnerable to a personal and potentially costly onslaught by Anwar.

During the election campaign, Najib was assailed by Anwar over the murder of
the Mongolian model and over a few defence deals. Expect the ferociousness
of the attacks to multiply if Najib becomes Number 1 now.

Even the return of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad could be counterproductive.

The Malaysian public believes that Anwar was wronged by Mahathir. This was
evident during the election when attempts to paint the former DPM as a
charlatan, racist and chameleon failed miserably.

So who can stop Anwar?

Professor Shamsul Amri Baharuddin, a political commentator, says that only a
united Umno and BN can hold the line against the Anwar-led Opposition.

“Anwar is pressing BN at 20 different points. Only if they are strong and
united can they survive. But can they stay united?” he wondered.

The next few weeks will be important. If the new Cabinet catches the
imagination of Malaysians, the morale of the ground troops will improve and
it will boost the confidence of BN’s leaders.

Otherwise, the grumbling against Abdullah will grow into a crescendo and it
may embolden Dr Mahathir or Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to step forward to “save
the party” – a situation which could lead to a party split like in 1987.

Such a scenario will be heaven-sent for Anwar.

Umno politicians believe that any upheaval in Umno or BN will convince the
weak-hearted that it may be prudent to cross the Parliament floor.

Within the higher reaches of Umno, the strategy appears to be to rally
around Abdullah, go down to the ground and get the troops ready for war. But
for Umno and BN to prevail over Anwar, they will need a few conditions to be
met.

1) Abdullah must be able to hush his band of critics in Umno.

2) Abdullah must be able to inspire the troops on the ground.

3) Abdullah must be a strong leader and reform his party and the country.

4) Anwar and the Opposition need to commit a few major mistakes.

5) For the public to fall out of love quickly with the reform-minded
Opposition.

http://themalaysianinsider.com/mni/anwars-game-plan-strikes-fear-in-umno.html
_______________________________________________________

Anwar Ibrahim – Man of the Match
By Baradan Kuppusamy

KUALA LUMPUR, Mar 14 (IPS) – Anwar Ibrahim, the man credited
with radically changing the political landscape of Malaysia, could not
contest the Mar. 8 general elections that saw the ruling coalition lose five
state governments and its long-held two-thirds majority in parliament.

There is a story in Ibrahim’s having been crippled by a five-year-ban on
contesting elections, as a result of having had to serve time in jail on
criminal charges, trumped-up by his political opponents.

But the former deputy prime minister fought his way back to the political
centre-stage and overcame ten years of virulent government propaganda
mounted against him to forge an alliance and establish a powerful opposition
in parliament.

“He is clearly the man of the hour, he made it possible,” said Steven Gan,
editor of the independent online news provider Malaysiakini.com. “He glued
together a viable opposition, set a common theme and led the opposition to
victory.”

After Saturday’s opposition successes politics in Malaysia will never be the
same again and it was made possible through Ibrahim’s multi-racial People’s
Justice Party which won the highest number of seats on the opposition
benches in Parliament.

Together with the pro-Chinese Democratic Action Party and the Islamist Pan
Malaysian Islamic Party or PAS, the opposition commands 82 seats, just 30
seats short of capturing the government.

It is the best ever showing by the opposition since independence in 1957 and
heralds a new era of transparency, accountability and clean government that
Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi promised but never delivered. The voters
punished him, sending his ministers and his state governments falling like
ninepins.

“He has made a big comeback and has given multi-racial politics a firm
foothold,” said Gan. “Now a two-party system of politics is possible not a
single domineering entity that is corrupt and dictatorial.”

During an interview with IPS, Ibrahim pledged to defend and promote
free-market economy, foreign investment and continue the development
process. But he emphasised that progress and wealth will now benefit the
poor of all races, not the rich and ruling elite.

“We are confident that under our leadership and working closely with our
partners (in the opposition) we will begin to implement policies to ensure a
stronger and more vibrant economy in Malaysia,” he said.

“We will ensure that investor confidence remains strong during the
transition period and also to identify areas of concern that our new
governments (state governments) will address in enhancing and improving
their operations and performance in Malaysia,” he said.

The opposition is now busy forming coalition governments in the five states
it won and is promising a new economic agenda to the people, mainly by
eliminating corruption. “We will have zero tolerance for corruption and this
will have a big impact in reducing business costs and build confidence in
small and medium enterprises,” Ibrahim vowed.

“We also plan to divorce government employees from doing business with the
government, thereby reducing incentives for cronyism and insider deals which
are plaguing the current administration,” he said.

Ibrahim’s comeback is astounding, considering that he spent six years in
prison, unfairly accused and convicted on corruption and sodomy charges –
now proven to be motivated by a political conspiracy at the highest levels
involving judges, crony tycoons and political leaders.

A former Islamist student activist who turned Malay nationalist, Ibrahim has
successfully reinvented himself as a leader of all of Malaysia’s races and
campaigned on a reformist agenda.

“The result of the election is testament to Anwar’s acceptability as a
leader to all Malaysians because his agenda is fair and just and involves
all races, especially the poor,” said Ragu Kesavan, a human rights lawyer.

How did Ibrahim manage it? What is his winning formula? Political analysts
say a key was his success in persuading the Islamist PAS party to drop its
fiery rhetoric demanding a theocratic Islamic state — an agenda that
usually drives the all important Chinese voters, about 30 percent of the
electorate, into the arms of the ruling National Front.

He then forged a loose opposition alliance of three parties, allowing each
to mobilise its supporters but campaign on a common theme, attacking rising
prices of food and fuel, cronyism in the ruling United Malays National
Organisation (UMNO) party and equality for all races.

Religion, Islamic theocracy or parochial and racial issues did not figure in
the opposition campaign this time, giving no ammunition to the government to
exploit. Ibrahim’s message of change resonated with ordinary Malaysians
irrespective of their race or religion, observers said, because it touched
on rising food and fuel prices which affected all people. They said people
were aware of the real danger of their prosperous country going bankrupt
through the pursuit of narrow policies. “Voters voted against Badawi because
of his inability to deliver on the promises he made in 2004, including the
promise to fight corruption, the promise to reform the police force, the
promise to be a prime minister for all ethnic groups, and the promise to
improve the civil service,” said political researcher Ong Kian Ming.

Chinese and Indians, descendents of immigrants under British colonial rule,
who have long felt treated as second-class citizens rallied to Ibrahim’s “we
are all equal” banner.

He also won over urban Malay voters who had not benefited from the New
Economic Policy (NEP) — a Malays first affirmative action policy — by
saying the benefits had been hijacked by the Malay elites.

Early in the campaign voters were wary of Ibrahim’s reformist agenda and the
turnout at his campaign rallies seldom reached 1,000 people, but midway
during the 13-day campaign the turnout steadily swelled to over 30,000.

Although Ibrahim did not contest, he is the de-facto opposition leader. He
is unlikely to formalise his position by contesting in a by-election and
return to parliament as opposition leader.

Pressed on this, Ibrahim told IPS: ”I rather look at myself as an
alternative government or a government-in-waiting than an opposition
leader.”

He also surprisingly did not rule out accepting smaller political parties
which are now members of the ruling National Front into his opposition
coalition provided they subscribe to his reformist agenda.

Political parties, now partnering the substantially weakened ruling
coalition, may switch allegiance and join Ibrahim. Crossing the floor is not
without precedent in Malaysia and even the beleaguered Badawi has come down
to saying that anyone crossing over from opposition benches would be
welcomed.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41587

Makkal Sakthi fever hits Penang

Anil Netto

“Makkal Sakthi (People Power)!” thundered speaker after speaker.

“Valga (Long live)!” roared back the crowd.

I thought I would check out the atmosphere at the DAP ceramah at the Penang Chinese Town Hall in George Town tonight to gauge the mood among voters. The theme: “Bebaskan Hindraf 5 (Free the Hindraf Five).”

When I arrived at the hall at around 8.00pm, it was full. More people were arriving and soon they were spilling out of the hall, where two screens had been put up for those outside to watch the proceedings.

The total turnout was around 3,000, including the few hundred outside the hall.

This was not your typical DAP ceramah. I had covered ceramahs in Penang, including those held at the Chinese Town Hall, for some years – but this was unlike anything I had seen. Instead of an 80 per cent ethnic Chinese crowd, this time Indian Malaysians made up more than 90 per cent of the crowd. Instead of speaking in English and Chinese, the DAP speakers spoke largely in Malay and Tamil and some English.

The Chinese Malaysians who turned up looked bemused and a bit taken aback to find themselve in a minority this time. One Chinese woman, a stranger, turned to me and remarked, “After 50 years of Independence, you have finally woken up” – which sounded a bit strange; she was talking as if I represented the entire Indian Malaysian community in the country!

I was more interested in observing the crowd. Of course, the middle-class were represented, but I saw many, many men and women who looked like they had come from tough or difficult backgrounds, the lower-income group. Were they manual labourers, casual workers, factory workers or unemployed, I wondered.

Many of them looked like they were coming to a political ceramah for the first time. How many of them were actually registered voters? All the same, they seemed eager to snap up reading material such as The Rocket and Aliran Monthly, which were being sold outside. I saw a few young Indian Malaysian men wearing the familiar red and pink Abolish ISA badges.

You could almost feel the air of excitement hanging over the crowd.

The DAP made a conscious effort to project the Indian Malaysian faces in their ranks such as Karpal, Kula, Prof Ramasamy, Guna, Sivanesan and Rayan. Also on stage were Kit Siang, Guan Eng, Chong Eng and was that Jeff Ooi?

Guan Eng told the crowd he had asked quite a few Hindus what they were praying for on Thaipusam and they replied, “For the release of the Hindraf Five.”

“But what did Abdullah Badawi give you?” he asked. “A public holiday!”

He also poked fun at Lingam’s “it looks like me; it sounds like me”.

The crowd laughed, knowingly, at the farce.

As for the detained Hindraf leaders who are now on a hunger strike, the joke going around is that if ever Uthayakumar, who is a diabetic, needed a blood transfusion, the authorities would be wary of appealing to the public for blood donations. That’s because they might have to call in the FRU to control the thousands who would turn up to donate blood!

All the DAP speakers received a rousing welcome as they entered the hall, including a big cheer for Karpal, who is the senior lawyer for the detained Hindraf leaders. Karpal, speaking while seated on stage, told the crowd the DAP was “adopting” Makkal Sakthi.

To me, there are pros and cons of a popular movement such as Makkal Sakthi being institutionalised as or within a political party. We saw that during Reformasi, when Keadilan was set up to institutionalise the movement and take the struggle to a political level.

An anonymous popular movement is spontaneous, dynamic and organic, representing “people power” from the bottom up.

In contrast, a political party tends to be structured and organised while decisions are made at the top. This makes it less spontaneous and more predictable. It also makes it easier for tacticians in the Barisan Nasional, who have mastered the art of our unfair electoral process and campaigning, to read and analyse and deal with during the general election.

That is why reformasi was exciting and unpredictable and dynamic, but once it was institutionalised within a political party (Keadilan), the movement lost some of its dynamism and spontaneity. In fact, my guess is that the BN would be much more comfortable dealing with opposition parties than with anonymous popular movements such as Reformasi and Makkal Sakthi.

Still, I suppose political parties have a role to play in putting across the people’s aspirations into the official policy formulation process. But it would be a great pity if the politicians were to take over in such a way as to leave the people – who have only just tasted a sense of liberation from their metaphorical shackles – feeling disempowered once again.

Okay, back to the ceramah: Karpal also informed the crowd that there was a high probability that Guan Eng would stand as a candidate in Penang in the general election.

Outside the hall, a couple of DAP volunteers at a desk were giving out forms to those who wanted to sign up as polling day volunteers to assist the party. About half a dozen young Indian Malaysians were busy filling up the forms.

I asked the DAP volunteer at the desk how many people had signed up. She flicked through the stack of forms and counted around 30. Others had taken forms, promising to return them later, she said.

From the back of the hall, I could see the a sprinkling of folks who had come in the orange attire of Makkal Sakthi, including the Makkal Sakthi T-shirts.

A visitor from KL marvelled at the mood here in Penang, which he said seemed more enthusiastic than in KL. “Perhaps it’s because the folks over in KL have quite a few different events to choose from.”

I left the ceramah before it ended, convinced that there has been a major swing within the Indian Malaysian community.

On my way back, I walked past the Pitt Street Corner Bar, a stone’s throw from the Chinese Town Hall. It is usually an oasis for those seeking “refreshments” on a Saturday night. Today, it looked rather quiet – a few empty seats around metallic tables inside – despite the presence of a large crowd nearby.

Even as more Malaysians were being detained in KL earlier today, the mood in Penang – at least among these 3,000 people – was one of newfound strength and solidarity in a community that has awakened from it slumber. More than that, a sense of empowerment has descended on the people – a feeling that I can and will make a difference, and what I do really does matter.

And this mood was infectious. Even the Chinese DAP volunteers outside the hall found themselves calling out, “Makkal Sakthi!“

Valga!

Source: Malaysia Today

Bahasa Melayu

Melayu lebih buta sejarah tak mau mengakui hampir seluruh kebudayaannya berasaskan kebudayaan hindu/india dan kini inging dibersihkan dengan meniru kebudayan arab.

Tak tau malu. diri sendiri pun di gelar BUMIPUTERA, satu gelaran 100%bahasa Sanskrit. malah perkataan “bahasa’ itu pun adalah sanskrit.

kamu semua ingat begitu pandai. suba pikir sikit apa pendapat orang lain bila kamu cuba jadi “tuan”baru sedangkan bahasa sendiri pun di ciplak dari kaum India????

Bapa bahasa kamu ialah Munshi Abdullah – SEORANG TAMIL dari India!!! ini kamu tau tak? ini bukan bohong. tapi buku sejarah disekolah tak pernah mengajar ini.

Selalu kamu semua bercakap seolah olah kamu je yang pandai sedangkan seluruh kebudayaan kamu adalah kebudayan ciplak dari India, Arab atau Cina!

Sarapan pagi setiap hari? ROTI Paratha? haa.. itu namanya dari mana?

Sapa kamu? bumiputera? oh… itu namanya dari mana?

Apa nama bandar kamu? Putrajaya? itu namanya dari mana?

Apa nama kereta nasional? Wira? itu perkatan dari mana?

Apa nama kaum kamu? Melayu? itu kamu tau tak perkataan Tamil yang bermaksud negeri orang gunung/orang bukit???

Apa satu satunya kesan perniggalan zaman lama di malaysia? Candi lembah Bujang? itu apa tu? KUIL HINDU la bro, kuil hindu…

Semuanya dari INDIA bro, dari INDIA jadi ada tak terpikir pa sebenarnya org India fikir pasal kamu semua?

BODOH SOMBONG!!!

Ada satu kala pengarah DBP kamu mau membersihkan bahasa Melayu dari perkataan asing, lalu saya berbincang dengan kawan dari india dan berkata bahawa kalau itu dibuat, hanya perkataan bodoh saja akan tinggal dalam kamus dewan bahasa. tau tak apa jawapan kawan saya dari India. Dia tertawa berdekak dekah dan berkata bahawa perkataan “booh” tu pun dari bahasa India jugak. ALAMAK!

Conclusion.

Kamulah yang buta sejarah. utk kamu sejarah hanya 500 tahun. Untuk org India sejarah ialah 5000 tahun!

Dr M slams PM’s sycophants in new book

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/76981
James Wong Wing-On | Jan 14, 08 11:50am

“Poor Malaysia!” This is the prognosis for the country from ex-premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad in the prologue of his newly-published
book, in relation to the captaincy of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his hardcore supporters.While continuing to take potshots against his successor, he reserves some of his ire for the “sycophants” surrounding Abdullah.

In the prologue to `Dr Mahathir’s Selected Letters to World Leaders’,he writes: “It did not cross my mind that after I left (office in October 2003), there would be such a change as to make pleasing the prime minister more important than anything else.”

Referring to the state of media freedom under the Abdullah administration, Mahathir writes that news in the mainstream media is “so censored and spun by spin doctors that the prime minister cannot possibly know the feelings and frustrations of the majority of the people … fortunately for the government, Malaysians abhor violence when expressing their anger”.

He then notes: “So things must become much worse before they would show their (people’s) true feelings in any way. In the meantime, the
sycophants will continue to enjoy their day. Poor Malaysia!”.Mahathir was prime minister and Umno president for 22 years from 1981. He left office, initially undertaking not to intervene in either administrative or political matters.

When Abdullah began reversing decisions on projects such as a bridge to replace the causeway to Singapore, Mahathir came out with stinging
criticism of his leadership qualities and the `undue influence’ that his kitchen cabinet has had on policy making.On one-time protege-turned- nemesis Anwar Ibrahim – currently the PKR de facto leader – Mahathir describes the series of massive protests that the latter’s sacking inspired in 1998-1999 as an “organised anti-government agitation (that) was not a broad-based movement (but) merely the expression of frustration of an ambitious personality over losing his job”.

The book is a compilation of 71 previously confidential letters that Mahathir wrote to such world leaders as George H Bush, George W Bush,
William Jefferson `Bill’ Clinton, John Major and Jacques Chirac.

“These letters should be read in the context of the time in which they were written,” he states.

The letters are in listed in four categories – under `terrorism’, `globalisation’ , `war and conflict’ and `economic and diplomatic relations’.

`Imposed choice’

According to the editor of the collection, former Kok Lanas MP Abdullah Ahmad, Mahathir initially wanted to publish about 200 letters.However, the government only allowed 84 to be declassified and 13 were further dropped with the consent of the editor and publisher “because they are relatively unimportant” .

The editor’s introduction states that those letters withheld by the current government are actually “more noteworthy and interesting” .

“The selection, to my mind, of the letters to be released was poor.It was imposed on him (Mahathir) by the government of his successor,”
he said, adding that Mahathir is currently writing his memoirs.The editor was political secretary of premier Abdul Razak Hussein and former ambassador to the United Nations. He was detained under the Internal Security Act from 1976-1981.

In 2000, he was appointed editor-in-chief of the pro-government daily New Straits Times, but was sacked soon after the current prime minister took over the helm of the country.