DAP MP for Seputeh, Teresa Kok, who is currently in Sabah on a political visit together with Member of Parliament Fong Po Kuan (Batu Gajah), has drawn my attention to the following Daily Express report yesterday quoting the Malacca Chief Minister, Datuk Seri Haji Mohd Ali Rustam as saying “It is easy to become a Malay”:
Easy to become a Malay, says MB
Kota Kinabalu: Malacca Chief Minister Datuk Seri Haji Mohd Ali Rustam said a person who is a Muslim, converses in Malay and follows the Malay traditions is considered a Malay.
“It is easy to become a Malay, ” he told a Press conference after Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman opened the Dunia Muslim Dunia Islam (DMDI) seminar, here, Saturday.
Elaborating on why Musa had said that more than 50 per cent of the State’s nearly three million population are Malays, Mohd Ali, who is also DMDI president, said:
“Even if that person is Chinese or Indian or Kadazan,if they are Muslim or have converted, converse in Malay and follow the Malay tradition, then they are Malays.”
“The Kadazans if they are a Muslim, we considered them as Malays, and if they have not embraced Islam, they are Bumiputeras. It is easy to become a Malay.”
Present were Sabah Deputy Chief Minister Datuk Yahya Hussin, Tourism, Culture and Environment Minister Datuk Masidi Manjun and Sabah State Secretary Datuk KY Mustafa.
Also present were Indonesian Governor of Riau Province Rusli Zainal, Governor of Riau Archipelago Province Ismeth Abdullah, Governor of Bangka Belitung Province Syamsudin B and Malacca State Secretary Datuk Wira Ismail Salleh.
#1 by Freddy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:08 am
hahaha …. since long ago, i had always emphasised that ‘ketuanan melayu’ is a misnomer and that ‘ketuanan islam’ is apt.
didn’t i say long ago that it is easy to become a malay?
so, what’s new and why got so worked up over this issue?
#2 by rayden on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:21 am
The Malays have a saying: lembu punya susu, sapi dapat nama
Have they ever forgotten that it was the combine effort of our multi-racial that make today’s Malaysia?
Why does he have to say this?
Is he trying to tell that it’s much more beneficial to convert to Malays?
Just because u Malay outnumber our non-Bumiputra, doesnt mean that we will convert just for the sake of this so-call beneficial.
Reminder: Malay doesnt own this land,Bumiputra does.
#3 by sotong on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:40 am
Decades of bad leadership had created a misguided sense of arrogance, pride and entitlement.
There is no strong encouragement to work hard to develop one’s characters and to contribute positively to the country economy to create real, rewarding and meaningful jobs for the people.
#4 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:40 am
Who can fault him? That’s what the Constitution says.
#5 by sotong on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:52 am
Rampant corruption, gross excesses and abuses, increase crime, gross financial incompetent, inefficient and ineffective administration and more………our country is run by politicians and bureaucrats.
#6 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:58 am
teckwyn,
The intent of (a) and (b) of article 160(2) was to cover citizens. However article 160(2) was promulgated in the Federal Constitution in 1957 prior to Sabah and Sarawak joining Malaysia in 1963 and hence, in unamended form, has not covered Sarawakian and Sabahan Malaysian citizens, which it ought to, there being no rational reason (at least to me) why a Malaysian Chinese or Indian citizen in Peninsular fulfilling constitutional criteria of converting to Islam, conversing in Malay and following the Malay tradition could constitutionally be treated as a ‘Malay’ whilst Sabahan and Sarawakians bumiputras could not. Perhaps no one thought of amending article 160(2) when Sabah and Sarawak joined Malaysia because this did not appear a big issue (until Rustam’s recent declaration). Whatever the reason, you are right technically in constitutional terms that the wordings of (a) and (b) of Article 160(2) do not cover those before Merdeka Day (or Malaysia day) as the case may be, born in Sabah or Sarawak or born of parents one of whom was born in Sabah or Sarawak or is on that day domiciled in Sabah or Sarawak, as it should otherwise be the case. Thanks for the correction.
#7 by rhematek on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 12:13 pm
My defination of kallawar:- a long lost cousin of the fruit bat ( kelawar ) from another country. Same characteristic of the malaysian kelawar…blind…but the kallawar species is both blind and deaf. Kallawar we are awaiting your confirmation on this.
#8 by bhuvan.govindasamy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 12:33 pm
Let’s apply some negative logic, shall we? If the 3 criterias needed to be malay are:
1. Be muslim, AND,
2. Speak malay, AND,
3. embrace/practise malay culture, THEN
it stands to logic that the non-fulfilment of any one or all of them would mean you are not malay.
So, then why the hullaballo about Lina Joy? She is not malay because she professes to be christian, not muslim, and, does not practise the malay culture because she co-habitates with her boyfriend.
Hisap-muddin is not malay because he does not practise the malay culture. The malay culture doe not condone violence or threats to its neighbors.
Anwar is not malay because he cannot be considered muslim. Why, you may ask. Because he was convicted of homosexuality which is both abhorrent to islam & the malay culture.
Mahathir cannot be a malay. Because he bore false witness against Anwar, thus nullfying his muslim status.
See where I’m going? Ali Rustam has been proven with his statements to be illogical & a down right idiot.
#9 by mangodurian on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 1:50 pm
Let’s see, if all Chinese, Indians dan lain-lain (dll)
1. convert to Islam
2. appear to speak Malay
3. ‘practices’ Malay traditions (what does this mean? Eat rendang every day?),
then Malaysia will be 100% Malay – and finally we will be a homogenous and presumable harmonious and fair society. No more BN, no more MCA, no more MIC, no more UMNO.
If that’s the case, what are you waiting for? Let’s do it!
… Oh of course, after that we will have different privileges for Melayu-Coklat, Melayu-Kuning, Melayu-Hitam … and Melayu-dll.
#10 by lakshy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 2:09 pm
This is a Malay as defined in our constitution:-
160.
“Malay” means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom and -
(a) was before Merdeka Day born in the Federation or in
Singapore or born of parents one of whom was born in the
Federation or in Singapore, or is on that day domiciled in the
Federation or in Singapore; or
(b) is the issue of such a person;
#11 by lakshy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 2:24 pm
Other in teresting parts of the constitution:-
Article number: 3
3.
• (1) Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.
Article number: 4
4.
• (1) This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.
Article number: 8
8.
• (1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.
• (2) Except as expressly authorized by this Constitution, there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment.
• (3) There shall be no discrimination in favour of any person on the ground that he is a subject of the Ruler of the State.
• (4) No public authority shall discriminate against any person on the ground that he is resident or carrying on business in any part of the Federation outside the jurisdiction of the authority.
Article number: 11
11.
(1) Every person has the right to profess and practice his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.
(2) No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.
• (3) Every religious group has the right -
o (a) to manage its own religious affairs;
o (b) to establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable
purposes; and
o (c) to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.
• (4) State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.
• (5) This Article does not authorize any act contrary to any general law relating to public order, public health or morality.
#12 by Toyol on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 2:25 pm
In Bolehland, the Malays are a joke in the Muslim world. My Arab friends like to poke fun and criticize the mentality of our dominant race and I can’t help but agree with them! The sad thing is that they comprise the government and so our country’s image is also tarnished.
#13 by Billy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 2:26 pm
You know, for all its worth that I may not enjoy the privileges like my Malay brethrens, I have always considered myself so so so lucky to be born a Chinese and not a Malay. I have been blessed with the “hard work” mentality, the art of survival, strong business acumen, the freedom of choice and freedom from being spied upon. I can eat what I want, when I want and always feel enjoy the presence of my many friends without making them feel uncomfortable of my religious dos and don’ts. What more can I ask? Would I want to be a Malay (with no offense to my Malay friends)? Thanks, but no thanks.
#14 by RadicalScope on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 2:32 pm
kallawar pointed an interesting point. FYI, this land we call Malaysia (pronounced as MALAY-SI-A = “malay go die”) belongs to the Orang Asli, Kadazan, Iban, Murut, Dusun, etc. why? because the arly malay settlers were indebted to them. parameswara, the leader of the malay settlers got help from the orang ulu, a tribe of Orang Asli, to establish the kingdom of melaka. those people were the ones who helped parameswara defend his kingdom. that was in the 14-15th century. fast forward to 2007, they were not allowed to have medical benefit unless they become muslim, and they don’t even have half the rights malays (who were indebted to their ancestors) have. compare that to the land rights that makes the red indian of the US were granted with.
#15 by hang tuah on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 3:11 pm
it is easy to become a “bastard”
- anyone who are corrupted
- anyone who are hypocrite
- anyone who rob from the rakyat of wealth and land
- anyone who speak without brain
- anyone who are racist
- anyone who work to lined their own pocket
- anyone who issued ic to illegal immigrant
- anyone who misused their power for personal gain
- anyone who talk like the clowns in parliament
but mind u, religion is not a criteria.
being a “bastard” seem to be easier.
shake head………
#16 by [dele5edscrtls on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 3:36 pm
Its “bat” people like Kellawar that makes the non malays sick to their stomach…[deleted]
#17 by Loh on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 3:48 pm
If we consider the rationale for Article 153 as to provide level playing field for Malays,then the need for that Article was dependent on the situations Malays were in at the time the constitution was drawn up. It was to be for 15 years initially and subject to review. The review should be on the situation of the descendents of the Malays who had been in the country since 1957. The Malays then knew who Malays were, and Article 160(2) existed at that time served to describe the common denominations of Malays, and I believe it was not intended to arrange for entry of NewMalays.
If Article 153 is viewed as a compensation package for a known community who became a beneficiary to a contract, then the beneficiaries could include the descendents but certainly not persons who are similarly classified to the same “race”.
If Article 153 is to be amended to include a seperate category of “Malay Celup” as suggested, that suggestion says that “MalayCelup” should not automatically be entitled to the same benefits as Malay tulin would. Hence the basis for Article as it stands fails.
#18 by sotong on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 4:06 pm
Some politicians gave you the impression they are speaking on behalf of ordinary Malays….but they do not. Ordinary Malays are not like them.
There are many views to improve the country to benefit all. But the bumi, including the real Malays, culture and traditions and their way of life must be fully protected to maintain the country’s uniqueness for the benefit of generations to come.
#19 by Billy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 4:15 pm
Just to add on to Izrafeil posting. Jeanne Danker is not a Malay. She was born a Catholic to a Catholic family [of Portuguese descent]. Unless she has surrendered her baptismal and confirmation certificates to the Church, she is still technically a Catholic although she may claimed to be a Muslim by virtue of her marriage to two Muslim husbands. This is something she cannot ignore. Therefore, she continues to bear the genes (pardon the pun) of a Portuguese rather than a Malay. But what about our so-called first family. Are they Malays? Truly Malays, I mean. Let’s start with the PM. He has Chinese blood who got married to a woman [the late Endon] who had Japanese blood in her. So what does that make Nori and her brother? Then, Nori went on to marry a Bugis in the famous SIL. So what does that make their off-springs? Now the PM who has Chinese blood in him, married a lady with Portuguese blood, and if they have children, what is to be made of them? So can a not so pure Malay holds the position of a PM? Finally, will the real Malays stand up and be counted. The whole of UMNO is so rojak that one just doesn’t know when to begin.
But one good thing came out of the above. The Eurasians who have always been getting the rotten end of the stick now have their own representative at the very top of the government. So to all the de Costas, de Silvas, de Souzas, Pintos, Santa Marias, de Witts, Fernandezs and of course, the Dankers, CONGRATULATIONS! You all finally made it!
#20 by dawsheng on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 4:39 pm
“So to all the de Costas, de Silvas, de Souzas, Pintos, Santa Marias, de Witts, Fernandezs and of course, the Dankers, CONGRATULATIONS! You all finally made it!” Billy
HAHAHA… CONGRATULATIONS!
#21 by lakshy on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 4:41 pm
According to our constitution as copied above, PM is a Malay, by virtue of the fact that he is the offspring of a Malay. And so his children will also be Malay as they are offspring of a Malay. What the other half is doen not matter. No quetion of the degree of purity is called for in teh definition of being a Malay.
#22 by RadicalScope on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 6:02 pm
by virtue of the fact that he’s an offspring of a malay, right?
based on which side, may i ask? the mom’s or the dad’s? in my case, my grandad is an indian, married to a malay woman, and got a child, that is my dad. my dad married a malay woman, and got me. if it is based on the mom’s race, then my dad and me are malays. if it’s based on the father’s side, then both me and my dad are indians. if it’s purely on the basis of race; that is as long as you marry a malay your infant becomes a malay, i’d say that that’s a screwed up law.
#23 by slashed on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 6:39 pm
The ironic thing is that the malay culture itself is fast dissipating in the light of social globalisation. Look around you, can we genuine say that the malay youngsters act and dress like malays? Most malays probably do not know genuine Malay traditions. I am a chinese and I am willing to admit that I do not know alot about Chinese traditions. So in a strange twist, a malay is a person born to malay parents, but he does not need to act malay – but a ‘new’ malay has to be ‘more’ malay then he does. LOL
Basing the characterisation of a Race (as a legal definition) on such vague terms is surely difficult. Is there a definition for malay tradition in the constitution? If not, what use is that term for surely it leads to a arbitrary value judgment.
#24 by ReformMalaysia on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 6:55 pm
( Billy Says:June 12th, 2007 at 2:26 pm)
‘You know, for all its worth that I may not enjoy the privileges like my Malay brethrens, I have always considered myself so so so lucky to be born a Chinese and not a Malay. I have been blessed with the “hard work†mentality, the art of survival, strong business acumen, the freedom of choice and freedom from being spied upon. I can eat what I want, when I want and always feel enjoy the presence of my many friends without making them feel uncomfortable of my religious dos and don’ts. What more can I ask? Would I want to be a Malay (with no offense to my Malay friends)? Thanks, but no thanks.’
And some more….. freedom to find the truth….the choice of religion……not like the poor LINA JOY….
#25 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 7:07 pm
I don’t understand why people want to be Malays, Chinese or Indians.
I just want to be a free individual who lives the way he wants, believes what he wants and not have others breathing down his neck telling him what to do and what not to do.
I just want to be left alone and not have anyone tell me the meaning of freedom, its responsibility and its constitutional limitations etc. No thank you, I can think for myself.
I certainly do not need charity.
#26 by Loh on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 8:03 pm
///In either cases article 153 would not cease but perhaps expanded by amendment with articles 153(A) for “Melayu Asal†and 153(B) for “Melayu Celupâ€Â.///
Malayu Celup were non-Malays before they became Muslims. There were not considered pesons who needed support before they became Muslims, they could not be thought to have been weakened as to require support after becoming muslims. Hence the basis for Article 153 would fail if they were included for the benefits of that article. The ability to succeed in life is the responsibility of individuals personally. A community with its voting strength succeeded in demanding concession for the community. It would be unreasonable to demand similar concession for an extended commnity. Again voting strength would again ensure that Newmalays enjoy exactly the same special privileges which should have ended decades ago. I realise this is a discussion that would have no relevance to BN policies.
#27 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 8:29 pm
But would not the next wave of immigrants make ‘new’ Malays ‘old’ Malays? What’s the point in engaging in such useless rhetoric?
#28 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 8:46 pm
In his speech welcoming the return of the Malaysian expeditionary team to Mt. Everest at KLIA the Information Minister is reported to have referred to the Malays as pirates. Could he be promoting the movie: “Pirates of the Caribbean†?
Or could he be suggesting that Article 160(2) of our Constitution be amended to include not just people who habitually speak the Malay language, follow Malay customs and profess the Muslim religion but also “people who plunder, rape and rob�
#29 by ZipZap on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 9:50 pm
The last time TDM landed in Sabah he say all the natives of Sabah is of the the same Malay stock……got the que…… this really make me sick. Perhap TDM forget the Orang Sungai, Kadazan, Dusun, Paitan, Suluk etc have their own unique languages and customs. I don’t even want to touch on religion!
Now we have this stupid Malacca CM talking about the 3 ways to be call a “malay”, is down right insulting specially when he made the statement in Sabah.
I think the Sabah State Government should take back the thousand of acres of land in Tawau given to Yayasan Malacca for free and for what! Or do the Malacca State Government give Yayasan Sabah land in Malacca also? May be not quite free after all if you think of all the datukships and JPs dole out to the Sabah “Malay” UMNOputra.
No wonder!! the “Bocor” Kinabatangan YB profess that he is a “malay”. How can you trust a guy who foresake his own Orang Sungai race and language. He should do better to fight for his mother tongue to be thought in School in Kinabatangan area. Shame on him….. his children can’t event speak a word of his own mother tongue.
I am a Sababan and a Malaysian and a damn proud Chinese. In Sabah we don’t need the Malacca CM to teach us how to become a “malay” because they is no malay in Sabah but only the Natives of Sabah.
#30 by RadicalScope on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 10:41 pm
i agree with undergrad. why bother about race. i want to be “human”. and if you want to know the actual definition of “Malay” or “Melayu”, just ask any of your indonesian friend who speaks javanese. they will agree that “Melayu” means “run away”. if you want to know the details, feel free to email me: radicalscope@gmail.com. hate mails are welcomed, but will not be entertained.
#31 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 12 June 2007 - 11:42 pm
“I am a Sababan and a Malaysian and a damn proud Chinese. ”
I am from Selangor. Funny how nobody refers to me as a Selangorian or a Selangorido or a Selangorite.
Is there any difference between saying that you’re “a Sabahan and a Malaysian and a damn proud Chinese” and you’re “a Malaysian from the state of Sabah of Chinese ethnicity”?
#32 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 1:29 am
“I certainly do not need charity.” Undergard2
Tired of living in a country where there are more people in needs of charity than good samaritans, but these are not ordinary beggars or the unfortunate ones that genuinely in needs of charity, these are robbers that will rob you in broad daylight.
#33 by shiunji on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 5:13 am
lol I still have no idea why it is so important to become ‘Malay’ instead of ‘Malaysian’. People never ask me ‘what race are you?’, just where are you from? and I will ever gladly say Malaysia! Why can’t we be more like the Mauritians?
#34 by RGRaj on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 7:45 am
What about the Malays before the advent of Islam into Malaysia?
Don’t tell me they were labelled is Indians because at that time they were Hindus!
#35 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 11:28 am
“Or could he be suggesting that Article 160(2) of our Constitution be amended to include not just people who habitually speak the Malay language, follow Malay customs and profess the Muslim religion but also “people who plunder, rape and robâ€Â?” Undergrad2
You forgot one important criteria; “murder”.
#36 by maya on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 1:28 pm
Dear Sir,
Just to add my 2 cents worth. i dont think this is the Chief Minister’s personal opinion. When i attended the 2 day compulsory biro tata negara course, this was told to us repeatedly, that a Malay is defined as someone who is a Muslim, who speaks Malay and who follows the Malay tradition and customs. Then, using the same argument, probably someone of an indian descent is half malay as the Bahasa Melayu has Sanskrit for its root and so much of the traditions are Hindu based. Not that i want to be anything other then who i was born as, but just a thought for some people with superiority complexes to think about…
#37 by kalei on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 5:15 pm
yea, its easy, cheap and easy. But the question is, who wants to be a malay anyway?
#38 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 6:18 pm
It is not easy to ‘masuk Melayu’ because you’ll need to undergo a painful operation. To many losing the foreskin is like losing a part of your anatomy and the ladies don’t like that!
#39 by ryan on Wednesday, 13 June 2007 - 9:35 pm
UMNO politician can be dumb…but i don’t know that they can be THAT dumb…phatetics.
#40 by dawsheng on Thursday, 14 June 2007 - 1:11 am
Why can’t Mohd Ali Rustam just say it is easy to be Malaysian? Oh I forgot it is Dunia Muslim Dunia Islam Seminar, I can understand about being a Malay and a muslim but what does that have to do with other races becoming a Malay when they profess Islam as their religion? Are they then not Malaysian anymore? This country is fast falling apart with this kind of statement which it is clearly against the law of nature and the nature of law. What we have here is the evolution of Malay dillemma, this is Malay superiority complex, both problems cannot be solves as long as it is a case of denial. It is kinda freaky don’t you think?
#41 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 14 June 2007 - 5:33 am
I hear that Paris Hilton now in jail, when she is released would like to come to Malaysia and be a Malay.
#42 by RadicalScope on Thursday, 14 June 2007 - 8:28 am
here’s a mail that i received during my absence:
by bro. jamaluddin abu bakar,
agree with you, buddy..and may I add a little thought.
There is no Malay race…Malay is like a club with certain conditions for entry.
Accoding to unwritten (but rational) history, long ago there were no Malays in Tanah Melayu. There were only the Orang Asli..the Jakuns, the Senois..Semangs (?)…etc…etc.
Then came the traders and pirates from neighbouring Sumatra, Medan, Aceh and Sulawesi (bear in mind that there was also no Indonesia yet). These people comprise many races including the Bugis of whom the pirate Daeng Parani was among them. Daeng Parani is the ancestor of the current royalties of Johor. Earlier there was also GajahMada, the supreme leader of the Majapahit empire.
So these people came to Tanah Melayu and settled there and their descendants unified and called themselves Malays. So Malay is actually some kind of organisation or association or club. Therefore it’s not wrong to say it’s easy to become a Malay…all you have to do is follow the membership rules, that is to be a Muslim and speak Bahasa Melayu. That’s it..you are in. But unfortunately their constitution does not provide for equality for Malay members who are Chinese, Indians and other races for their rights to be on par with the descendants of pirates.
It’s almost like the Kadazans of Sabah. Kadazan is a politically created race.
————————-
by the way, maya. for your information, many of the intellectual malays who attended biro tatanegara courses called it a “brain-washing session”. you want to know why? BECAUSE IT DOES NOT PROMOTE RACIAL INTEGRATION. IT SOWS RACIAL DISTRUST. IT TELLS MALAYS TO HATE OTHER RACES. and if you actually accept whatever they taught you there, forgive me, but you have something (or a lot of thing) wrong with your brain.
50 years of independence should mean that the country has matured enough to see BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF RACE AND RELIGION. somethjing like biro tatanegara is not needed anymore.
#43 by shortie kiasu on Thursday, 14 June 2007 - 4:49 pm
To many and to the world, the very mention of Malay conjures up the picture of people on crutches, protected species, waiting to be doled out free minimum 30% free equities in any successful corporations in the Malay land, special rights and privileges when coming to government contracts, licences, scholarships, education in University, jobs in GLC, jobs in civil service ….
Nothing to be proud to be Malay if that perception persists, but shamefulness!
#44 by bcda on Thursday, 14 June 2007 - 11:28 pm
Sounds like it easy to become a gay, but cannot turn back as man anymore. Cos why? its already cut off cannot be sewn & use back.
#45 by pongsakling on Friday, 15 June 2007 - 11:40 am
Why we talk about been Malay, Chinese, indian or others is beacuse our BN goverment do not treat all equally. Just imagine, if our BN goverment treat all equally, what will be the different for been Malay, Chinese, Indian or Others.
#46 by pamelaoda on Friday, 15 June 2007 - 1:34 pm
With what you ppl written above, if I m a malay, i feel so sick and so hina and I hope I am an ostrich instead!
#47 by maya on Friday, 15 June 2007 - 3:55 pm
Dear Radicalscope,
I thought it was obvious to people that when i referred to biro tata negara course, it was with contempt, and i can vouch about the seed of distrust that they planted in us during the course. I didnt meet any of the intellectual malays you were talking about there,as nobody stood up for us when we, the minority, were made to feel so unwanted. all i met were people who appeared to agree with the content of this really disruptive course, which i had commented on in another issue in this blog. At the end of the day, i felt really isolated and alone, by virtue of my race/religion. All the course did to me, was to help me make up my mind once and for all that never will my children go through this discrimination. And you are right, it was a divide and rule policy by the government. And thankfully, because there is nothing wrong with my brain, i have not come out of the course losing my self esteem and sense of worth. And i sincerely hope that these courses are abolished. infact i had written to uncle Lim to bring this up in the parliament. So, thank you very much, but nothing is wrong with my brain, at least now that i am out of there!
#48 by Loh on Friday, 15 June 2007 - 5:48 pm
///There is no Malay race…Malay is like a club with certain conditions for entry.
Accoding to unwritten (but rational) history, long ago there were no Malays in Tanah Melayu. There were only the Orang Asli..the Jakuns, the Senois..Semangs (?)…etc…etc.///
It is surprising that club members could become very emotional to the extent that they saw fit to have Article 153 initially for 15 years, and now forever. Sometime ago, there was a conference to discuss whether the club would remain on this earth. Since it is not a race, where the population has to depend on birth, the continuation of the club depends on both birth and new entry, the club cannot die easily. The club members need not feel emotional about their possible disappearance as would the members of an engangered specis.
#49 by greenacre on Saturday, 16 June 2007 - 12:26 am
Undergrad was surprised by the sabahan term. A decade ago in australian university there were among us many malaysians. This guy from sabah (chinese) each time we mention malaysian he will retort that he is Sabahan. I didn’t think of it then but I wonder now? why!
#50 by teckwyn on Sunday, 24 June 2007 - 2:25 pm
The DAP SG just issued a statement that: “Malaysians are divided into bumis and non-bumis with special rights for the former determined solely by skin colour and ignoring merit and needs.”
While it is true that merit and need are not the practical determinants, it is not true that “skin colour” plays a key role in the dichotomy. Skin colour is certainly not the sole determinant as stated. This is a grave fallacy that I hope DAP would cease to promulgate.