|Laman Webantu KM2A1: 3546 File Size: 8.0 Kb *|
MK: Pesongan Minda 'Sets Aside' atau 'Put Aside'
8/1/2001 12:17 am Mon
[Satu komen menarik mengenai penggunaan bahasa dalam akhbar untuk
memesong dan menyeleweng minda pembaca. Saya fikir rencana ini mesti
dibaca oleh semua. Bahasa itu dapat membina atau membunuh lebih banyak
jiwa..... Teknik membunuh melalui kata ini sudah lama digunakan
sehingga bukan sahaja Anwar menjadi mangsa, malah seluruh bangsa Melayu
turut tertipu oleh permainan kotor itu. Bukankah Mahathir 'pandai'
bermain kata? Siapa yang terbunuh jika tidak yang lemah antara kita?
Source: Bunga Raya
'PUTTING ASIDE' NOT 'SETTING ASIDE'
Lest it may be misunderstood, it is to be stated from the outset
that this is not to refute what has been written by Mr Iskandar.
It is just a point of clarification. I am not sure whether such a
clarfication will make any difference.
If one were to read the original text of the joint statement, one
will note that the Suqiu Committee has not agreed to 'set aside'
the 7 sub-points out of the 83 sub-point appeals.
What has been agreed upon by the Suqiu Committee is that the 7
sub-point appeals are to be 'PUT ASIDE' for the time being in the
light of ethnic tensions artificially created by some quarters.
The expression 'PUT ASIDE' has been translated into Bahasa as
'diketepikan' for want of more accurate word, I believe.
It has been agreed that the English version [with the expression
'PUT ASIDE'] is to be treated as the authoritative text.
This had been explained by the Chairman of the Suqiu in the
Nanyang Siang Pau yesterday [see Nanyang 6.1.01 at page 2] when
commenting on Bernama using the expression 'tarik balik' in its
The English and Malay mass media chose to use the expressions
'set aside' and 'tarik balik' instead of the original expression
'PUT ASIDE' [i.e. to be dealt with at a later date'. Were they
intended to create confusion among the readers? It is everbody's
----- Original Message -----
Subject: [reformasi-malaysia] Su Qiu's Defeat is a defeat to the
So, I suppose we should consider blackmailing as a legitimate
means of bringing about -- or preventing -- political change.
Finally, after standing firm for more than four months, from the
day our PM, Dr. Mahathir, gave that infamous Merdeka speech, Su
Qiu has finally caved in to the demands of a bunch of bigots -- I
insist on the term.
Well . is it good news for us, Malays? Many Malays certainly
would think so. Didn't those eight Reformasi sites came to the
defence of GPMS, when Suhaimi began issuing his threats?
This is sad! Truly sad. It only goes on to prove how primitive
our beloved nation still remains as far as political maturity
goes. To their credit -- fortunately -- Reformasi leadership
rejected those unprincipled "Perpaduan Melayu" talks. But still,
I am troubled.
Why should UMNO even think that we would fall for their ploy? Is
it because Malays in general still see everything through a
racist paradigm, that potentially, they would not mind
sacrificing the unity of our nation for some short-sighted
notions of Malay unity?
If that wasn't the case, then, my next question: Why did we never
see an overwhelming condemnation of UMNO's blatant racist
Here, we must have one thing very clear in our minds. Protection
of our interests is not one and the same as promotion of our
unity. Protection of our interests means promotion of our
wellbeing -- the wellbeing of all Malay people in Malaysia, rich
and poor alike. One the other hand, Malay unity need not promote
the wellbeing of all Malays. As matter of fact, Malay unity might
as well work against the interests of Malays!
Perhaps there was a time when Malay unity had a role -- when UMNO
was formed under the leadership of Onn Jafar. But, he himself,
the very founder of UMNO, rejected the concept of Malay unity
before long. He knew -- even then -- the fundamental difference
between Malay unity and Malay interests.
Let us see our present predicament. Malays clearly still need
some form of affirmative action to help them to lead a dignified
life. I am confident that we can still make a very persuasive
case in any forum, or debate. And one need not be a Malay person
to see the logic behind the need for such special measures.
But sadly, that was not how GPMS, and their sympathisers
approached the subject. They invented some obtuse, non-existent
social contract, which supposedly gave certain special rights to
us Malays! Since the day they issued the statement, I have tried
very hard to find any such contract -- I found none. It appears
that the notion suddenly emerged out of a blue only in late
1980s, after a talk given by one Dato Ibrahim in Singapore.
If anything, the framers of our Constitution, and those who made
the important amendments in 1971, wanted to create a united
Malaysian people. Our Rukunegara, which paved the way for the
formulation of NEP, clearly aims to achieve a national unity and
an equitable distribution of wealth. Nowhere does it mentions
[see Rukunegara: http://www.penerangan.gov.my/history/rukun11.html]
In any case, let us not delude ourselves here. As Malays, and as
Malaysians, we are not just competing with other non-Malay
Malaysians, we are competing -- and continue to compete -- with
the larger world. That is the fact. We have to compete with MNCs
and TNCs that have very, very deep pockets. These are our
competitors. We cannot afford to -- and we should not even dream
to -- maintain our present preferential policies forever -- if we
want to survive, if we at all care about our nation and
Viewed in that light, those Indians and Chinese, who also happen
to be our neighbours, are our allies -- they are our brothers and
sisters in arms, we need their help as much as they need ours.
The highwayman technique used by GPMS and UMNO is not only
perverse, it is also suicidal.
Therefore, I am utterly saddened by Su Qiu's retraction of their
appeals. Those appeals were not simply the appeals of the
Chinese-Malaysian community; those were our appeals -- Reformasi
appeals. We may not agree with all of them (and I don't with some
of them, in certain ways), but Su Qiu has every right -- as every
single one of us do -- to appeal; they, too, have every right to
question the fairness of the present discriminatory regime, which
clearly seemed to have veered totally off course.
We should have welcomed those 83-point appeals with open arms. We
should have been glad that a group of concerned Chinese-Malaysian
citizens were taking an initiative to change our nation for the
better. But, unfortunately, we dithered, and certain quarters
within our nation, has opted to pour fear in our hearts in order
to shape and mould new ghosts of racial tension, with the hope, I
presume, of diverting our attention from their failed policies.
Pray tell, what is there to fear? Gone were the days when the
postion of the Malay majority was threatened; now, we are well
entrenched. And, what's more, Malay share of the Malaysian
population is ever increasing. There is simply no way a minority
community could do anything without our approval, and that is the
political reality. At this juncture, the most appropriate course
is to discard our siege mentality; we should to embrace
magnanimity; and we should behave confidently - but alas, our
Malay leaders have chosen narrow self-interest and worst,
I lament that we didn't do more to support Su Qiu!