The Racist Card

[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU DI BAWAH ARTIKEL INI]It
is strange that whenever people like Param Cumaraswamy accuse others of
being racist they end up by exposing the racist in them. For them you
are racist only if you talk about Malays and their need to catch up
with other races. If you talk of the imagined plight of other races in
Malaysia, and make ridiculous statements that the Tamil Indians in
Malaysia are facing “ethnic cleansing” when you know that no such thing
is happening, it is not racist.

It is only in Malaysia that
people of immigrant origins, so identified by their insistence on being
linked race-wise with their countries of origin, are actually accepted
as citizens.In other countries including the much-admired
democracies of the West, citizens are not linked to or classified by
their countries of origin. They speak the national language habitually,
go to schools where the national language is the medium of instruction
and adopt the culture of the indigenous people, or at least the people
who originally founded these countries (the indigenous people having
been systematically wiped out).


But
in Malaysia although the national language is the language of the
indigenous people, many Malaysian citizens cannot speak the language,
much less use it habitually in their homes and with fellow citizens.
Whenever some foreigner speak Bahasa Malaysia to them, they would reply
in English. Foreigners cannot understand why they seem to downgrade
their national language. And yet these citizens question why there is,
for practical purpose, no Bangsa Malaysia.

Schools using
languages of the countries of origin are not only permitted but are
actually financed by the Government. Try and find such schools in South
East Asia or in the so-called liberal developed countries where they
claim there is no racial discrimination. There are actually more
Indians in the United Kingdom than in Malaysia. But there is not a
single school where the teaching medium is in any of the Indian
languages.

People like Param would not notice all these. Instead
he sees the effort to bring up the indigenous people to the level of
the non-indigenous people as racist. Arrogantly he seems to want the
indigenous people become the deprived in their own country.

I
admit that I spoke on “Ketuanan Melayu” in Johor. The Malay
intellectuals have been talking about this for a long time. There was
no suggestion about them being racist or that they should be detained
under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

I spoke on this issue
critically as I consider that claiming to be masters when you are not
is ridiculous. How can the Malay driver driving a car belonging to
someone else regard himself as the “Tuan” and the owner of the car as
inferior to him? Actually it is the owner and his employer who is the
“Tuan”.

In my speech my advise to the Malays is to acquire
knowledge and skills and use them to enrich themselves for only then
can they be regarded by their servants and employees as “Tuan”.

Is this seditious or near seditious? Is speaking about Malays and their needs seditious?

On
the other hand let us consider the Hindraf memorandum to the British.
Most people including Indians have not read it. To gain the support of
the Tamil Indians, Hindraf demands that the British compensate every
Tamil Indian in Malaysia one million pounds sterling (about RM 7
million). That should tempt even middle-class Indians. Surely Indian
workers would fall for it.

The Hindraf memorandum also contains the following extracts which are obviously racist;
1)
“Commonwealth ethnic Indian peace loving subjects in Malaysia
persecuted by Government backed Islamic extremist violent armed
terrorist who launched a pre-dawn violent armed attack and destroyed
the Kg Jawa Mariamman Hindu temple at 4.00am this morning (15.11.07)”.

2) “Appeal for United Kingdom to move emergency United Nations Resolution condemning “Ethnic Cleansing” in Malaysia”.

I
will not quote other highly inflammatory remarks found in the Hindraf
memorandum. However I would like to mention the threat made by Hindraf
in its conclusion;

“We fear that the peace loving Indian
community of Tamil origin having been pushed to the corner and the
persecution getting worse by the day may be forced into terrorism in a
matter of time as what has happened to the Sri Lankan Tamils”.

Is Hindraf planning to make Malaysia a Southeast Asian Sri Lanka?

I
don’t believe the majority of the Tamils in Malaysia would agree with
the picture painted by Hindraf. Unfortunately, like the Malays, few of
them read the actual memorandum. And so they support Hindraf blindly.

But
if you read what I have quoted would you not conclude that Hindraf and
Param Cumaraswamy, who objected to their detention under the ISA as
racist especially as his desire to have me detained under the Act for
telling the Malays to realise that they are not “Tuan” when they have
to clean the shoes of others. If they want to be “Tuan”, then they must
acquire the skills and knowledge to succeed in life. And when they
succeed they would be highly regarded whether they are called “Tuan” or
not.

It seems that according to Param Cumaraswamy talking about Malays is seditious.

Who is racist; Param Cumaraswamy or Dr Mahathir?

I am not going to call for his detention.

He should as a lawyer who understands the law, decide whether he is a racist and should be detained or not.*************

[EDISI BAHASA MELAYU]

Perkauman Sebagai Modal

Adalah
agak menghairankan apabila orang seperti Param Cumaraswamy menuduh
orang lain bersifat perkauman kata-kata mereka mendedahkan sifat
perkauman mereka sendiri. Bagi mereka, seseorang itu “racist” (bersifat
perkauman) cuma apabila bercakap mengenai bangsa Melayu dan keperluan
mereka untuk berusaha mengejar pencapaian bangsa lain.

Tetapi,
jika mereka bercakap mengenai masalah kaum lain yang tidak berasas dan
tidak benar seperti membuat kenyataan karut bahawa kaum India Tamil di
Malaysia menghadapi “penghapusan etnik” yang masyarakat tahu ianya
tidak terjadi, ini tidak dianggap bersifat perkauman.

Cuma di
Malaysia sahaja orang daripada kaum pendatang, atas kehendak mereka
sendiri dikenali dan dikaitkan dengan negara asal mereka, telah
diterima sebagai warga negara.

Di negara-negara lain,
termasuklah di negara Barat yang demokrasi mereka begitu dikagumi,
warga negaranya tidak dikaitkan mahupun diklasifikasikan mengikut
negara asal mereka. Mereka juga selalu menggunakan bahasa kebangsaan,
negara berkenaan, bersekolah dimana bahasa kebangsaan menjadi bahasa
pengantar dan menerima adat resam bangsa pribumi ataupun bangsa yang
mula-mula menubuhkan negara itu (apabila bangsa pribumi telah
dihapuskan secara terancang).

Tetapi di Malaysia walaupun bahasa
kebangsaan adalah bahasa pribumi, ramai rakyat Malaysia yang tidak
boleh bertutur bahasa tersebut, malahan secara lazimnya tidak
menggunakan bahasa itu di rumah mahupun dengan rakyat Malaysia yang
lain. Apabila orang asing bercakap dalam Bahasa Malaysia mereka akan
menjawab dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Orang asing tidak mengerti mengapa
mereka kelihatan merendah-rendahkan bahasa kebangsaan mereka sendiri.
Di dalam masa yang sama mereka ini menyoal mengapa tiada Bangsa
Malaysia.

Sekolah-sekolah yang menggunakan bahasa negara asal
mereka bukan sahaja dibenarkan malahan dibiayai oleh Kerajaan. Cuba
cari sekolah sebegini di Asia Tenggara ataupun di negara-negara maju
yang dianggap liberal dan didakwa tidak berlaku diskriminasi kaum.
Sebenarnya terdapat lebih ramai orang keturunan India di United Kingdom
daripada di Malaysia. Tetapi tidak ada sebuah sekolah pun yang mengguna
bahasa-bahasa India sebagai bahasa pengantar di United Kingdom.

Orang
seperti Param tidak akan nampak semua ini. Sebaliknya dia melihat
sebarang usaha untuk meningkatkan keupayaan rakyat pribumi supaya
setanding dengan rakyat bukan pribumi sebagai bersifat perkauman.
Dengan bongkak dia seolah-olah mahu melihat rakyat pribumi semuanya
mengemis didalam negara mereka sendiri.

Saya mengaku saya
bercakap mengenai Ketuanan Melayu semasa di Johor. Sebelum itu,
cendekiawan-cendekiawan Melayu telah begitu lama bercakap mengenainya.
Tidak pernah ada pandangan bahawa mereka itu bersifat perkauman ataupun
ada cadangan supaya mereka ditahan dibawah Akta Dalam Negeri (ISA –
Internal Security Act).

Saya bercakap mengenai isu itu secara
kritis kerana saya menganggap mendakwa diri kita sebagai tuan bila kita
bukan tuan adalah aneh. Bagaimanakah boleh seorang pemandu Melayu yang
memandu kereta kepunyaan orang lain menganggap dirinya “Tuan” dan
pemilik kereta itu berkedudukan lebih rendah daripada dirinya? “Tuan”
yang sebenarnya adalah pemilik kereta dan orang yang membayar gajinya.

Di
dalam ucapan saya, saya menasihatkan orang Melayu supaya menimba ilmu
dan kemahiran supaya boleh digunakan untuk mencari kekayaan bagi diri
mereka kerana cuma dengan cara demikian sahaja mereka akan dianggap
“Tuan” oleh orang suruhan dan pekerja mereka.

Adakah ini hasutan ataupun menghasut? Adakah membicarakan mengenai bangsa Melayu dan kepentingan mereka menjadi satu hasutan?

Sebaliknya,
cuba kita teliti memorandum Hindraf kepada pihak British. Ramai
termasuk kaum India tidak membacanya. Untuk mendapatkan sokongan kaum
India Tamil, Hindraf mendesak pihak British supaya membayar gantirugi 1
juta pound sterling (lebih kurang RM 7 juta) kepada setiap orang kaum
India Tamil yang terdapat di Malaysia. Ini sudah pasti berupaya
mempengaruhi bukan sahaja mereka yang berpendapatan rendah tetapi juga
golongan pertengahan dari keturunan Tamil India. Sudah pasti golongan
pekerja kaum India terpengaruh.

Terdapat juga didalam memorandum Hindraf sedutan-sedutan seperti berikut yang jelas bersifat perkauman:

1)
“Kaum India Komanwel yang merupakan rakyat yang mencintai keamanan di
Malaysia ditindas oleh Kerajaan yang didokong oleh pengganas bersenjata
kelompok ekstremis Islam telah dengan ganasnya melancarkan satu
serangan bersenjata sebelum subuh dan memusnahkan Tokong Hindu
Mariamman di Kampung Jawa pada pukul 4 pagi ini (15.11.07)”.

2)
“Memohon kepada United Kingdom untuk membentangkan satu resolusi
tergempar Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu mengutuk “Penghapusan Etnik”
di Malaysia”.

Saya tidak mahu menambah lagi lain-lain kenyataan
yang begitu mengapi-ngapikan perasaan perkauman yang terdapat didalam
memorandum Hindraf tersebut.

Walau bagaimanapun, saya ingin menyebut mengenai ugutan yang dibuat oleh Hindraf didalam kesimpulannya;

“Kami
risau kaum India berketurunan Tamil yang cintakan keamanan setelah
dipinggirkan dan ditindas, semakin hari semakin teruk, akan pada satu
ketika, secara terpaksa mengambil langkah keganasan sebagaimana yang
terjadi kepada kaum Tamil di Sri Lanka.”

Adakah Hindraf bercadang menjadikan Malaysia sebagai Sri Lanka di Asia Tenggara?
Saya
tidak percaya majoriti orang Tamil di Malaysia bersetuju dengan
gambaran yang dibuat oleh Hindraf. Malangnya, seperti orang Melayu,
cuma beberapa orang sahaja yang membaca memorandum yang sebenarnya.
Jadi mereka menyokong Hindraf secara membuta-tuli.

Tetapi jika
anda membaca apa yang telah saya nyatakan tidakkah anda akan membuat
satu kesimpulan bahawa Hindraf dan Param Cumaraswamy, yang membantah
penahanan mereka dibawah ISA bersifat perkauman, terutama di atas
kehendaknya supaya saya ditahan dibawah Akta itu kerana menyatakan
kepada orang Melayu supaya menyedari yang mereka bukan “Tuan” apabila
mereka terpaksa mencuci kasut orang lain. Jika mereka ingin menjadi
“Tuan”, mereka mesti menimba ilmu dan kecekapan untuk berjaya didalam
kehidupan. Dan apabila mereka berjaya martabat mereka akan meningkat
samada mereka dipanggil “Tuan” ataupun tidak.

Nampak jelas menurut Param Cumaswamy , bercakap mengenai orang Melayu adalah satu hasutan yang berbau perkauman.

Jadi siapa yang bersifat perkauman; Param Cumaraswamy atau Dr Mahathir?

Saya tidak akan meminta supaya dia ditahan.

Sebagai
seorang peguam yang memahami undang-undang, dia perlu menilai dirinya
samada dia seorang yang bersifat perkauman dan perlu ditahan atau tidak.

BOEING TECHNOLOGY – WHAT GOES UP MUST COME DOWN 138

Click Here

1. What goes up must come down. Airplanes can go up and stay up for long periods of time. But even they must come down eventually. They can land safely or they may crash. But airplanes don’t just disappear. Certainly not these days with all the powerful communication systems, radio and satellite tracking and filmless cameras which operate almost indefinitely and possess huge storage capacities.

2. I wrote about the disabling of MH370’s communication system as well as the signals for GPS. The system must have been disabled or else the ground station could have called the plane. The GPS too must have been disabled or else the flight of MH370 would have been tracked by satellites which normally provide data on all commercial flights, inclusive of data on location, kind of aircraft, flight number, departure airport and destination. But the data seems unavailable. The plane just disappeared seemingly from all screens.

3. MH370 is a Boeing 777 aircraft. It was built and equipped by Boeing. All the communications and GPS equipment must have been installed by Boeing. If they failed or have been disabled Boeing must know how it can be done. Surely Boeing would ensure that they cannot be easily disabled as they are vital to the safety and operation of the plane.

4. A search on the Internet reveals that Boeing in 2006 received a US patent for a system that, once activated, removes all control from pilots to automatically return a commercial airliner to a pre-determined landing location.

5. The Flightglobal.com article by John Croft, datelined Washington DC (1st December, 2006) further mentioned “The ‘uninterruptible’ autopilot would be activated – either by pilot, by on board sensors, or even remotely by radio or satellite links by government agencies like the Central Intelligence Agency, if terrorists attempt to gain control of the flight deck”.

6. Clearly Boeing and certain agencies have the capacity to take over “uninterruptible control” of commercial airliners of which MH370 B777 is one.

7. Can it not be that the pilot of MH370 lost control of their aircraft after someone directly or remotely activated the equipment for seizure of control of the aircraft.

8. It is a waste of time and money to look for debris or oil slick or to listen for “pings” from the black box. This is most likely not an ordinary crash after fuel was exhausted. The plane is somewhere, maybe without MAS markings.

9. Boeing should explain about this so-called anti-terrorism auto-land system. I cannot imagine the pilots made a soft-landing in rough seas and then quietly drown with the aircraft.

10. Someone is hiding something. It is not fair that MAS and Malaysia should take the blame.

11. For some reason the media will not print anything that involves Boeing or the CIA. I hope my readers will read this.

THE RULE OF LAW

1. One of the things associated with democracy is that Governments and the people must subscribe to the Rule of Law.

2. We all believe that if we do this, we will enjoy good governance and, the people would be protected through the application of laws.

3. But now we are seeing laws being used to do things that cannot be considered as democratic or even just.

4. For example people can elect the Government through elections. But now we see the Government of the people’s choice being replaced by a Government of the people rejected by them. The losers rule. The winners form the opposition.

5. You would think this is wrong. But the law says it is legal. It is therefore a part of the rule of law. We must accept.

6. In Sabah, State assemblymen who are supporters of the Government, suddenly left the Government. Why? The only explanation is that they had been bribed.

7. The Government had to be dissolved, a new election held and the people rejected in the original election now form the Government.

8. Again, this is legal. This is a part of the rule of law and must be accepted.

9. Then the former Ketua Menteri (Chief Minister) who faced 42 charges of financial wrong doings had all the charges withdrawn by the Attorney General (A.G.).

10. Again, it is all legal. The A.G. has the right to withdraw charges. The rule of law is not breached.

11. In another case, the accused gave back some of the money he was alleged to have stolen. He was discharged on the promise that he would return the rest of the money later on. It is also legal.

12. And now a man who bribed a minister was fined after he admitted to doing so. But the minister who accepted the bribe is discharged without being acquitted.

13. Again, it is completely legal and in accord with the Rule of Law.

14. Maybe later on even a man convicted of stealing millions of Government money will be pardoned. This too would be according to the law.

15. All these are in accordance with the law. Criminals can go unpunished. Crimes can be committed without fearing the law.

16. All are done according to the rule of law.

17. We are going to see criminals enjoying a free life according to the law.

18. It seems that the rule of law can be so abused that justice will not be done.