Bahasa Power 9/9/2008

1. Gejala lidah berbisa yang sering mematuk tangkai hati dan jantung orang, pembawaan daripada Abdul Rahim Kajai ini turun kepada muridnya - Ali Bukhari Amir Harakahdaily.net 8/9/2008

2. Satu program yang begitu melucukan, ketika umat Islam mendakap erat bulan penuh keberkatan dan kakitangan kerajaan dilarang mengadakan program di luar negara. Ahmad Lutfi Othman Harakahdaily.net 8/9/2008

3. Karim Raslan 9 september 2008 Sinar Harian

Bagi mereka yang ingin tahu mengenai kesan terhadap meningkatnya peranan raja dan kemungkinan campur tangan tentera, apa yang terjadi di Thailand boleh dijadikan panduan. Pada dasarnya kedua-dua institusi itu mengakui bahawa mereka tidak tahu bagaimana hendak menangani permintaan dan bantahan rakyat. Rakyat sedar bahaya yang mereka hadapi kerana melanggar peraturan istana dan tentera.

Bagaimanapun, apa yang jelas ialah Raja Bhumibol dan tentera Thai akan memainkan peranan penting dalam menentukan pihak mana yang betul. Bagaimana pun Ketua Turus Angkatan Tentera, Jeneral Anupong Paochina telah mengistiharkan bahawa pasukannya, juga polis, hanya akan bertindak ‘untuk menyuraikan penunjuk perasaan secara aman” dan tidak mahu “menjadikan keadaan lebih buruk”.

Pendek kata, walaupun Samak telah menyerahkan kepada pihak tentera dalam hal yang terjadi sekarang, adalah jelas bahawa dalam jangka panjang hanya orang politik yang dapat menyelesaikan masalah di Thailand. Walaupun ada raja dan tentera, kedua institusi ini tidak bersedia menangani jurang perbezaan yang besar dalam kerajaan. Krisis ini akan menyaksikan sama ada kelahiran semua demokrasi Thai atau tidak ada demokrasi selamanya.

Sementara istana dan tentera adalah sesuatu yang diperlukan dan dihormati di negara kita, mereka tidak mempunyai kunci untuk masa depan kita.

4. Rahman Shaari 9 september 2008 Sinar Harian

Sarjana Media, J. Habermas agak kerap menyebut istilah ruang awam (public sphere). Ruang awam ialah ruang perbincangan dan penyuaraan pendapat umum tanpa kawalan pemerintah.

Pertimbangan awam ialah pertimbangan yang bersandarkan timbang asa yang penuh hati-hati untuk mendapatkan penyelesaian.

Apabila rakyat berupaya memasuki ruang awam, pembangkang atau kerajaan hendaklah bersuara dengan cermat, tidak emosional dan tidak perlu mutak. Kedua-dua pihak hanya perlu berkata yang benar. Kita sudah menemukan ahli UMNO berjalan sekali dengan ahli PKR dan lebih hebat lagi ahli Pas berbual-bual mesra dengan ahli DAP. Memang itu tidak mustahil sejak dulu, tetapi yang mahu ditegaskan di sini ialah bahawa rakyat kian memahami hakikat "political animals”; atau lebih lembut lagi di sebut pelakon politik.

Tidaklah terlalu sukar untuk memahami dunia politik, tetapi bagi yang merasakan politik itu memeningkan, berjaraklah saja, atau ikutlah nasihat Dr. Zakaria Ali: leave politics to the politicians.

Legasi A Samad Ismail

(Cabutan daripada tulisan Abdul Shukur Harun, HARAKAH 8-11 September, 2008 bil 1373.)

Tan Sri A. Samad Ismail meninggalkan dunia pada 5.58 petang 4 September 2008.

Beliau dilahirkan di Singapura pada 18 April 1924. Mendapat kelulusan Senior Cambridge lalu terus bekerja sebagai pemberita di Utusan Melayu Singapura sehinggalah memegang jawatan Timbalan Ketua Pengarang Utusan membantu Almarhum Tun Yusuf Ishak (Presiden Republik Singapura yang pertama). Apabila berlaku krisis di Utusan beliau ditukarkan ke Jakarta pada tahun 1957, sebagai wakil Utusan di sana.

Beliau hanya pulang ke Malaya pada 1958 dan tidak bertugas dengan Utusan kemudian beliau dipanggil untuk memimpin Berita Harian Singapura. Beliau kemudiannya berpindah ke Kuala Lumpur dan menjadi Pengarang Berita Harian Malaysia disamping menjadi penolong kanan kepada Ketua Pengarang NST, Tan Si Lee Siew Yee, sehinggalah beliau kemudiannya dilantik sebagai Timbalan Ketua Pengarang NST merangkap Managing Editornya.

Almarhum juga pernah disumbat ke dalam penjara. Pertama pada tahun 1945 ketika British kembali berkuasa di Singapura kerana pejuangannya menentang penjajah British. Kedua daripada tahun 1951 sehingga 1953 oleh penjajah British juga. Selepas merdeka pada tahun 1976 sehingga 1981 di tahan di bawah ISA kerana di dituduh bersubahat dengan kegiatan komunis walaupun beliau menafikan sekeras-kerasnya. Tangkap ini lebih terkenal sebagai tangkapan tiga Abdul.

Bersama-sama dengan Ishak Haji Muhammad (Pak Sako), Dr. Burhanudin Al-Helmy, Ahmad boestamam, Ibrahim Yakub dan lain-lain pejuang yang gigih telah menentang penjajahan British dan Jepun.

Bersama-sama dengan Keris Mas, Uthman Awang, Asaf, Cikgu Arif (Mas), Masuri SN dan lain-lain mengasaskan Angkatan Sasterawan '50 (Asas 50) berslogankan 'Seni Untuk Masyarakat" sebuah organisasi sastera yang telah dengan jayanya melakar sejarah penting, di mana secara aktif, melalui karya mereka telah meniupkan semangat perjuangan kemerdekaan, di samping membela kaum tertindas dan berjuang menegakkan keadilan sosial.

Bahasa Power

8/9/08

1. - biar betul….bukan saja ngok tetapi bodoh pulak.. bukan saja bodoh, bangang pulak bukan saja bangang… biol pulak… bukan saja biol… tres imbiciles… le grand fou… beatles ada lagu dream ??? kah kah kah.

2. Aku masih tidak dapat membuka simpul kusut fikir tentang ini

Sunday, September 07, 2008

HORMATILAH SUARA HATI MELAYU DAN ISLAM
Ruhanie Ahmad

Kali ini kita berpuasa dalam suasana maruah orang Melayu dan umat Islam sedang diperkotak-katikkan oleh sesetengah pihak tertentu akibat mainan politik segelintir pembesar Melayu sendiri, khususnya pembesar utama UMNO.

Akibat pendirian yang takut kehilangan sokongan bukan Melayu di era pasca PRU12, segelintir pembesar Melayu ini seolah-olah lupa bahawa power-base mereka adalah Melayu, terutamanya UMNO.

Bila orang Melayu, umat Islam dan UMNO menyuara dan membicarakan hakikat dan kebenaran sejarah yang menyentuh entik lain di negara ini, kelompok pembesar ini pun memaksa orang Melayu, umat Islam dan UMNO memohon maaf.

Tapi, bila entik lain melemparkan tuduhan semberono terhadap orang Melayu, umat Islam dan UMNO, pembesar ini pula tidak menuntut mereka memohon maaf.

Kita ambil contoh Hindraf. Akhir tahun 2007, NGO tidak berdaftar ini mengheret Malaysia dan UMNO ke pelantar antarabangsa dengan tuduhan amat serius – kononnya UMNO melakukan pembersihan etnik keturunan India dan Perlembagaan Persekutuan kononnya menindas entik bukan Melayu di Malaysia.

Pemimpin nombor satu Malaysia pun memberikan reaksinya – ini pengkhianatan of the highest order, katanya. Setakat itu saja. Lepas itu, apa yang telah terjadi kita semua pun tau. Kalau saya ulangi di sini, tentu saya akan dituduh sebagai menghasut.

Jiwa Nurani Melayu

Tapi, perlu saya tegaskan di sini bahawa apa yang terjadi selepas demonstrasi Hindraf itu memang amat menghiris sebilangan besar jiwa orang Melayu dan nurani umat Islam. Adakah pemimpin nombor satu Malaysia insaf akan hakikat ini?

Adakah pemimpin nombor satu Malaysia sedar bahawa cara dan tindakan kerajaan menangani Hindraf amat berbeza dengan cara kerajaan menangani demonstrasi umat Islam di Kuala Terengganu menjelang Ramadhan 2007?

Adakah beliau sedar, cara dan tindakan kerajaan menangani demonstrasi umat Islam di Kuala Terengganu tahun lalu, amat berbeza dengan cara kerajaan menangani bangkangan sekumpulan penternak babi di Melaka yang tergamak menginjak-injak bendera Malaysia dan melemparkan bom molotov kepada pihak penguatkuasa undang-undang kerajaan?

Mengapakah penternak babi yang terang-terang menginjak-injak bendera Malaysia di hadapan mata para pegawai kerajaan tidak di heret ke muka poengadilan? Mengapa pula sekumpulan anak muda Melayu yang hanya dituduh kononnya menginjak-injak dan membakar jalur gemilang di Kuala Terengganu diburu hingga ke lubang cacing?

Mengapakah penternak babi yang membaling molotov kepada pihak berkuasa kerajaan tidak diapa-apakan oleh pihak polis? Mengapakah polis tergamak melepaskan dua das tembakan dengan peluru hidup terhadap pendemonstrasi di Kuala Terengganu? Bagaimana agaknya jika tembakan itu mengakibatkan dua pemuda terbabit itu terbunuh?

Double Standard

Adakah beliau sedar bahawa cara dan tindakan kerajaan mengangi demonstrasi umat Islam di Kuala Terengganu pada September 2007 juga amat berbeza dengan cara dan tindakan kerajaan menangani demonstrasi membabitkan beribu-ribu kaum India di hadapan Pejabat PM di Putrajaya juga tahun lalu?

Mengapa jadi begini? Adakah bila umat Islam dan orang Melayu yang bertindak menyuarakan isi hati mereka terhadap kerajaan maka mereka boleh dilayani secara kasar dan diluar batas undang-undang?Adakah bila rakyat bukan Melayu bertindak menyuarakan isi hati mereka yang mengguris jiwa orang Melayu dan umat Islam perlu dilayani secara lembut kerana takut tindakan keras akan menjejaskan status quo sokongan mereka terhadap kerajaan?

Saya imbas semula insiden-insiden di atas untuk membangkitkan soal pokok dan prinsip, iaitu mengapakah kerajaan seolah-olah tidak adil terhadap orang Melayu dan umat Islam di bumi ini mutakhir ini? Dan, mengapakah kerajaan mutakhir ini amat berlembut dan cukup bertoleransi terhadap bukan Melayu yang mempertikaikan peruntukan Perlembagaan Persekutuan?

Apa yang saya tegaskan di atas bukan mempersoalkan tindakan polis. Ini kerana polis hanya ikut arahan kerajaan. Apa yang saya persoalkan ialah tindakan kerajaan yang double standard terhadap Melayu dan bukan Melayu kebelakangan ini.

Bukan Hasutan

Jadi, ini bukan suara hasutan. Ini suara yang mencari kedailan dan kebenaran bagi pihak orang Melayu dan umat Islam yang kebelakangan ini seolah-olah jadi warganegara kelas ketiga di tanahairnya sendiri.

Soal ini juga saya lahirkan sewaktu kita menjalani ibadat puasa kerana ibadat ini juga yang mendorong saya untuk terus mencari kebenaran dan keadilan untuk orang Melayu dan umat Islam.

Bagaimanapun, orang Melayu dan umat Islam tidak tergamak membawa kemarahan mereka ke jalanraya seperti warga Thailand mutakhir ini. Sebab itulah mereka rela membekam kemarahan itu di jiwa masing-masing secara senyap. Tetapi, bukankah akhirnya terbukti bahawa segolongan orang Melayu dan umat Islam telah meleraikan kemarahan itu secara demokratik menerusi peti undi baru-baru ini?

Mingguan Malaysia 7 September 2008, memetik Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sebagai berkata di Pulau Pinang pada 6 September 2008, bahawa “semua pihak” tidak wajar mensensasikan isu sensitif sehingga menimbulkan rasa marah dan tidak senang hati di kalangan kaum di negara ini.

Menurut Abdullah, perkara yang berkaitan dengan agama, kontrak sosial atau melibatkan perkauman tidak sepatutnya ditimbulkan kerana ia akan menyebabkan kaum-kaum berkenaan berasa bahawa sensitiviti mereka diketepikan.

Punca Keresahan

“Saya ingin menyatakan bahawa kebelakangan ini saya lihat perkara berkaitan dengan kaum sudah menjadi perkara yang menimbulkan keresahan dan rasa tidak senang hati di antara kaum-kaum yang ada di negara kita sama ada orang Melayu atau bukan Melayu.

“Apa yang berlaku itu kononnya adalah kebebasan untuk bercakap dan menyuarakan pandangan sesuka hati mengikut apa yang dirasai oleh orang berkenaan, ini adalah perkara yang tidak sepatutnya berlaku,” katanya.

Saya ucapkan syabas kepada Abdullah kerana akhirnya beliau seolah-olah jadi insaf dan tegas. Tapi, bukankah ini sudah terlambat? Bukankah kelambatan ini menjadi sebahagian punca keresahan orang Melayu dan umat Islam mutakhir ini?

Saya desak Abdullah berterus-terang, pihak manakah yang kebelakangan ini banyak mempersoalkan isu “agama, kontrak sosial atau melibatkan perkauman”?

Saya juga desak Abdullah berikan jawapan, tidak adilkah jika orang Melayu dan umat Islam menangkis seluruh suara yang membabitkan “agama, kontrak sosial atau perkauman”? Mengapa tidak boleh? Kerana kerajaan takut hilang sokongan pihak berkenaan walaupun mereka sudah gagal memelihara sensitiviti Malaysia?

Jika inilah hakikatnya, di manakah keadilannya kepada orang Melayu dan umat Islam? Adakah adil bila hanya orang Melayu dan umat Islam sahaja yang diminta untuk membisukan suara, hati dan perasaan mereka buat selama-lamanya?

Posted by kudakepang at 3:23 AM

Bar Council is legally RIGHT but politically WRONG

by TEH TARIK

Was it within our “rights” as non-Malays to celebrate the Opposition’s victories on the night of March 8? Yes. But was it wise?

No. We all knew that it was politically “wrong” as the Barisan could use it to create a May 13 “emergency”. And so we stayed at home.

Was it within the Bar Council’s “rights” to hold an intellectual legal discussion about Muslim converts? Of course.

But was it wise? Knowing that Umno people were fanning the flames of Malay-Muslim insecurities? I doubt it.

Was it within Karpal Singh’s “rights” to comment about the Malay’s most sensitive issues – Islam and the Sultans – when he declared that the Perak Mentri Besar was legally “correct” to transfer the state’s Muslim affairs chief despite the Sultan’s displeasure? Sure.

But that was not a court case and I believe Karpal (whom I otherwise respect for his life-long political contributions) was politically “wrong” to stir the hornet’s nest then.

Was it within Karpal’s “rights” to warn PAS that they might be kicked out of Pakatan for secretly talking to Umno?

Well, excuse me, but since when was the Pakatan “owned” by DAP and PKR?

Why are we walking into Umno’s trap? We already know that their game plan is to stimulate decades-old Malay fears about “losing out” to the non-Malays. These are deep-seated fears, played up by Umno since 1946, of how the Malays may end up like the Red Indians of North America – swamped, and “losing their land” to the “pendatang” or immigrants.

These fears are not entirely amenable to “rational” debate. Even the PAS ceramah speaker, Mat Sabu, publicly asks his audiences, why oh why, despite revealing – for years - how Umno’s corruption and abuses have been cheating the ordinary Malays, do they STILL vote for Umno?

It’s like a sheer habit, deeply programmed by Malay society, ingrained from youth and perpetuated by the mass media that Umno = Malay Salvation. When people have been eating rice as their staple since childhood, you can’t suddenly ask them to switch to bread, no matter how many vitamins and minerals you say are in the latter. Getting people out of their comfort zones is a very tricky business.

To all the commentators of Malaysia-Today (many non-Muslims I suspect) who have been loudly cheering along to Raja Petra’s bashing of the Malay malpractice of Islam, yes we have every “right” to heap criticism, and we may even be intellectually “right” in our arguments, but we could be very politically “wrong” – especially in this sensitive transition period.

It’s one thing when a Malay with royal blood says it. But – like it or not – it’s quite another when we non-Malays say the same thing with similar vehemence. In fact, I can imagine a Biro Tatanegara guy using the comments as “proof” to brain wash Malay students that the non-Malays are against them.

Isn’t the Opposition about a “pakatan” of inter-racial co-operation, understanding and (dare I say it) love? Why is there so much hatred being flung about in the comments?

I wish we could have more of that comradeship as displayed by the younger Pakatan Perak state leaders as opposed to the acrimony of the old guard of Hadi and Karpal. It's amazing to hear Nizar speaking in Mandarin and Nga Kor Ming speaking about Islamic concepts.

And I admire the elegant, understated way Nik Aziz replied to Karpal’s blasting of PAS over the secret “Malay unity” talks. “Dia orang tua, saya pun orang tua. Kita hormat dia, dia pun kena hormat kita.”

Before we get overly carried away with the political tsunami of March 8, let’s not forget that the Malay swing vote to Pakatan was only 5%. Sure, many of the more well-exposed urban Malays this time voted against Barisan but what about the mass of rural Malay voters who read the racial incitement of Utusan Malaysia every other day?

And let’s never forget that whatever new Pakatan Federal govt we are hoping for can only come to power with Malay support. To alienate the crucial Malay fence-sitters now – by holding events such as the Bar Council public forum knowing full well that Umno’s agents are ready to create trouble - seems rather unwise.

In fact, if we remember, Raja Petra himself had written an article sometime in March or April to point out that the Malays themselves were ambivalent about the March 8 tsunami. About how many Malays had cast protest votes against Umno without quite expecting such spectacular Opposition victories. Well, everybody was surprised by the stunning results.

Suddenly, the Malays were faced with the prospect of Chinese Deputy Mentri Besar’s in Selangor and Perak. Suddenly, in a burst of newfound enthusiasm, Teresa Kok let slip in her blog that the FIRST big Selangor project was the huge pig farm. Suddenly, Lim Guan Eng’s remarks about abuses in the NEP were twisted to make it look like the Malays were under siege. Suddenly, the Malays seemed to face a shift of their staple diet from rice to bread.

In these circumstances, how do we expect the fence-sitter Malays to react? We can argue that, “rationally”, they should not THINK that way. But surely politics is more about perception and FEELINGS, not hard logical facts. Similarly, smokers may intellectually KNOW that cigarettes are bad, but hell, smoking FEELS damn good.

Sensing unease in the Malay ground, certain PAS leaders even saw it fit to secretly negotiate with Umno on the basis of “Malay unity” against, presumably, the non-Malays who seemed to be getting a bit too “uppity” and “kurang ajar”.

What I can’t understand is: given that many PAS members were upset about the merger with Umno, and knowing that Nik Aziz was struggling to manoeuvre within his party against it, why did Karpal choose his sledgehammer approach of literally “warning” PAS to get out of Pakatan? Was this non-Muslim “lecture” the way to convince the PAS grassroots to stay away from Umno? Or was it a grandstanding move to play “hero” to DAP supporters?

I realise I am conceding that we non-Malays are second-class citizens but then again, so what’s new? Will bulldozing our way and hitting a brick wall, like in the Bar Council forum, change that? It’s the male method to confront things head on, but if we want to do that, we had better bloody well make sure we have superior strength. Given the way Malaysian society is structured, are the non-Malays stronger?

The Bar Council can claim to have achieved a moral “victory” of being proved “right” against so-called Islamic “brutes”, but it is still a hollow, Pyrrhic victory which gives the converts’ families no new relief. And what if Umno decides to push through laws that are even more “unfair”?

Is it not better to yield (or at least appear to yield) and walk around obstacles with quiet negotiations? Is that not how women get better treatment, through the soft way?

By holding events like the Bar Council forum, we are merely pouring petrol on these underlying embers of Malay fears. With rampant inflation, crime, corruption and a global economic slow down, with all due respect to those few families caught in conversion situations, is this an issue we HAVE to push NOW? And jeopardise everything else? What are our priorties?

Why can’t we at least wait till the Pakatan govt comes into power? And then, after say two or three years, when our bigger problems have been settled, when the people of Malaysia (especially the majority Malays) can FEEL the benefits of a cleaner and better govt in their guts and soul, okay-lah, we can initiate a “slow talk” on these issues.

I don’t know if it’s because the lawyer types are fond of arguing court battles and having that “high” of being proved intellectually “right” (and hence superior?). Perhaps these same lawyer types, who live in upper middle-class or middle class urban comfort should also consider the needs of poorer urban squatters, factory/estate workers, Sarawakian longhouse dwellers, Sabahan schools with no electricity etc etc who urgently need the Pakatan to come in and stop the looting of this country.

There is a time and place for intellectual discussions over sensitive topics, and I humbly submit now (when Umno has created a Malays-under-siege situation) is certainly the politically “wrong” moment to engage in them.Like it or not, the non-Malays are a minority in this country. And the Malays know that, hence the enduring attraction of “Malay unity”.

The Bar Council forum has also pushed PAS into a corner and they had no choice but to demonstrate against it too, for how could they be seen to be “selling out” Muslim “rights”?

To be fair to PAS, they had already compromised by not emphasising their goal of an “Islamic state” in the last elections. They had agreed to co-operate on the common ground of fighting Barisan’s corruption and abuses.

Do we non-Muslims want to push them all the way to the wall and harp on the weakest point in the Pakatan co-operation - religion? Are we going for blood? Are we that stupid?

We are all Asians and we all want face. Reading the comments in Malaysia-Today about how the Malays are “insecure” and “can’t discuss rationally” etc etc, all I can say is, OK good-la, you know alreadeee... WHY SOME MORE YOU GO AND POKE these raw nerves?

All races have their strengths. I personally feel that the Malays are a more warm-hearted, easy-going, friendly and graceful sort of people – except in religion. The Chinese are hard working, great in business and disciplined - as their religion is money. The Indians are excellent with debates and they are heavily represented in speaking up for our rights as NGO/trade union activists, and yes, lawyers.

And we know the flip side of these strengths too, don’t we? When the Malays are too easy-going, when the Chinese become coldly calculating and when the Indians get overly argumentative.

I am in danger of over-generalising, but then again, when we crack racial jokes, why do we laugh? Because something rings true?

A Chinese friend who used to do marketing surveys told me: “If we go to a Malay housing area, they will have time to talk to us, occasionally they will even invite us for tea. But in a Chinese area, they usually can’t even be bothered to open the gate. Indians may start to debate and lecture us.”

Another Chinese woman swears that, “Malays are more romantic. Chinese are more practical but colder. Indian men are fun to talk to but, aiyo, too much ego.”

A Chinese press photographer says, “If we need help from strangers, Malays are usually willing to help us pose a bit to make our pictures look better. Chinese don’t want to `get involved’. Indians, even though we don’t ask them, will come running to be inside the photo.”

A Malay architect once told me, “The Malays like to talk about things in a graceful roundabout way instead of coming right out to ask for it. The Chinese are more direct and business-like.”

Are these racial stereotypes correct? I suspect many may agree that they are broadly true even though there will always be exceptions. And for the Malays, the BIG exception is when we touch the topic of religion.

So why don’t we non-Malays build bridges with the Malays based on the strong points that they have? Instead of harping on the hot buttons? The Pakatan is fragile and we urgently need “confidence building” measures. Thus the non-Malays should reciprocate the Malay’s natural friendliness and warmth, and understand their fears/insecurities, by making concessions here and there. Just as PAS has conceded on the Islamic State issue. Let’s all give each other more face-lah...

If there are any issues, “kita boleh cakap slow” later in a polite, graceful and “sopan-santun” Malay way instead of having public forums that look (or are made to look) like a confrontation. Politics is all in the perception.

We non-Malays should be aware that too much emphasis on legal “rights” may result in political “wrongs”. We should know who will be the loser then.