MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku


                                                                                                                                     KKLIU 1211/2017
CLICK HERE :http://oze.my/

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Commander, you cross the river by feeling the stones

YOURSAY | ‘The opposition may yet save the Malays from themselves and from Umno-BN.’
Awang Top: There isn't, at this point in time, anyone who would swim upstream against the tide to innovate a new Malaysia - Malays who would not depend on the government but on their own god-given potential to excel and succeed; non-Malays who would strive to develop this country with a soft spot for their Malay brethren.
Religion has been used umpteen times to confuse and suppress, and a new Malaysia should be made to mature socially, politically, economically, and spiritually.
Prudent: One step at a time, Commander (Rtd) S Thayaparan. You cross the river by feeling the stones.
The Malays are still seemingly in a stupor through the delusion of ‘ketuanan Melayu’ that was and is being force-fed into them after May 13, 1969 by the Umno ultras, of which former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad was and is one.
The opposition do not want to fall into a trap and be swept away by deluded Malays still high on Umno's ‘ketuanan Melayu’ ideology and further seduced by mass ‘dedak’ (animal feed).
One step at a time but in the right direction. The opposition may yet save the Malays from themselves and from Umno-BN.
Plo: An excellent piece, as usual, from the commander. Those who are advocating, fighting and standing up for the rights of the people, the animals, the forests and the environment are seen as anti-establishment and labelled opposition. They are threatened with censorship, sedition charges and worse, remanded or imprisoned.
Is a new Malaysia possible when the country is now a haven and a sanctuary for people who are wanted in their own countries, a transit for people who have evil intentions and who engage in evil actions?
David Dass: A week or so, the PM listed out a very long list of policies, programmes and actions that the government had undertaken and was undertaking for Muslims and Islam. Now he says that leaders of the opposition are opposed to the progress of both Malays and Islam.
The point has been made repeatedly by everyone from every side - that whichever government comes into power, it must be led by Malays and the Malays will be the dominant members of such government.
Moreover, all of the provisions that deal with the position of the rulers, Malay special rights and Islam are protected by the need for constitutional amendment and the consent of the rulers.
The Parliament, the state legislative assemblies, the civil service, the police, the Armed Forces and the judiciary are all dominated by Malays and Muslims.
That will not change even if adjustments are made to reflect a more multiracial approach to things. That is something that should be done by any government in power.
Today, what the government does and has done for the Malays and Islam is a great deal. And the non-Muslims are saying - plaintively - hey, what about us? We are also citizens. We are equal under the law. Discrimination is unlawful.
Freedom of worship is guaranteed. We pay taxes. Why are we not adequately represented in all of the institutions of government? Why are we continuously treated as people who are hostile to Malay and Muslim interests?
Yes, some of us are opposed to turning this country from a secular one to a theocratic state. Some of us are opposed to the implementation of hudud law, whatever its guise.
We do not want to alter the 'atmosphere' in the country where freedom of worship and the legitimate activities of non-Muslims are examined microscopically by zealots and progressively circumscribed. Take the guidelines for the building of non-Muslim places of worship as one example.
We understand that when elections loom, things are said to obtain support from every quarter. But in the past, there were limits. Now it appears that the limits are gone.
Anonymous #44199885: Social media is not a battleground but an outlet for the rakyat to voice their views, opinions and concerns. Though at times there have been people who abuse the facility, by and large social media has contributed to the revelation of corruption and mismanagement.
It has enabled the sharing of opinions and views that have reached the eyes and ears of many, many Malaysians, more so than the sterilised and censored stuff emanating from the print and government-controlled and government-friendly media.
The rakyat deserve full transparency of decisions and decision-making that affect their lives. It must be supported with sound considerations of facts and evidence.
I have not seen any who have been trying to breach or break the social contract. Peddling of lies and deceit is certainly not coming from civil society nor the opposition but government supporters who are unable to defend wrongdoing, bad policy decisions and certainly failed implementation of policies designed to help the poor.
David Dass: “Our streets will be littered with blood and dead bodies if the social contract is broken,” said DPM Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
How did we get there? How can the deputy prime minister of a country speak in such terms? He says that the social media has become a battlefield for opposing views on things. Why does it have to be described as a battlefield? A healthy open discussion of issues is good. No one questions the 'social contract' if that is a reference to the various provisions of the constitution.
The term ‘social contract’ has been used by many politicians in different contexts and is badly in need of definition and clarification. All Malaysians will accept policies and programmes that are directed at the least advantaged in the country. They will accept programmes and actions designed to promote bumiputeras in business.
But effect must also be given to the equality and non-discrimination provisions of the constitution. And to the provisions guaranteeing freedom of expression and freedom of religion.
The comparison with countries like Iraq, Syria and Turkey are not valid. Iraq was ruled by a dictator who was removed by the US and Syria is ruled by a dictator who is supported by the Russians. As for Turkey, they were and are faced with serious ideological issues that resulted in an attempted coup.
The discussions on social media that precipitated the Arab Spring were simply urgings for more democratic freedoms. Unfortunately, the absence of democratic experience and infrastructure proved fatal to these movements.
Many have argued that the movement towards justice and freedom has a spiritual aspect. Social media is a good thing if it is a vehicle for true information to all. Mainstream media lost out to social media because it lost credibility as the vehicle for truth.
Malaysia is a democracy with democratic institutions. We are a long way from May 1969 which many believe was not a spontaneous uprising of all its people, but limited trouble instigated by a few disgruntled people.
Anonymous 539281478077880: The mainstream media is a ‘lopsided one’ whereby they seemingly had to follow the instructions strictly stipulated by the government-of-the-day.
But with social media, many can comment and debate on current issues freely. But we, too, have to maintain some decency when commenting. There must be no ‘character assassination’.

If the social media is used in the correct sense, it can never become a ‘battlefield’.- Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment