Monday, October 7, 2013

Kelantan leads the way in studying Mandarin


Kelantan, the "most Malay state" in Malaysia, has proportionately more Malays studying Chinese than anywhere in the country.

This surprising phenomenon was reported by the Singapore Straits Times, which noted that it was common to find Malays in the state enrolling their children in Chinese-language schools or attending Chinese-language classes offered in religious schools.

Many Kelantanese take their cue from their beloved and revered Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, the former menteri besar, whose five grandchildren are enrolled in Chinese schools.
Nik Aziz is held up as a prime example of someone who encourages the younger generation of Kelantanese to take up the Chinese language.

Kelantan, with a population of 1.6 million, is comprised of 95% Malays, the remainder made up of Chinese, Thai and Indian communities.

Although more parents in Malaysia send their children to Chinese schools and tuition classes, the concentration of Malay students in these classes is much higher in Kelantan.

The Straits Times recently went to one of the east-coast state's religious schools and saw how female students in baju kurungs and Muslim veils were learning to read and speak in Mandarin and write in Chinese.

The students attending Chinese classes at the Tarbiyah Mardhiyah Religious Secondary School were taught by 51-year old Wang Yin Kang, a Chinese-Muslim teacher from Yunnan, China.

Wang teaches Mandarin to 160 students weekly and has lived in Kelantan for 18 years. He had initially gone to the state to do a diploma in Arabic studies and decided to stay behind after being offered a position to teach Mandarin and Arabic languages in several religious schools.

"I was initially surprised that Malay students would be willing to take up Mandarin classes. Then I realised it was because they believed it would enhance their job prospects," Wang told The Straits Times.

"Many have come to realise that China is a fast-growing country and its investments are everywhere."
Some of Wang's students were also members of the Chinese language society. Under Wang's supervision, they took up drama classes and participated out dialogues in Mandarin.

It is as if many Malays in Kelantan were following to the letter a saying attributed to Prophet Muhammad, "Seek knowledge even as far as China", the paper noted.

The Kelantan state government has a role in this phenomenon – it has been funding Mandarin classes in schools, and has sent three Malay-Muslim teaching college graduates to China in 2009.

Besides sending the graduates to China to learn Mandarin, the state government has also hired teachers from China to come to Malaysia to conduct Mandarin classes.

Although statistics on Malay student enrollment in public Chinese vernacular schools is not readily available, PAS's non-Muslim wing, the PAS Supporters Congress, said it was a fair number.

The wing's chairman Hu Pang Chaw told The Straits Times that between 20% and 50% of the student population in Kelantan's 15 Chinese primary and two secondary schools were Malays.

Hu revealed that two-thirds of the students population in a Chinese primary school in Rantau Panjang were Malays.

In contrast, there is only an average of 10% Malay students enrolled at Chinese vernacular schools in other states.

Researcher Heng Buai Chin said the Kelantan government's move to encourage Malay students to enrol in Chinese vernacular schools promotes integration among students of other races.
"Malay students in Chinese vernacular schools tend to be more open to accepting Chinese culture such as movies, counting and thinking in Chinese," she was quoted by The Straits Times as saying.

This is perhaps illustrated by Form Five student Wan Ashikin Ismail, who attends a Chinese vernacular school, said her best friends were Chinese and they conversed in Mandarin.
"I am not treated differently by students or teachers. I am also constantly motivated to excel in my studies," said the 16-year-old who aspired to be a Mandarin novelist in the future, as quoted by the paper.

[Source: The MI]

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

Malaysia Parliament or New Delhi Parliament

Some times our Parliamentary seating has its own light moments.  Here we have the two Yang Berhormats, Umno MP, Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim (BN-Baling) and PKR MP, G Manivannan (PKR-Kapar) having their exchanges during a Q&A session over the ashes of Chin Peng.  Even the Speaker of the House, Pandikar Amin Mulia, was at a loss as he could not understand anything that was said in Tamil. Dr Hatta Ramli (PAS-Kuala Krai) stood to say he thought he was in the "New Delhi Parliament" and not in the Malaysian Parliament.



Sunday, September 29, 2013

Can you honestly believe this guy?

After reading the full text of Najib's speech, I must have thought it was another person making the speech at the UN General Assembly.  Yes, it is Najib alright and I just simply can't believe he could say those things with a straight face in front of an international gathering. 
 
So what I have done is to post the full text of the speech here with my remarks marked in red just to show how contradictory this man can be.  He will say one thing, but will do the opposite when it suits him.

 

Mr President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Allow me to begin by congratulating you, Mr President, on your election. I offer you Malaysia’s full cooperation and support as you seek to further the cause of peace and prosperity.

Ladies and gentlemen,
Three years ago, I stood before you and called for a Global Movement of Moderates. It was a call to reject extremism in all its forms.

Because the real divide is not between East and West or between the developed and developing worlds or between Muslims, Christians and Jews.

It is between moderates and extremists of all religions.

Much has changed since 2010. Then, a current of protest and reform surged through the Middle East and North Africa.  Out of the heat of the Arab Spring, new questions arose: about the pace of democratic change, about the role of Islam in politics, and about the need for more inclusive development.

But the search for answers to those questions has been put on hold.

As authoritarian regimes have fallen, and governments have been swept away by political change, extremists have tried to fill the space that remains.

Motivated by ideology, politics and religion, they have sought refuge from the hard work of development in the unholy practice of violence.

Conflicts have spilled across borders, inflaming old tensions, and igniting new ones. Around the world, extremism is taking lives and crushing opportunity.

This affects us all; but it is one people, of one faith, who suffer most. I believe the greatest threat to Muslims today comes not from the outside world, but from within.

The conflict between Sunni and Shia threatens the lives and livelihoods of millions of Muslims. Our religion – founded on peace, and premised on tolerance – is being twisted by extremists, who are deploying false arguments to foster division and justify violence.  [You are so right.  Islam is a religion of peace, and premised on tolerance, but here in Malaysia, it has been twisted by the likes of UMNO BARU, PERSASA, JATI, PERKIDA, JAKIM, JAIS, MAIS, etc.  Furthermore, the Shias in this country do not harm anybody. So why persecute them?]

Across the Islamic world, extremists are wrapping their perverse agenda in religious cloth; tearing families, countries and the ummah apart.

With each new atrocity, tensions are wound tighter, and peace seems further away.

The corrosive influence of extremism cannot be easily countered. But we are not powerless to act. I believe moderation in religion and the political process can stem the loss of life and liberty in the Muslim world. [If you believe that moderation can stem the misery of mankind, why are you an extremist yourself by persecuting the Christians in this country?]

Behind the tragic violence, there is a battle being waged for the future of Islam. By reaffirming our commitment to moderation – and solving the political problems that drive instability – we can seize back the centre ground.  [Seized back the centre ground?  I don't see you even making an attempt in doing it here.]

We can marginalise the extremists. And we can advance an agenda for peace, harmony and justice.
[Marginalise the extremists?  Then may we ask why are people like Mahathir Mohamad, Ibrahim Ali, Hasan Ali, Ridhuan Tee, and UTUSAN allowed to roam freely with their pervacious writings?]

Ladies and gentlemen,
Around the world, Muslims have watched in despair as conflict tears into some of our oldest communities. Rarely in our history has the ummah faced violence on this scale.

Right now, the world’s attention is rightly focused on Syria. United Nations investigators have concluded that the focus of the war has shifted along ethnic and religious lines, and become ‘overtly sectarian’.

A conflict which began with anti-government protests threatens to descend into a war of ethnic cleansing.

With fighters from Hezbollah engaging on Syrian soil, the conflict now threatens Lebanon too.
Last month, after car bombs killed dozens in Beirut, 42 people died in explosions outside Sunni mosques.

Communities are dividing along religious lines, with hard-line preachers urging violence between Sunni and Shia.

Meanwhile, the security situation in Iraq continues to unravel, as Sunni extremist groups and Shia militia struggle for control.

In the last four months, nearly 3,000 people have been killed. In the last week alone, three funerals have been bombed in Baghdad. Women and children have been blown apart whilst mourning.

Again, the violence is carried out between Sunni and Shia. In one Iraqi town, four children from one Shia family were slain with knives.

In another, local people – neighbours for generations – have built blast walls to keep themselves apart. Forced displacements are growing.

In Pakistan, bombings have wrecked the city of Quetta, killing hundreds. Revenge attacks spread to Lahore; bombs have been detonated in Karachi.

In August, militants ambushed buses, dividing the passengers according to belief; those who answered incorrectly were executed.

Each of these conflicts has a distinct cause, but they follow a darkly familiar path.

Emboldened by political failures, radical preachers and militant groups turn civil conflicts into wider religious wars. Yet the preaching of such violence is completely counter to the Islamic faith.

The Quran not only condemns suicide, unjust war, and retribution by force; it also makes clear the Prophet’s desire for Muslims to live in peace with one another and their neighbours.
Verse 8:61 says, ‘And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah’. Verse 5:32, that ‘whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely’. And verse 2:256 holds that ‘there shall be no compulsion in religion’.

It should come as no surprise that there is no scriptural basis for the atrocities being committed in the name of Islam. Under the six higher objectives of Islamic law, the first and foremost is the protection and preservation of life.

Yet even during Ramadan, our holy month - when contemplation, devotion and compassion reign uppermost in Muslim minds - the extremists would not stop. More than 4,400 people died this Ramadan in Syria; 371 in Iraq; 120 in Pakistan.

This is a burden we can no longer afford to bear. It is time to end the killing, and concentrate instead on building a common agenda for peace and prosperity. There are two things we can do.
First of all, I believe that peace-loving Muslims – the overwhelming majority of Muslims – should unite against the extremists who use our religion as an excuse to commit violence.

And one of the most powerful tools we have to do so is al-wasatiyyah: the practice of moderation.
Verse 2:143 of the Quran says that ‘we have made you into a community that is justly balanced’. This concept – of balance and moderation, of social justice within our faith – is a central tenet of Islam. It asks of us that we hold to the principles displayed by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in the Medina Charter.  [Are Ibrahim Ali, Hasan Ali, Ridhuan Tee, Mahathir Mohamad and UTUSAN aware of this tenet?]

Our task is to reclaim our faith, by articulating clearly the true nature of Islam: the religion of peace, of moderation, of tolerance. [But then, why are Ibrahim Ali, Hasan Ali, Ridhuan Tee, Mahathir Mohamad and UTUSAN acting to the contrary?]

We should speak this message clearly, so that all may hear it; and stand firm against the minority who use Islam to further violent and unjust ends.

We should not mistake moderation for weakness. To face those baying for violence and call instead for calm is a sign not of frailty, but of strength.

Muslim leaders should speak up and condemn such violence, lest their silence is mistaken for acceptance.  [We don't hear you speaking up against the likes of Ibrahim Ali, Hasan Ali, Ridhuan Tee and Mahathir Mohammad?]

Moderation can be practiced at the national level, as is the case in Malaysia, by choosing mutual respect and inclusivity, and strengthening the bonds between different communities and faiths. [Najib, you are joking, right?]

All countries should reinforce their commitment to the principles of moderation; not just in religion, but for sustainable development and stable economic growth. [Again, cakap tak serupa bikini].

Moderation can also direct regional policy. It sits at the heart of Malaysia’s efforts to bring peace to the southern Philippines, and to Thailand’s restive south. [Yah, yah, yah .... *yawn* ]

And ASEAN, which endorsed the Global Movement of Moderates, has made a commitment to peaceful settlement and the non use of force in territorial disputes.
And at the international level, moderation can guide our approach to the great global challenges of our age: violent extremism, sustainable development, and equitable growth. [Let's look in your own backyard first.]

Secondly, we should give our all to resolve the political problems which raise tensions in the Muslim world – starting with Syria.

We cannot underline strongly enough the need for a Syrian-led inclusive political process.

Malaysia is against any unilateral action to resolve the conflict. All sides must come together to work out a political settlement. [Then, why is it that decisions on delicate matters here are not discussed with 'all sides' before actions are being taken, even with component parties of the BN?  Decisions are made unilaterally by UMNO Baru and UMNO Baru alone.]

We welcome the recent US-Russia Framework Agreement, condemn without reservation the use of chemical weapons, and call on the international community to intensify their efforts to explore all possible diplomatic options for peace under the auspices of the UN.

We must also find the vision and the political will to commit to a just solution for Palestine. [Why don't UMNO Baru take the initiative to be a peacemaker for once, or is it that you don't have the stomach for it?  At least Norway got Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin to sign the Oslo Accord.]

We fervently hope that progress towards a viable Palestinian state – based on pre-1967 borders, and with East Jerusalem as its capital – will be made, and that the US and other members of the Quartet continue to play their role as honest brokers in the process.

Only with peace can there be development and dignity for the Palestinian people.

Finally, we should continue to focus on building stronger and more prosperous societies, predicated on the rule of law and the practice of democracy. ['Rule of law', 'democracy' .... hmmmm.]

The Arab Spring showed that the Muslim world is crying out for change. Governments must answer that call. [The Muslim world is not the only one crying out for change.  Malaysia is crying for change, but ..... are you answering the call?]

We must provide good governance to fight corruption, create jobs to tackle poverty, and deliver sustainable growth that builds a world of opportunity for our citizens. [Good governance when there is no transparency and accountability?  As with regards to corruption, the recent Asia-Pacific survey by accounting firm Ernst & Young (EY), shows that Malaysia is ranked as one of the most corrupt countries.  How in the world do we find the moral standing to talk about curbing corruption?]

We must create economies in which people can fulfil their own aspirations, not those of extremists. [Fulfil their own aspirations?  How could anyone hope to achieve this when there is that continuous handouts.]

By acting to solve our most difficult political problems, we can bring an end to the immediate suffering - in Syria, in Palestine, and in the wider world.

By committing to the cause of moderation, Muslims can secure something even greater. [Er ... may we know your version of 'moderation'?]

We can reclaim our religion, choosing harmony and acceptance over division and conflict. [Ah, the word 'division'.  Our country is the most divided nation in the world and all thanks to the racial politics and religious bigotry of UMNO Baru, PERKASA, PERKIDA and JATI.  We are so divided that sometimes we wonder whether we could be together again like the good old days of the 60s & 70s]

And we can broadcast a vision of Islam as it is understood by Muslims around the world: as a religion of peace, tolerance, and moderation. [Peace, tolerance and moderation, as in Malaysia?  Anyone who agrees, please put up your hand.]

Last month, when militants attacked those buses in Pakistan, a 19 year-old Sunni student named Ghulam Mustafa stood up for such a vision.
Confronting the Sunni gunmen, he said killing Shiites was wrong.
Ghulam was shot dead, but his life was not lost in vain.
With guns to their heads, the Sunnis on the bus refused to identify the Shia passengers who the gunmen wanted to kill.
In their defiance, we see the true measure of courage, and the true test of faith.
Under unimaginable pressure, facing the greatest possible threat, they chose to stand with their brothers and sisters. They chose unity over division.

Faced with unimaginable pressure, and the greatest possible threat, we must summon the will to do the same.

Thank you.

Tuesday, September 24, 2013

OMG, is this true? Our second PM was in the Japanese army during WWII



Draw your own conclusion here ........

An interview with Tan Sri Rahim Noor on the Haadyai Peace Accord

This was the interview given by former IGP, Tan Sri Rahim Noor, on his views about the Haadyai Peace Accord, and his thoughts about Chin Peng, in 2009.  From the tone of it, I believe Tan Sri Rahim holds a great deal of respect for Chin Peng and that probably what prompted him to make the 'don't make us a laughing stock' statement when UMNO Baru plans to bar the ashes of Chin Peng from entering the country.





The true facts behind the Baling Talks in 1955

I had the honour of participating in the reading of the 1955 Baling Talks at the Singapore Arts Festival in 2011.

After reading the entire unedited script of those talks, I was left with the distinct feeling that the official account of that historical event must count as amongst the most dishonest.

Like so many others from that era, Chin Peng must be acknowledged as one severely maligned by the lies and untruths layed out by UMNO / BN and denied his place in the annals of this nation as one who fought for his beliefs and the freedom of the people.
_____________________________________________________________

A review of what happened at the meeting in December 1955 in Baling, Kedah between the Alliance represented by Tunku Abdul Rahman, David Marshall and Tan Cheng Lock and the MCP represented by Chin Peng, Rashid Mydin and Chen Tien, is crucial for proper apportionment of the blame for the continuation of the Communist Insurgency in Malaya post Independence.

First a quote from Khong Kim Hoong –
The Peace Talks in Baling in December 1955 between the Alliance leaders and the MCP broke down. The Alliance leaders went back on their amnesty proposal which they had campaigned for earlier in the (1955) elections and rejected the MCP demands that after the cessation of the guerilla warfare, there would be no reprisals against any individuals and that the MCP would be allowed to participate freely in politics. The stand taken by the Alliance leaders was important to the British government. They had proven themselves to be as uncompromising to the communists as the British government itself. Therefore the earlier fears of the British that the Alliance leaders might strike a compromise with the MCP that could adversely affect British interests in Malaya were eliminated. The talks in London opened in a more amiable atmosphere.    (Merdeka! British Rule and the Struggle for Independence in Malaya. P 198)

Khong’s description of the outcome of the Peace Talks is corroborated by Said Zahari in his book, “Dark Clouds at Dawn”, where he writes (P282) –

I asked Tunku if he was disappointed with the failure of the “peace talks”. Unhesitatingly, the Chief Minister replied: “No, I’m not. I never wanted it to be a success.” He then smiled broadly and walked away towards the conference room. Syed Jaafar Albar pulled me aside and said “Said, I think Tunku’s reply to your question should not be made public.” I was disappointed

According to these 2 accounts, Tunku Abdul Rahman had to renege on his offer of amnesty for the communists that was so loudly canvassed in the Federal Elections of July 1955 because that would have adversely affected his push for Independence within 2 years. Chin Peng and his colleagues thought so too, and they harboured hopes that once Malaya won its Independence the amnesty offer might be followed through (See “My side of History” by Chin Peng.) Amnesty was finally offered in 1989 on almost the same terms that the MCP had requested in Baling in 1955.

Why the inordinate delay? The MCP was ready to lay down arms in 1955 itself for they could see that the military campaign was not getting them anywhere. But they did not want the indignity of surrender and indefinite detention under the emergency regulation! The continuation of armed hostilities in the jungles of Malaya between Independence in 1957 and the Peace Accord in 1989 was largely because the Malayan/Malaysian government wanted to keep the communists out of the legitimate political process. They were afraid that the communists might be able to garner enough support to enter Parliament and offer resistance to the pro-capitalist policies of the Alliance government.

Don’t the UMNO leaders – Najib, Muhiyuddin, Hishamuddin, Nazri and several others – who have been loudly protesting the return of Chin Peng’s ashes to Sitiawan, know what actually happened at Baling in December 1955? Surely they cannot be so ignorant! Their main argument is that Chin Peng was responsible for the deaths and injuries suffered by Malayan /Malaysian soldiers, and that why many Malaysians are still angry with him. Yes, many Malaysian soldiers sustained their injuries fighting the communist insurgents. But surely Kong Kim Hoong’s and Said Zahari’s accounts of the Baling Talks suggest that the Alliance leaders do share the moral responsibility for all the injuries sustained by our soldiers as well as the communist fighters post Independence.

Intellectual honesty has never been the strong point of our UMNO leaders! The penchant to take an ethnic slant on issues is! Their hysterical reaction to the proposal to bring Chin Peng’s ashes to the land of his birth displays both of these features quite clearly!

Dr. Jeyakumar Devaraj
PSM Central Committee member / MP Sg.Siput

Monday, September 23, 2013

Yet another PAS leader stands up for Chin Peng

Sepang MP, Mohamed Hanipa Maidin

Chin Peng continues to draw official condemnation days after his death, but a PAS Member of Parliament has today spoken up in defence of the late communist leader.

Sepang MP Mohamed Hanipa Maidin (pic above) took to task Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar, saying he should not follow right-wing Malay group Perkasa when talking about the law.

The PAS lawyer was commenting on Khalid's statement that border checks would be stepped up to prevent any attempts at bringing back Chin Peng's remains into Malaysia.
"I urge them not to make statements like the Malay rights group Perkasa. Their statements must not be based on emotions but on history and legal facts," the first-term MP said in the Parliament during a debate on the Legal Profession (Ammendment) Act 2012.

Hanipa then referred to a statement by Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar that Putrajaya has no legal power to stop Chin Peng's ashes from being brought in, as well as the comments from former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Noor, that Malaysia will be a laughing stock for not allowing Chin Peng's ashes into the country.

"The former IGP had also suggested that Chin Peng's contribution to the country be studied again.

"Good thing it was Rahim Noor who had said that and not Mat Sabu. If it was Mat Sabu, there would have been thousands of police reports lodged against him by BN politicians," Hanipa remarked, referring to PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu.

Mohamad Sabu was at the centre of a storm last year for saying that history books deriding communist fighters should be revised.

Hanipa also defended Chin Peng as an independence fighter, a description that has not sat well with Umno leaders.

Hanipa is one of many PAS leaders who have openly come out in defence of Chin Peng, who died on September 16 in Bangkok.

Mohamad Sabu, in urging Putrajaya to reconsider its decision to bar Chin Peng's remains, pointed out that Islam never discriminated against its enemies.

Yesterday, a Kedah PAS leader, Fadzil Baharom, showed up at Chin Peng's wake at a temple in Bangkok, saying many Malaysians including PAS members have misunderstood the late leader.
"Malaysia's history has been changed. I am looking for the unvarnished version," said Fadzil.

[Source: The MI]