6 posts from May 2009

Berikut adalah petikan daripada blog JebatMustDie mengenai sejarah yang berkait dengan masalah ketegangan kaum.  Saya percaya kita perlu kenal sejarah, untuk menghargai keamanan yang kita miliki kini, serta untuk meneruskan misi memperkukuh keamanan di negara kita yang tercinta ini.  Saya potong dan tampal secara total semua perbincangan mengenai tajuk berkaitan yang terlibat di laman tersebut.  Untuk membaca bahagian kedua dan ketiga, sila pergi sendiri ke laman tersebut. 

Pesanan saya, bina keikhlasan dan baca basmalah sebelum membaca, serta doakan semoga seluruh kita membina hasrat dan mengerah kudrat ke arah 1Malaysia, walau tanpa Najib, Muhyiddin, Hadi, Anwar, Lim Kit Siang, Samy Vellu, Shafie, Anifah, Taib Mahmud dan lain-lain.

~~~~~~~

May 13th 1969 – The Correct View (part 1)

 

It has been 40 years since the bloody riots of 1969. Today, I would like to offer my prayers to the people that had lost their lives in that fateful day. Many have talked about what had happened. Many books were published. Many theses and opinions were written to elaborate and discuss the events prior, during and after the incident.

Some say that this bloody blotch in our history books should be a lesson learned. Some say we should bury this ghost of our past. Some even made the effort to distort history by misrepresenting the facts.

Three weeks ago, the Regent of Perak put to task people who write destructive political books in order to satisfy their own selfish agenda. His Majesty had commented on something that is very crucial in highlighting the despicable act of rewriting our history to fit a certain ulterior motive. What more, all the so-called facts presented in the books are highly presumptuous, misguided and intended only to achieve a divisive propaganda.

One such book that I would like to highlight is the book by Dr Kua Kia Soong entitled : Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969″.

From reading the book, readers will ultimately come to three conclusions:

1) Tun Abdul Razak masterminded the May 13 racial riots as a form of coup d’etat from Tunku Abdul Rahman

2) Datuk Harun Idris led Umno Youths to spontaneously launched an unprovoked attack towards the chinese people

3) The racial riots were not the fault of the racist opposition or the subversive communist movement

These are the conclusions the author of the said book would like his readers to believe. He strengthened his thesis by providing several dockets of ‘declassified documents’ in his book.

Now, from the term ‘declassified document’, what does a layman normally associate it with?

It must have been a top secret document sanctioned by the government to be kept as classified and confidential from the eyes of the public. It must have been documents with  valid and unshakable truths that are so damning,  it would have been prudent to be kept as a secret. Correct?

But as you read the book, these ‘declassified documents’ were nothing more than articles taken from the now defunct Far Eastern Economic Review magazine. Its writer, a journalist named Bob Reece communicated directly with the FEER’s HQ in London and British High Commission.

These documents were ‘obtained’ by Kua Kia Soong from the Public Records Office in Kew Gardens, London  – and so he stated in his book.

In fact, these were the documents deemed by Kua Kia Soong as the priceless ‘declassified documents’. They have no intrinsic value and were not data laden with factual analyses  except to notify the readers that the documents were actually, only a personal opinion of a British journalist!

Kua Kia Soong rubbished all the investigative research and study of the White Paper of the NOC on what actually had happened. He relied mainly on Bob Reece’s writings and dispatches between foreign correspondents.

If he thinks that his book is a thorough research and also the definitive version of what had really happened 40 years ago, then he is gravely mistaken.

This book can safely be classified as a highly prejudice book vent on achieving a specific propaganda which is detrimental to the nation’s social harmony. Why do I say that? Please refer to the three lies conclusions above.

This article came about from what Raja Nazrin had said three weeks ago:

If this trend continues to grow, I fear that it will create an unhealthy writing culture, a writing culture which nurtures lies, a writing culture which is unethical and ready to ignore fact, and one that will have a negative influence on the development of the people’s minds.

And this article will try its best to straighten and debunk the propaganda which had been swimming within the minds of the ignorant racists.

Now in order to ascertain what really happened that day, we need to study it holistically. Kua Kia Soong had purposely left out vital events preceding May 13. I would have thought a research director with a doctorate would have been more diligent in espousing his hypothesis. One must always begin with the root cause, the trigger, the reaction and finally the aftermath. In a historical event of this magnitude, one must evaluate every event that took place in chronological order before we can decide on the conclusion. One must know the historical background of the mood of the people on that day.

Instead, he concluded them before making the research and work on it backwards. That is why the book was written in a manner which denigrated Tun Abdul Razak as a chinese killer and a usurper of Tunku Abdul Rahman. After making this conclusion, he then proceeded in cherry picking excerpts from the so-called ‘declassified’ documents (which were nothing but mere telegrams and wired news) of British field reporters to justify his conclusion.

That is a flawed approach and it does not work that way.

Let us dissect and re-address the May 13 episode as what it is and what it is not.

The first of many factual errors the author committed was in the Introduction section whereby he averred that Dato Onn revolted against the British in 1946 in order ‘to grant citizenship rights to the non-Malays’ (pg. 13 of the book).

That was a factual mistake. In 1946 which was the birth year of Umno, Dato Onn had opposed the Malayan Union because it would usurp the power of the Malay Rulers, and allow the British to rule Malaya as their colony (according to Tunku Abdul Rahman’s Political Awakening book pg. 1).

Furthermore, Dato Onn was fighting the Malayan Union because the Malays saw the jus soli (right of territory) principle in the citizenship clause for the Malayan Union as too generous because it stipulated that individuals born in Chinese-majority Singapore were included even though Singapore was excluded from the Malayan Union structure. The Malays’ worst fears seemed to be coming true; they would be reduced from a nation to a mere community, and a minority one at that; in a land which they perceived as being historically theirs.

It was the author’s intention to psychologically induce the minds of the younger generation that the first President of Umno was actually fighting for the non-Malays! Kua Kia Soong lied about this and got away with murder.

He also used the term declassified documents extensively but failed to establish validity on the facts he wanted to portray. In chapter three he stated:

“The following day, the riots continued but on a smaller scale compared to the previous day. The curfew was only lifted to allow people to buy food. This dispatch from the British High Commission (BHC) shows that the casualties were mainly chinese:

‘Violence continued throughout the night according to eye witnesses and official reports. However it was much more sporadic, more quickly contained and less widespread. Security forces were much better organized to contain and check violence. It is hoped this morning that the back of the communal rioting may be broken. Curfew is being lifted over staggered hours in various districts of the city to allow people to get food. Curfew is to be rigidly reinforced this afternoon but indications are that it will be lifted for a few hours on a daily basis for the next few days if the situation permits.’”

But readers will see that there were no numbers of deaths supplied in that particular dispatch. It did not even mention about more chinese were killed! Readers were deliberately led to believe otherwise through the opening remarks. Very misleading indeed. Yet, currently most younger generations who is reading the books think that the official tally should be much higher! All because of his lies stated in the book.

It was amusing when in the effort to absolve any blame from the racist opposition at that time, the author concluded in his second chapter that-

“the official version of the May 13 Incident puts the blame for the riots on provocation by the Opposition parties. From correspondents’ dispatches at the time, we find little evidence to support this allegation’ (pg 39).

Of course there were little evidence from them Mr Kua Kia Soong, those correspondents were parachuted to the scene just to cover the general election.  They were not here when racial tension was at sky high weeks or even years before May 13^th.

Foreign journalists from Britain in the past had always gleefully wishing that Malaysia will falter. Right after our independence in 1957, the then Malaya was labeled as the ‘primary candidate for the dustbin of history’. They had always prophesied that Malaya (Malaysia) can never succeed as a nation due to its multiracial citizenry. It would be much better if Malaya had stayed under the administration of the British.

This incident was the best opportunity for them to see us go for each other’s throat so that their prophecy will be self-fulfilled. As usual, most foreign journalists all around the world came here merely a couple of days before the general elections.

And it became damaging when in order to suit this book’s agenda, Kua Kia Soong used all those suspicious correspondence and documents.

Did Kua Kia Soong take into account the prevailing feelings of the people in Malaysia during that time? He did not. His only reference of the discontent and animosity between the Malays and the Chinese contained only within one sentence in which he blamed the policies for the anxiety caused, and not the opposition’s racist approach. He stated –

“There was certainly widespread discontent among the workers, farmers, middle classes as well as urban setters. The state’s racially discriminatory policies only served to create further divisions among the people and the 1969 election results clearly reflected this growing polarisation”.

And that was all he said. Consciously, he failed to include in his book the following items which fueled the mood of the people at that time. Importantly missing was the happenings between the election day of 10^th May and May 13 itself. The author somehow failed to include these facts in his book.

Background on racial tension in Malaya / Malaysia

1) To defend Malaya from Communist insurgency, the Government embarked on an effort to recruit the Chinese to join the police force. Between 1949 to 1951, the effort of the government to attract the Chinese to defend the nation against the MCP met with little success. Only 200 chinese youths volunteered. When National Service was introduced in 1950, considerable amount of Chinese and Indians sought to leave the country.

Over 10,000 chinese fled to China to avoid call-up. This further added to the resentment among the Malays and even Sir Henry Gurney commented –

“A feeling of resentment is growing among all the other communities of the apparent reluctance of the Chinese to help. These people (the Chinese) live comfortably and devote themselves wholly to making money…”

(Did I just hear RPK cough just now?)

However, I must add that there were indeed a few Chinese that stayed back and help defend the nation against the communists. Those were the brave ones. Very much unlike the opportunistic racists that we have now who would migrate overseas when times are bad and at the same time condemning Malaysia from abroad.

2) Pulau Pinang racial clash on 2nd January, 1957 resulted in 4 deaths and 48 injured. It happened on the day of celebrating Georgetown’s bestowment of a City status by the British Government. The procession was marred by a misunderstanding by the mostly chinese celebrants towards the Malay spectators. It was quickly averted from becoming a state wide riot through the quick arrival of a police party.

3) In May 1959, another Malay-Chinese racial clash happened in Pulau Pangkor. Confrontation between Malay thugs and Chinese hoodlums caused residential fire and two Malays were killed and eight were injured. The Chinese suffered one death and a couple of injured youths. Island curfew was imposed for a few days because of that racial clash.

4) In Bukit Mertajam  circa July 1964, one Malay and one Chinese were killed over a petty argument. Dozens were injured. It started when a Malay market employee was hit with a cangkul by a 15 year old Chinese vegetable vendor.  Subsequent to this, a spate of assaults cases and arson occurred in the Bukit Mertajam area as the employee tried to report the incident to the District Council. Eventually curfew was imposed to deter anymore racial clashes. The nation was rocked yet again by this incident.

5) In 1967 when the currency was devalued, the communist elements in the Labour Party initiated ‘hartal’ on the 19th November to exploit the issue using the anti-devaluation propaganda. They chose Pulau Pinang as their target because of the sensitive racial situation on the island. This is because, Penang’s racial tension was already brewing for the past 10 years (from the first racial clash 10 years before). Many Malays were brutally attacked by the Chinese members of the opposition resulted in many deaths and injuries while  several houses and vehicles were burnt. Tunku related -

“The communists however, never left us alone. If they couldn’t carry out open aggression they at least carried out intensive and extensive acts of subversion. In 1967, we had to adjust our currency to meet our financial exigency, and so we devalued very slightly our currency – so slightly that nobody noticed. But in Penang the Socialist Front, an opposition party somewhat hostile to the Alliance Government, declared a hartal (closing of shops as mark of protest or sorrow)…

So when they declared the hartal the gangsters and thugs took it upon themselves to start trouble, and attacked the harmless Malay people whom they regarded as the favoured children of the Government. In fact these Malays were ignorant shoppers who knew nothing valuation or devaluation of our currency, and they were taken completely by surprise.”

Tunku wrote that in the 1980’s. He penned his thoughts in his weekly column in The Star. This was then compiled into a book entitled Political Awakening. The excerpt above had particularly debunked yet another lie told by Kua Kia Soong that Tunku Abdul Rahman stopped blaming the communists for the crisis.

Note that on page 27 and 28, Kua Kia Soong had tried to use yet another ‘reliable’ dispatch from the BHC to divert the blame put on communists by Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Dr Ismail and Ghazali Shafie. But the fact is, Tunku Abdul Rahman, as mentioned above had always blamed the communists as the instigators of the riot. Just read Tunku’s and Tun Dr Ismail’s books.

Hence, we have a Malaysian author here with political leanings of the DAP, doing his utmost best to shift the blame from the communists.

I wonder why.

Moreover, he is using the flimsiest of evidence to sidetrack the blame.

Note also that the word hartal was used by the pro opposition bloggers such as Haris Ibrahim to denote his distaste of the mainstream media and the ISA. Should he even mention the word hartal in front of the older Malay generation that suffered the brunt of the unprovoked attack in 1967, he will definitely meet disapproving faces. Astonishingly, the modus operandi of the old and current opposition is eerily similar.

6) In June 1968, racial troubles broke out when 11 chinese members of the MCP and 2 Malays who were sentenced to death for helping Soekarno to invade Johor during the Confrontation, were about to be sentenced to death for treason in Kuala Lumpur.   The MP for Batu, Dr Tan Chee Koon of the Labour Party made an appeal against the execution. He gathered enough support from the chinese and pro-communist elements instigated the chinese community further.

Outside the gates of Pudu Jail and all along the road leading to the prison, menacing crowds gathered by the thousands in unruly demonstrations, throwing stones and bottles at passing cars and blocking traffic in the busy city roads.

Fearing nationwide unrest, Tunku Abdul Rahman pleaded for clemency from the Sultans of Johor and Perak and the death sentence was commuted from death sentences to life imprisonment.

In hindsight, the net result was not unexpected. The racist communists saw it as a weakness from the government instead of seeing its magnanimity and they further destabilised the nation through their racialised approach.

Dr Mahathir at that time summarised Tunku’s decision in a stinging letter sent to the then premier in the aftermath of 13th May. He wrote, among other things:

“You yourself told me that you have prevented a riot by commuting the death sentence of the 11 subversive Chinese. In truth this very action sparked the riots of 13 May, which resulted in the deaths of many, many more.

Your ‘give and take’ policy gives the Chinese everything they ask for. The climax was the commuting of the death sentence, which made the majority of the Malays angry. The Chinese on the other hand regarded you and the Alliance government as cowards and weaklings who could be pushed around.

That was why the Chinese and the Indians behaved outrageously toward the Malays on 12th May. If you had been spit in the face, called dirty names and shown obscene gestures and private parts, then you could understand how the Malays felt. The Malays whom you thought would never rebel went berserk, and they hate you for giving too much face.

Dr Mahathir was sacked from being an Umno and Supreme Council member about a month later.

7) A much more vile attack by the opposition happened on 24^th April, 1969; just two weeks before the historic general election. An Umno worker named Kassim Bin Omar was brutally murdered by the Chinese members of the Labour Party on his way home from elections campaign. He was beaten up and murdered on the streets and red paint was smeared all over his face. It was a deliberate act of murder and the senseless killing sent shock waves in the government. The opposition had become political murderers. They had tasted blood and the racists among them wanted more. They freely killed a Malay without any qualms whatsoever just to show their political strengths. Racial tension intensified to a dangerous level and a serious clash was averted at the last moment when Umno leaders instructed their supporters to bury the dead man quickly and quietly in a dignified manner. Umno leaders then were very sensitive with the feelings of the public and some say too tolerant towards the Chinese chauvinists.

The Run-up to General Election of 1969

Kua Kia Soong’s analyses in his book only started from this point onwards although he still missed out several more pertinent points.

The May 13th general election had an unprecedented long campaign period. One month to be precise. Under the pretext of freedom of speech yet with rising racial tension in the background it was an unfortunate decision to be made by the government to grant a long campaigning period at that time.

The communist infested Labour Party instigated the nation by announcing in October 1968 they will boycott the 1969 general election. This left the opposition front to consist only the DAP, Gerakan, PPP and the PMIP (Pan Malaysian Islamic Party or PAS). The supporters of Labour Party then threw their weights in support of the DAP and Gerakan during the campaigning period.

They sense the government had already weakened by the racial intimidation and tension ignited by them and they were willing to divide the nation further in their campaigning strategy.

Using Kua Kia Soong’s own words -

“Thus, on the eve of the 1969 general election we saw on the one hand, PMIP (PAS) accusing UMNO of having ‘sold out’ the Malays to the Chinese and betrayed Islam; on the other, DAP accusing MCA of having “sold out” non-Malay rights to Umno” (pg 32).

So which is which? Their line of reasoning was indeed preposterous and illogical.

But this modus operandi remains the same till this day. They slandered the government through this racist method of divide and conquer and yet, they have the gall to call the Alliance (now Barisan Nasional) as racist!

Both PAS and DAP had different idealogies and yet they were willing to cooperate using DIFFERENT approach in their campaigns and the unassuming public bought their sickening propaganda! The result?

Again Kua Kia Soong’s succinctly summarized that “among the Chinese, the Alliance Party’s policy was seen as excessively favoring the Malays, while among the Malays, the Alliance Party’s policies were regarded as not getting results fast enough” (pg 37).

But who pounded these beliefs into the hearts and minds of both Malays and chinese? It’s non other than the opposition themselves.

Hence we have the ultimate hypocrisy of PAS chastising Umno for working with MCA instead of pursuing Hudud but at the same time can work in tandem with the DAP in a coalition. DAP meanwhile criticise MCA and Gerakan for kow-towing with Umno but the party itself failed to look in the mirror whenever they fawn over and hug PAS leaders in the opposition coalition.

Please re-read what Kia Kua Soong had wrote in the two excerpts above and juxtapose them with the current cries of racism that the opposition love to scream about these days.

Anyway, six days before the 1969 elections, 3 police constables came across a group of youths from the Labour Party painting anti-election slogans on the road. When challenged by the police, they attacked using iron rods and hurling firewood and stones. They put up such a fight that the police had to open fire in self defense. One of the youth was wounded and died later  in the hospital.

The opposition took advantage of the youth’s death and wanted to organise a large funeral procession on the polling day itself! See the intended malice? Did Umno leaders organised a similar procession when Encik Kassim Bin Omar was killed as shown above? Compare the two incidents and we know who were the racist among them.

Anyway, the police together with the permission from the Home Ministry however, gave the permit for the procession to be held on the 9th instead.

This funeral procession, although larger in scale compared to the recent suspected car thief’s funeral procession was the tipping point of the Malays’ anger towards the chinese.

One of the documents which were considered ‘declassified’ was Bob Reece’s article in FEER in May 1969. Kua Kia Soong used an excerpt from it to establish that the funeral procession was very disciplined and well behaved (thus trying very hard to absolve any wrongdoing of the opposition).

“While it was true that some Mao-slogans and flags were seen during this parade, the discipline of the 14,000-strong crowd in their eight-mile march may have been due to genuine restraint rather than to communist organization.” (pg 27)

There you go. A British journalist who probably forgot to bring his glasses that day. The only side that had genuine restraint were the Malays watching the ruthless and taunting procession.

For eight miles the chauvinistic chinese marched.

The sight of the jeering hooligans marching slowly around the city for that many miles must have been an agonizing experience to bear for the Malays then. And yet, they chose to be patient.

They chanted Maoist slogans, sang ‘The East is Red’, and displayed portraits of Mao Tse-tung and the Red flag. The procession passed through the heart of Kuala Lumpur and tied up traffic in almost every major street in the city and provoked Malay bystanders with shouts of ‘Malai si!’ (Death to the Malays) and ‘Hutang darah bayar darah’ (Blood debt will be repaid with blood).

Pictures say a thousand words. Here they are:

Did Kua Kia Soong mention any of these in his book? Of course he didn’t. Even to show these pictures will be damaging to his third conclusion stated at the beginning of this article.

4 days after this funeral procession, when  an election victory march was held all over the city again, it broke the ever tolerant Malay psyche. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Today, Farish Noor wrote an article about May 13 and I am very disappointed that he chose to ignore all the above facts and proceeded to write that May 13 WAS NOT the result of a racial conflict. That is not the truth.

My next article will continue to discuss the events that happened after the victory procession of the opposition for the 2 days before May 13.

I will also lay out the retaliation by the Malays that ran amok on May 13, Umno’s role at that time and the reconciliation  process between the people. We will also discuss whether the first two conclusions of the book were correct.

I reiterate the purpose of this article – which is to straighten out the lies some people are telling to young Malaysians. In order to clear the path for a united Malaysia, history must be made known as it is. Only then we can tell straight to each other’s face – ‘how lucky we are now’.

There is hope though. Anas Zubedy’s article here is a refreshing read and I applaud it. But only after we really know what happened in the past that we can face the future in a positive way. Maybe starting next year, we can all celebrate National Harmony Day on May 13 each year.

For the time being, please click on the articles below for a better view of what had happened prior to May 13 (zoom on it if you have to). They are a must read before we proceed later on in part 2.

Addendum

Tonight there will be a public forum in MBPJ Selangor. If Lim Kit Siang was asked what was his involvement during the whole nightmare in 1969, I would be curious to know his answer. I hope he can maintain a straight face when answering especially when Dollah Kok Lanas is going to be one of the speakers.

Posted in History, MUST READ, Racism | 154 Comments

~~~~~~~~

 

Saya terpaksa memotong semula bahagian respons kerana lampiran tersebut mejadikan laman ini berat dan susah untuk download.  Sila terus ke laman jebatmustdie untuk membacanya.

Terima kasih.

Abezi. 

Sekarang musim penentuan siapa dapat biasiswa, siapa dapat pinjaman, dan siapa tidak dapat apa-apa.  Banyak golongan menghenyak JPA atas alasan tidak memberi biasiswa kepada yang dapat banyak A dan sebaliknya diberi kepada yang dapat kurang A.  Sama ada ini agenda politik atau agenda kaum, itu bukan persoalan saya di sini. 

Muhyiddin buat kenyataan seperti dalam keterpaksaan. Katanya Kementerian Pelajaran mungkin mengkaji untuk menghadkan subjek yang diambil dalam SPM.  Katanya adalah tidak adil dibandingkan kerana pelajar Sekolah Berasrama Penuh memang tidak dibenarkan ambil lebih daripada 10 atau 11 subjek, bagaimana nak lawan mereka yang dapat 14 A atau lebih daripada itu.  Pelik juga.  Kalau nak betulkan hal pemberian biasiswa, kenapa perlu hadkan pengambilan subjek dalam SPM? 

JPA dihenyak atas nama meritokrasi.  Meritokrasi, kalau ikut Webster's Dictionary ertinya: "an intellectual elite based on intellectual achievement" atau "a system in which such an elite achieves special status, as in positions of leadership". Ertinya meritocracy hanya mementingkan "intellect", tetapi tidak mementingkan sifat dan kemampuan kemasyarakatan, kepintaran emosi dan lain-lain.

Mahukah kita dibayangi oleh golongan yang hanya bijak akademik, tetapi buta kemasyarakatan, kering emosi, dan tuli kepada budaya? Sesebuah negara memerlukan lebih daripada golongan intellect. Seorang CEO syarikat yang ambil cuma lulusan kelas satu untuk syarikatnya pernah mengadu kepada saya, bahawa pekerjanya mudah break down under pressure, dan berbagai masalah yang asasnya adalah kekurangan keyakinan diri, self esteem, ketahanan mental. Mereka bijak dan rajin tetapi boleh 'jam'kan syarikat bila masa kritikal. Tetapi yang kelakarnya, CEO tu cuma third class holder masa degree dia . . . .

Saya tidak memperkecilkan kemampuan intellect.  Tetapi negara perlukan pasukan pemimpin dan rakyat yang seimbang.  Kajian rata-rata telah membuktikan bahawa kemampuan intelek hanya menyumbang sebanyak lebih kurang 15% sahaja dalam kejayaan hidup seseorang insan.  Paling utama ialah kekuatan dan kepintaran emosi.  Sekiranya biasiswa hanya mengambilkira meritokrasi, saya percaya negara tidak akan seimbang dalam perancangan untuk masa depan.

Meritokrasi yang hanya berasaskan SPM adalah perkara yang boleh mengalih pandangan daripada kemampuan sebenar generasi muda negara.  Ramai pelajar yang tidak cemerlang sewaktu SPM yang kemudiannya menjadi lebih cemerlang daripada rakan mereka yang cemerlang sewaktu SPM (MCE).  Kalau saya mahu ambil contoh rakan sebaya saya sendiri, mereka yang jadi jutawan dan banyak membantu orang lain adalah daripada golongan yang pernah dikata oleh Pengetua sebagai "tidak jadi orang".  Mereka tidak cemerlang dalam SPM.  Dan tidak ada daripada 20 pelajar terbaik SPM dari rakan sebaya saya itu yang lebih baik ekonomi mereka daripada pelajar-pelajar tidak cemerlang ini.  Malah, daripada kalangan kami yang sudah menjadi pembantu kuat pemimpin negara, tidak daripada kalangan 20 pelajar terbaik masa itu.  SPM bukan segalanya.  Sebahagian mengasah minda intelek, sebahagian yang lain meleburkan diri dalam pembentukan kepintaran emosi.  Daripada kedua-dua kumpulan ini ada yang berjaya, dan ada yang gagal. 

Seperkara lagi ialah, meritokrasi berasaskan SPM semata-mata adalah tidak adil kerana secara umumnya mereka yang berjaya selalunya terdiri daripada golongan yang mampu mendapatkan khidmat pengajaran yang lebih dan suasana belajar yang lebih baik.  Bagaimana pula dengan mereka yang tidak berpeluang mendapat khidmat sedemikian kerana kemiskinan atau tinggal jauh di luar bandar?  Kerajaan perlu mengambilkira faktor ini secara serius, kerana telah terbukti, ramai golongan berjaya dalam negara kita adalah asalnya daripada kampung dan miskin tetapi telah diberi peluang oleh kerajaan.  Bayangkan jika peluang mereka ditutup kerana meritokrasi!

Meritokrasi bukan keadilan.  Meritokrasi hanyalah salah satu daripada alat pengukuran untuk membina 1Malaysia.

Mahkamah Rayuan memutuskan sebulat suara (3-0) Zamri adalah MB Perak yang sah.  Ini merupakan "landmark decision", atau keputusan mahkamah yang akan menjadi rujukan pada masa depan.  Ia boleh membawa erti Sultan atau Agong boleh lucutkan mana-mana MB atau PM tanpa ada undi tidak percaya di dalam Dewan Undangan Negeri atau Parlimen, sekiranya bilangan penyokongnya sudah sah dan terbukti kurang daripada 50%.  Tetapi ia masih belum menolak perlunya ada undi tidak percaya melalui surat atau cara lain.  Penghakiman bertulis amat dinantikan oleh mereka yang terlibat dengan perundangan.  Lagipun saya tidak ada di dalam mahkamah waktu mereka bersidang.  Saya serahkan kepada mereka yang lebih mengetahui.

Saya percaya, Nizar akan merayu terus ke Mahkamah Persekutuan, mahkamah paling tinggi dalam perundangan Malaysia.  Malah, mungkin bila tulisan ini dipublishkan, dia sudah pun buat pengumuman.  Itu hak beliau.  Orang lain tidak boleh halang, marah atau beri komen yang tidak sepatutnya.  Tetapi komen menyatakan "hakim sudah dibeli", "mahkamah tidak adil" dan apa-apa komen yang membawa maksud sedemikian, kalau bertulis, boleh bawa petaka.   

Perkara yang menarik perhatian saya ialah, begitu ramai para loyar (buruk) yang buat komen tanpa ilmu.  Komen di Internet, sama ada di blog atau FB, memang panas-panas.  Ramai daripada mereka ini yang nampak jauh lebih mengetahui tentang undang-undang daripada para hakim di Mahkamah Rayuan itu.  Mereka juga semacam lebih mengetahui daripada hakim Mahkamah Tinggi bila mereka katakan Hakim Aziz benar bila keputusan berpihak kepada mereka. Seolah-olah mereka boleh kata "Aziz, kau pandai, bijak, adil, berani".  Dan mereka pula seolah berkata kepada 3 orang Hakim Mahkamah Rayuan, yang pangkat lebih tinggi, pengalaman lebih lama, pengetahuan lebih luas, sebagai "zalim", "tidak adil", "tidak pandai", "kena beli" dan macam-macam.

Kalau yang membuat tuduhan atau mengeluarkan kata-kata itu orang Islam, saya ingin ingatkan bahawa kata-kata itu juga akan diadili oleh Tuhan Rabbuljalil.  Jangan ingat para hakim yang buat keputusan tersebut sahaja akan dihadapkan ke mahkamah rabbul jalil.  Saya tidak ingin samakan mereka dengan nabi, tetapi pengajaran peristiwa Nabi Musa dan Nabi Khaidhir boleh dijadikan ukuran.  Bayangkan, kalaulah Nabi Musa terus menuduh Nabi Khaidir dangan tuduhan-tuduhan liar bila melihat beberapa tindakan Nabi Khaidir yang pada pandangannya zalim.  Begitu juga bila Imam Maliki tidak mahu membuat keputusan sehingga diambil tindakan oleh penguasa.  Satu masa, debu-debu akan jatuh, dan langit akan terang. 

Bagi saya, keputusan ini adalah keputusan mahkamah.  Saya terima ia sebagai keputusan mahkamah.  Mereka lebih tahu selok belok perundangan dan risiko dalam membuat keputusan penghakiman.  Saya yakin mereka juga takut kepada Allah.  Keputusan sebegini tidak semudah hukum matematik.  

Saya ingin mendengar hujjah.  Saya bencikan penghakiman berasaskan emosi.  Saya bencikan manusia yang tidak pernah menerima keputusan jika keputusan tidak seperti yang mereka mahu.  Saya bencikan mereka yang anggap diri mereka suci dari kesalahan, bersih dari dosa, dan pihak lain sentiasa tidak benar.  Mereka ini, jika jadi pemerintah, akan bertindak jauh lebih zalim. 

Saya rasa ada baiknya saya berkongsi merenung tulisan Dr. Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin ini:

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ramai orang politik memang pemurah. Semua orang cakap begitu. Sifat pemurah orang politik mempunyai banyak makna. Mungkin kerana ingin menolong orang lain disebabkan mereka merasakan mereka itu pemimpin. Mungkin juga kerana ingin menjaga undi dan sokongan. Sehinggakan Ketua Dewan Ulama PAS pun mengeluh tentang ‘unsur rasuah politik’ dalam partinya.

Sama ada dinamakan rasuah atau apa sahaja; orang politik itukan pemurah?! Sekalipun mungkin ada maknanya yang tersendiri. Ya! Kuasa, pengaruh, nama, pangkat dan segala yang berkaitan dengannya bukan mudah hendak dilepaskan, juga bukan mudah untuk diubati jika sudah mabuk. Benarlah kata tokoh umat Islam yang terbilang al-Imam Sufyan al-Thauri (meninggal 161H): Aku tidak melihat paling kurangnya kezuhudan itu melainkan dalam perkara kepimpinan (kuasa). Engkau akan dapati seseorang yang zuhud dalam makanan, minuman, harta dan pakaian tetapi apabila tiba soal kuasa maka dia akan mempertahan dan bermusuhan kerananya (al-Zahabi, Siyar A’lam al-Nubala, 7/262).

Namun ramai orang politik dan ‘tidak politik’ bukan sahaja murah duit atau ‘harta dunia’ tapi juga murah pahala. Dengan mudah sahaja mereka memberikan ‘pahala’ mereka kepada orang lain, atau dengan mudah rela menanggung dosa orang lain jika mereka tidak dapat memberikannya pahala. Nabi SAW pernah bertanya para sahabat baginda: “Tahukah kamu siapakah orang yang muflis?” Jawab mereka: “Orang yang muflis dalam kalangan kami ialah sesiapa yang tiada dirham dan tiada harta”. Sabda baginda: Orang yang muflis dalam umatku ialah sesiapa yang datang pada Hari Kiamat nanti bersama solat, puasa, zakat, juga dia pernah memaki seseorang, menuduh seseorang, memakan harta seseorang, menumpah darah seseorang dan memukul seseorang. Lalu diberikan kepada orang ini dan itu pahalanya. Jika pahala-pahalanya habis sebelum sempat dilangsaikan kesalahannya, maka diambil dosa-dosa mereka dicampakkan ke atasnya lantas dicampakkan dia ke dalam neraka (Riwayat Muslim).

Hadis ini amat menakutkan. Inilah hakikat muflis atau bankrap yang hakiki. Adapun muflis dalam kehidupan dunia mungkin boleh diselesaikan atau berakhir. Namun muflis jenis ini membawa kesan dalam kehidupan ‘alam abadi’. Ya, kita semua jarang yang terlepas dari kesalahan ini. Namun kita selalu berusaha dan ingin mengelaknya. Malangnya, dalam kehidupan sesetengah ahli politik yang tidak berteraskan wahyu kita ada dapati bagi mereka memaki hamun orang, menuduh orang tanpa bukti, memakan harta orang atau rakyat, menumpahkan darah orang sama ada mencedera atau membunuhnya tanpa sebab yang diizinkan syarak bagaikan ‘rukun politik’ yang wajib dan ‘haram’ ditinggalkan. Lebih buruk lagi jika itu semua dihalalkan atas berbagai alasan.

Mengkritik dan memberikan pandangan berbeza dalam politik adalah tidak mengapa. Bahkan merupakan satu keperluan. Jika membabitkan hak rakyat, maka rakyat perlu dibela. Apatah lagi dalam ‘reka bentuk’ politik demokrasi yang diamalkan. Namun, memaki-hamun, mencerca, sehingga ada yang mencarut adalah bertentangan dengan syarak. Lebih buruk lagi ada yang mengutuk sifat peribadi orang lain yang Allah ciptakan seperti mempersendakan ‘botak’, ‘hidung besar’, ‘mamak’ dan berbagai lagi. Makian, kutukan, sendaan itu dijadikan bahan ketawa yang ‘dikongsi dosa’ bersama pengikut dan penyokong. Jika ada tuduhan terhadap musuh politiknya, belum pun ada bukti atau sokongan bukti, terus sahaja diperkatakan secara ‘yakin tanpa syak’. Bersorak sorai pengikut meraikan ‘kemurahan pahala’ orang politik. Sementara membelasah harta orang dilakukan oleh banyak pihak yang tidak jujur dan amanah. Namun, dalam banyak keadaan ramai orang politik yang mempergunakan harta rakyat untuk kepentingan dirinya. Demikian sejarah juga menunjukkan penumpahan darah dan penyeksaan ke atas hamba-hamba Allah yang lain sering mempunyai hubungan dengan politik.

Buruk

Lebih buruk lagi, ada yang menghalalkan kesalahan-kesalahan tersebut atas alasan demi menegakkan kebenaran. Lalu dipetiklah kata-kata sarjana itu dan ini seperti al-Imam al-Ghazali dan al-Nawawi bagi menjustifikasikan perbuatan salah tersebut. Padahal jika dilihat kepada konteks huraian yang mereka sebutkan, bukan demikian maksudnya. Mana mungkin mereka menghalalkan maki-hamun, carut-marut atau menuduh tanpa bukti atas alasan untuk menegakkan kebenaran. Kebenaran apa jika begitu rupanya?! Peperangan mempertahankan agama yang dihalalkan Allah dan rasul-Nya pun, tidak dibenarkan kita melampaui batas, apakah kita boleh melampaui batas ketika berpolitik? Firman Allah: (maksudnya) Dan perangilah di jalan Allah orang-orang yang memerangi kamu, dan janganlah kamu melampaui batas, sesungguhnya Allah tidak menyukai mereka yang melampaui batas. Namun orang politik yang berperang untuk kerusi mereka melampaui batas. (Surah al-Baqarah: ayat 190)

Saya masih teringat seorang penceramah politik tertentu, beliau juga terkenal dengan alunan zikir munajatnya. Semasa saya menjadi mufti, beliau berceramah atas pentas politiknya bersama dengan pendengarnya mengalunkan ‘istighfar dan zikirnya’. Habis sahaja ceramah beliau memaki hamun saya di atas pentas yang sama dengan menggelar saya ‘bapa syaitan’. Beliau mahu memancung saya dengan tuduhan saya akan menulis buku khas mengkritik partinya dan beberapa tuduhan lain yang tidak benar. Padahal buku tersebut tidak pernah muncul dan saya tiada cukup masa untuk itu. Saya hanya tersenyum sinis melihat rakaman tersebut dalam youtube. Saya juga mungkin berterima kasih atas sedekahnya itu untuk saya yang kekurangan pahala ini. Cuma saya begitu kagum; bagaimana politik boleh menukar watak manusia daripada berzikir kepada memaki hamun orang. Maka jangan hairan jika politik boleh menukar manusia menjadi pencerca, perompak harta, penyeksa bahkan pembunuh sekalipun. Ya, orang politik memang pemurah pahala.

Sikap tidak professional yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang politik seperti inilah yang membantutkan manfaat intelektual dan menyumbang kepada keretakan masyarakat. Malangnya, hal ini sering dilakukan oleh orang politik yang sedang berkuasa, juga yang ingin mendapatkan kuasa. Apa tidaknya, jika seseorang yang memberikan pandangan yang berbeza atau mengkritik dalam batasan yang wajar diambil tindakan, maka terbantut idea-idea yang baik. Juga, apabila tindakbalas itu diambil dalam bentuk maki hamun, atau kezaliman yang lain, maka retak dan bergeserlah masyarakat. Sebab itu, saya dapati dalam negara kita ramai intelektual takut, atau tidak dilatih untuk memberikan pandangan ‘ketiga’ atau yang berbeza dengan ‘kumpulan-kumpulan politik’ yang ada. Ini kerana, jika kumpulan atau badan politik itu mempunyai kuasa kita akan diambil tindakan secara kuasa. Jika mereka belum berkuasa, senjata cercaan, makian dan kutukan akan digunakan yang menyebabkan banyak pihak tidak mampu menanggungnya. Dengan itu, sifat murah pahala orang politik itu bukan sahaja untuk pesaing politik mereka, juga untuk sesiapa yang enggan akur kepada pandangan mereka, sekalipun tidak menyokong musuh mereka. Sehingga kadang-kala kita mungkin kecewa dan perit dengan sikap yang seperti itu. Namun Allah itu adil. Sabda Nabi SAW: Segala hak akan dibayar kepada empunya pada Hari Kiamat, sehinggakan akan dibalas untuk biri-biri yang bertanduk atas perbuatannya ke atas biri-biri yang tidak bertanduk (Riwayat Muslim).

Cumanya, jika kita semua; sama ada kita orang politik atau tidak, merenungi hadis ini dan yang sebelumnya, mungkin kita akan tidak pemurah pahala lagi, atau akan kurang pemurah. Ini kerana setiap kita memang sukar untuk mengawal tabiat ‘boros pahala’ ini, namun mengingati hadis ini akan membataskan kita. Sifat pemurah memang dianjurkan oleh Islam kerana ia boleh membantu orang lain juga mengeratkan hubungan antara kita. Namun, jangan pemurah pahala kerana ia merosakkan orang lain dan meretakkan hubungan antara kita.

SUMBER : http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2009&dt=0517&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Bicara_Agama&pg=ba_02.htm

Daud Iraqi membuat kenyataan wujudnya politik wang dalam PAS.  Ramai terkejut.  Ramai melenting.

Hadi telah membuat penafian pada 18 Mei tentang kemungkinan wujudnya politik wang, atau rasuah dalam PAS.    Bila Husam cadang Daud Iraqi dibawa ke jawatan kuasa disiplin, Daud Iraqi bertegas dan berkata beliau tidak takut.  Kemudiannya, pada 19 Mei, Ketua Dewan Ulama' PAS Pusat,  Daud Iraqi juga menafikan bahawa beliau ada membuat kenyataan tersebut.

Mana satu yang betul?

Ada unsur pembohongan ke? 

Adakah pemberita yang mula-mula melaporkan dari Daud Iraqi yang berbohong?  Atau siapa yang bohong?

 

Salaam;
Hari ini. 11 Mei, 2009, UMNO merayakan ulang tahun ke 63.  UMNO, tulang belakang BN, masih belum mampu bernafas lega sejak dikejutkan oleh tsunami pru12, 2008. Terimalah ia sebagai hakikat.

Para aktivis UMNO, dari semua peringkat, walaupun tidak semua terlibat, telah lupa kepada asas kewujudan UMNO, dan majoriti para aktivis ini telah lupa kepada prinsip, falsafah dan matlamat perjuangan.  Malah, kalau ditanya, apakah prinsip dan falsafah perjuangan UMNO, saya yakin ramai yang akan terkial-kial mencari jawapan.  Seharusnya gegaran pru12 menjadi pengajaran, dan pendukung UMNO tidak berselimut dalam penafian, bahawa UMNO menghadapi risiko kekalahan dan kehancuran.  Para ahli muda terutamanya, bukan hanya hilang arah, malah tidak pernah tahu arah dan 'milestone' perjuangan.  Majoriti golongan muda UMNO lebih nampak peluang menghimpit pemimpin, mencari peluang jalan pintas ke lubuk rezeki dan puncak kuasa, berbanding dengan rasa bertanggungjawab memikul beban amanah bangsa.  Ini antara putik kehancuran.

Ramai umat Islam tahu, umur Nabi wafat ialah 63 tahun (kiraan tahun Hijrah).  Saya tidak tahu apa kena mengenanya dengan umur UMNO.  Tetapi kesan psikologi tetap ada, terutama bila BN/UMNO tewas teruk dalam pru-12.  Namun, jika dikaji lebih dalam sedikit, walaupun BN kalah teruk, undi untuk UMNO masih gagah.  Lihat sahaja para ADUN BN yang menang, sama ada di Selangor, Perak atau Pulau Pinang, hampir kesemua mereka adalah dari UMNO.  Komponen BN yang hilang terlalu banyak undi dalam pru-12 baru-baru ini ialah MCA, GERAKAN, MIC dan PPP.  MCA dan GERAKAN kepupusan undi dari kalangan pengundi berbangsa Cina, dan MIC dan PPP kepupusan undi dari kalangan pengundi berbangsa India.  Kesemua MCA, GERAKAN, MIC dan PPP melontar batu ke arah UMNO, menyatakan UMNO adalah punca segalanya. Benarkah begitu?  Saya tidak ingin mengulas perkara ini di sini, cukup sekadar membuka ruang untuk perbincangan di masa depan.

Saya juga tidak berhasrat membela UMNO di sini.  Lebih baik saya buka ruang untuk pendukung UMNO membuka mata, minda dan hati.  Selalunya kita lebih mudah bersikap defensif bila cuba meneliti kelemahan kendiri.  Segala peringatan dan pendapat dipandang sepi dan serong sehingga terhantuk baru nak tengadah.  Tetapi tengadah pun cuma untuk seketika.  Mungkin mereka ini tunggu dilanggar oleh trailer baru mahu sedar bahawa mereka berada dalam bahaya yang amat sangat. Lebih baik lagi, cuba keluar daripada diri sendiri dan teropong ke dalam diri dari luar.  Kalau tidak mampu keluar daripada diri sendiri, buka lah telinga, minda dan hati kepada coretan, dengusan, peringatan dan cadangan daripada orang di 'luar'. 

Saya cadangkan UMNO meneliti semula falsafah perjuangannya.  Perjuangan yang berasaskan "Ketuanan Melayu" sudah dicabar dan UMNO tidak mampu pertahankannya, antara sebabnya kerana ramai pemimpin UMNO sendiri yang menghancurkan 'Ketuanan Melayu", yang merosakkan amanah Melayu dan tidak menghormati Ketuanan Melayu.  Ramai pemimpin UMNO lebih memperjuangkan "Ketuanan Diri" dan "Ketuanan Kelompok" dalam UMNO.  Kemajmukan rakyat Malaysia, campuran keturunan Melayu, perubahan pemikiran dalam masyarakat Melayu dan bukan Melayu, menjadikan "Ketuanan Melayu" semakin tidak relevan dan tidak dapat bertahan.  UMNO perlu menaiki rakit perubahan, atau hanyut mengikut arus ke jeram dan menjunam ke jurang.

Konsep 1Malaysia masih belum jelas (8 tiang seri 1Malaysia: Culture of Excellence, Perseverance, Humility, Acceptance, Loyalty, Meritocracy, Education, and Integrity).  Ia lebih merupakan slogan sementara bagi memberi ruang kepada Najib untuk manarik nafas.  Jangan nanti hanya jadi macam rukunegara.  Bunyinya indah, tetapi tidak berpijak di jiwa. Di mana pula letaknya UMNO dalam 1Malaysia?  Apa pula relevannya UMNO dalam 1Malaysia? Slogan, tidak seharusnya dianggap sebagai kata-kata keramat untuk memenangi perjuangan.  Slogan hanyalah iklan yang menyentak perhatian.  Perhatian akan mengundang pentafsiran.  Pentafsiran akan dikait dan disandar kepada apa yang dilihat, dirasa dan dialami.  Jika pentafsiran tidak seperti yang dijangka, slogan itu tidak akan laku dilelong lagi. 

1Malaysia perlu dipenuhi dengan konsep, falsafah dan metodologi pembinaannya.  Konsep, falsafah dan metodologi ini perlu diterapkan ke dalam benak pemikiran para pejuang (ada ke para pejuang dalam UMNO kini?).  Proses penerapan ini tidak mampu berlaku dalam masa yang pendek.  Ia memerlukan perancangan, strategi dan langkah perlaksanaan.  Konsep 1Malaysia tidak akan dapat diterapkan hanya melalui program motivasi, ceramah dan drama.  Ia memerlukan perlaksanaan serentak antara konsep, pengisian, latihan, pengukuhan, perlaksanaan dan teladan yang dipertontonkan oleh pemimpin.

Di zaman manusia semakin banyak terdedah kepada maklumat, dan ilmu pengetahuan, serta mampu mencapai komunikasi bebas di pelantar maya, konsep yang longgar dan falsafah yang dangkal akan mudah dilanggar dan disangkal.  Keadaan ini menjadikan kerja penjelmaan konsep dan falsafah perjuangan baru untuk UMNO satu tugas yang maha berat.  Apa lagi, jika konsep 1Malaysia tidak bertatahkan nilai sejagat yang sudah diterima oleh ramai rakyat negara ini.  Jangan lupa bahawa masyarakat Malaysia berbilang kaum, berbilang adat dan berbilang agama dan semestinya berbilang pendirian.

UMNO mungkin bernasib baik jika PAS menukar arah kepada konsep dan pemikiran DAP-PKR. Kerana ia bererti PAS dalam proses pembikinan semula konsep perjuangan mereka yang tidak mengutamakan pembentukan negara Islam, atau penegakan hudud.  Jika PAS memang memilih slogan universal untuk bersama dengan DAP-PKR, UMNO dan BN boleh mendahului perlumbaan.  Tetapi, sekali lagi diingatkan, slogan semata tidak menjanjikan keagungan atau kemenangan.

Dilantai perjuangan, UMNO dicemuh bukan kerana konsep.  UMNO dicemuh kerana perlaksanaan yang tidak adil.  Perlaksanaan yang tidak adil ini kemudiannya disabitkan kepada konsep "Ketuanan Melayu" dan polisi DEB.  Pengundi India dan Cina marah kerana mereka menganggap pemimpin UMNO dan BN tidak adil, mementingkan kroni  dan keluarga, dan mereka sanggup mempertaruhkan kepercayaan kepada PAS, parti yang selama ini mereka curiga.  Malah pemimpin DAP masih terkial-kial cuba menyangkal laungan PAS yang inginkan penegakan negara Islam atau hudud.  DAP-PKR telah berjaya memujuk, walaupun sebahagiannya secara tidak benar, agar pengundi India dan Cina yakin bahawa PAS boleh dopercayai, pemimpin PAS baik dan tidak korup, Nik Aziz pergi kerja naik kereta buruk atau berjalan kaki (ini yang saya dengar sendiri).  DAP-PKR-PAS telah berjaya membina kepercayaan di kalangan masyarakat India dan Cina bahawa mereka (PR) adalah alternatif yang lebih baik daripada UMNO/BN.  Memang, kepercayaan adalah berasaskan persepsi, dan persepsi dibina melalui apa yang dilihat, didengar, atau dibaca berulang-ulang.  DAP-PKR bekerja keras di kalangan pengundi India dan Cina supaya memberi peluang kepada PAS.  Contoh terbaik, bila mereka begitu kukuh di belakang Nizar dalam kes kemelut politik di Perak.

Buat masa ini, UMNO/BN bernasib baik kerana bilangan Melayu lebih ramai daripada campuran India dan Cina.  Jika lebih ramai Melayu pula yang ikut sama mempercayai dendangan DAP-PKR-PAS, hasrat UMNO/BN untuk kembali memerintah Selangor, Pulau Pinang, Kelantan dan Kedah pastinya punah.

Demi mengisi usia 63 tahun, untuk terus bermaya dalam senario politik Malaysia, UMNO seharusnya meneliti lebih daripada konsep 1Malaysia.