At 20:56,19 hours yesterday, on my thread “Songkok compulsory wear for JB English College prefects”, a blog visitor left the following posting:
However, as far as the “EC prefect wearing songkok issue” is concerned, I am surprised that no one has yet posted that the issue has been resolved amicably as the headmaster himself has announced today during an emergency prefects meeting that it is NOT compulsory for the prefects to wear the songkok for whatever function or duty.
This morning, I phoned and spoke to the principal of Maktab Sultan Abu Bakar (formerly English College) Johor Bahru, Haji Zulkifli bin Mahmood and he confirmed the veracity of the posting on my blog – that he had announced that it is not compulsory for school prefects to wear the songkok for whatever function or duty.
I welcome the return to sanity, as the compulsory imposition of the songkok issue has attracted considerable flak and traffic on my blog with three threads and 359 comments in four days, viz:
1. Songkok compulsory wear for JB English College prefects (11.1.08) – 133 comments
2. Songkok made compulsory – latest in series of insensitivities usurping “middle ground” (11.1.08) – 87 comments
3. Suspend “Little Napoleons” school principals who trample on rights and sensitivities of plural Malaysia (12.1.08) – 139 comments
I commend the parent of the school prefect who not only gave full support to his son, a Form Five student who had been a prefect since he was Form Two, to stand firm on principle to the extent of being prepared to resign as school prefect and for bringing this issue into public domain to bring public pressure to end abuses and misuses of power and rank disregard of the legitimate rights and sensitivities of all communities and religions in plural Malaysia.
The lesson here is clear – Malaysians must stand up for their fundamental and constitutional rights as citizens of a plural nation as nobody will stand up for them unless they are prepared to come forward to speak and cry out against excesses and abuses of power. If they do so, they can be assured of the support of right-thinking middle-ground moderate Malaysians – and this blog is dedicated to defend our fundamental constitutional citizenship rights.
#1 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 5:53 pm
Our constitution guarantees us certain basic rights. The right to abode, the right to vote, the right to practise your religion, etc. Compulsion of wearing the songkok infringes on your basic right to education. So if they say that you either wear a songkok or don’t attend school, then even a majority of the Muslims will tell you that it is wrong.
It’s similar to the a hard-core group of UMNOputras telling you to leave the country if you don’t like it here. They don’t have the right to tell you to leave because you have every right to stay – and that is guaranteed by the constitution.
#2 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 6:00 pm
Which is why at the haead of this thread:
However, as far as the “EC prefect wearing songkok issue†is concerned, I am surprised that no one has yet posted that the issue has been resolved amicably as the headmaster himself has announced today during an emergency prefects meeting that it is NOT compulsory for the prefects to wear the songkok for whatever function or duty.
#3 by Jeffrey on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 6:36 pm
“So if they say that you either wear a songkok or don’t attend school, then even a majority of the Muslims will tell you that it is wrong”. – Godfather. Equally if they say that you either wear a songkok or don’t be a prefect” then that’s wrong (when one by conduct and achievement in school is otherwise eligible to or have been appointed one by the school). I believe that’s the issue, isn’t it?
#4 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 6:56 pm
Jeffrey:
We have to look at the different degrees of “intolerance”. For every person who doesn’t want to be a prefect because he won’t wear a songkok at ceremonies, there are perhaps 10 others who would. Should we therefore pamper to this absolute minority when we could easily have uniformity and perhaps more of an esprit de corps if we go with the absolute majority ? The principled individual may have earned the prefectship but if he is so intolerant as not to go with the vast majority, then perhaps not having him on the prefect board may be beneficial for harmony and tolerance in society in the longer term.
Take a poll. Ask non-Muslim parents if they would allow their children to wear songkoks at ceremonies if their schools dictate it. Just don’t blow it up into such a big issue when the vast majority doesn’t see it as so.
4.
#5 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 6:59 pm
Now that the issue is resolved, there is no need to harp on it anymore. Intolerance works both ways.
#6 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 7:21 pm
Just don’t blow it up into such a big issue when the vast majority doesn’t see it as so.- Godfather
I disagree most emphatically. Your kids can wear the songkok.
#7 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 7:22 pm
Never ever mine or my relatives`.
#8 by grace on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 7:46 pm
For every one of you who believe that the wearing of the songkok at official functions is wrong (or a gradual erosion of your rights) then don’t go for the official functions. Don’t be a prefect. Don’t be a datuk. There are countless others who are willing to do so because they are not offended by it.- Godfather
You cannot compare ceremony for datukship and appointment of prefect.
Hey, Getting a datukship is for the rich and connected. Datukship carries a lot of weight. Juus an example, police will not check or ask for your driving licence if you have a datuk crest on your car. On top of that people crave for it.
Prefectship comes with more resposibility. To add a songkok to your uniform means more expenditure. some poor parents find it hard to buy.
“So if they say that you either wear a songkok or don’t attend school, then even a majority of the Muslims will tell you that it is wrong.- Godfather
ARE YOU SURE??????
#9 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 7:47 pm
Tickler: You, your children or your relatives have every right never to wear the songkok. Others will have the right to.
#10 by sybreon on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 7:49 pm
Yea, i welcome the return to sanity, not of the principal, but rather the people who read and comment on this blog. I find it sad that some of us are too quick to jump on the race/religion bandwagon for every little issue that is raised. We really need to get out of that mentality. Otherwise, things will never change.
#11 by AhPek on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 8:07 pm
Godfather,your insistence in saying that there is nothing wrong with wearing a songkok or for that matter baju kurung is perfectly sane and would also be the position of any civil minded chap.However I would not agree with anybody if you say that it is prefectly alright if somebody were to make wearing songkok part of school uniform or prefectorial uniform or work attire in a purportedly multiracial and multicultural society in a nation ruled by a government purportedly selling the idea of diversity to the outside world.It makes nonsense of of this concept of treating all ethnic groups fairly.Why don’t you ask whether it is alright to impose cheongsam as prefectorial uniform and see the repercussions vibrating throughout the nation?
The big distinction in this case is wearing malay attire of one’s own volition and being told to wear it as part of uniform.If it is part of uniform then you have to wear it at all cost or else disiplinary action will be given and if repeated expulsion will followBy implication it simply means that the dominatig group is imposing its will on the minority group if such an action is to be pursued!That is why in Malaysia’s case we are witnessing marginalisation and hegemonismcreeping in slowly and surely.It is up to us to be vigilant and take steps to nip it in the bud when such actions are detected.
#12 by dranony on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 8:12 pm
Godfather said on Tues 15 Jan 2008 at 17:41.11:
“For every one of you who believe that the wearing of the songkok at official functions is wrong (or a gradual erosion of your rights) then don’t go for the official functions. Don’t be a prefect. Don’t be a datuk. There are countless others who are willing to do so because they are not offended by it.”
I disagree.
This is exactly what the issue is about – it’s about the lack of sensitivity and lack of mutual respect and lack of mutual understanding by the dominant race, which is leading to creeping erosion of the values and culture and practices of the minority races.
We pride ourselves in declaring to the world that we have a harmonious society comprising of various races and cultures – or has that been done away with?
If we still hold on to that ideal, why must we force minority races and cultures to adopt the practices values and culture of the majority, albeit in a creeping fashion, by progressive exclusion of the minorities from areas of interaction which were previously free of such influence, unless they are forced to conform?
The so-called “choice” of “either you do it our new way, or you lose out what you had been doing before” is NOT really a choice – it is but COMPULSION.
If you accept the creeping enforcement of minor erosions like the songkok, what then of the tudung next? (Not that it has not already happened?)
Saudari Fong Po Kuan forewent her convocation at IIU, simply because she felt that the tudung was an Islamic practice, and she felt that forcing her to wear the tudung is an affront to her freedom of belief. Do you also agree with the forced wearing of the tudung at convocations?
Do you still hold onto your “You can always choose not to attend” argument?
Does one not have a right to attend one’s convocation?
Or do you define rights only to that which governs abode, votes and religion?
Even if so, does not the freedom of religion mean freedom in choice of NOT donning emblems of another religion?
The minorities fear that the institution of such practices may creep in the future, certainly not an impossibility. Today, it may be only convocation, later it may be extended to other official fucntions, and later to lesser functions, and even later still to daily wear. Impossible? Hardly.
#13 by dranony on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 8:28 pm
I’m sorry I may have made a mistake – Saudari Fong Po Kuan was _compelled to wear the tudung_ for her convocation. She did attend her convocation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fong_Po_Kuan
I had mistaken another poster in one of these “compulsory songkok” threads, ie “malaysiatoday.com” who had boycotted his convocation at UTM because he was forced to wear the songkok:
http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2008/01/11/songkok-compulsory-wear-for-jb-english-college-prefects/#comment-68865
#14 by Malaysian on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 8:49 pm
Why would one “tend” to link islam to malay tradition?
The reason being that all Malay are automatically born as Islam religion, basically no choice.
But even if taking out religion part, imposing own tradition on others also not a right thing to do. “Encourage” would be a better choice.
As for wearing school uniform, something neutral with school badge will do. This itself can be accepted across all race and religion.
Wearing tie, i personally don’t think it is necessary except official functions. If not worn properly it restricts blood circulation.
But since wearing tie is ALREADY a generally accepted attire amongst the race and not SEEN as associated to religion, i guess thats the reason no one really would oppose it.
(Assuming and IF) wearing tie is a must during, say, non-islam prayer ceremony for many years in Malaysia, then a reasonable person would understand if a muslim oppose to wearing tie for not willing to be SEEN AS associated with other religion.
#15 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:04 pm
The ‘songkok’ is a failure of leadership. We should expect more. Much like the common cold, withdrawing the instruction only treats the symptom – but not the illness. And much like the common cold things got to get worse before they get better.
It is the job of the DAP to ensure that we are not just treating the symptom.
#16 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:04 pm
…ooops ‘songkok’ issue
#17 by dranony on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:08 pm
Godfather,
If there is a directive that non-Muslim policewomen must wear the tudung during official parades and ceremonies, what would you advise the policewomen? Refuse to attend the official ceremonies?
But what if it is compulsory to attend the ceremonies?
Go for MC? Resign?
Refuse to sign up as policewomen in the first place?
I’m assuming that the “policewomen tudung” directive is still in place – I wonder – can anyone give the figures of how many non-muslim women have signed up as policewomen ever since that directive came into effect in March 2006?
#18 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:12 pm
What I am trying to provoke in this thread is simply that what some of us see as intolerance towards non-Malays may be interpreted as intolerance or disrespect towards the Malays by the “other” side. Have we ever thought that the Malays see it as an honour to ask us – as non-Muslims – to wear the songkok ? Like some of you said in your comments, what if you abuse this honour by doing certain things with the songkok on that are anathema to the Muslim faith ? Have we seen it as an unifying factor rather than as a dis-unifying (if there is such a word) factor ?
There are far bigger issues than this, and I just think that we are making a mountain out of a molehill by prolonging this debate.
#19 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:12 pm
“The lesson here is clear – Malaysians must stand up for their fundamental and constitutional rights as citizens of a plural nation as nobody will stand up for them unless they are prepared to come forward to speak and cry out against excesses and abuses of power. If they do so, they can be assured of the support of right-thinking middle-ground moderate Malaysians – and this blog is dedicated to defend our fundamental constitutional citizenship rights.” KIT
You sound like Barack Obama here! And like Barack Obama, it makes my hair stand on ends just reading it!
#20 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:17 pm
Tickler: You, your children or your relatives have every right never to wear the songkok. Others will have the right to. – Godfather
But that I already told you:
Your kids can wear the songkok.
Never ever mine or my relatives`.
[I left out `most of my friends`]
#21 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:22 pm
There are far bigger issues than this, and I just think that we are making a mountain out of a molehill by prolonging this debate. – Godfather
So that`s your tolerance. Everyone should agree with you on this `unifying factor` to avoid mountains out of molehills. What next – mass circumcisions. You could equally make a case for that. How about breaking all those statues in Hindu Temples. That too would be unifying. No wonder temple statue demolitions are such a unifying factor.
Minorities should shut up and then all be unified. Osama Laden says the same.
#22 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:23 pm
Well at least Raja Petra was right about tolerance and dogs doing their job on his lawn.
#23 by shaolin on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:25 pm
ALLAH will surely faint when he sees the Chinese men
wearing songkok eating pork at stalls, touching and
playing with dogs, yeam sing at bars with beers and
hard drinks… He certainly will ban all Chinese to wear
songkok!!
Baju Melayu and songkok come hand in hand. Songkok
is termed religious headgear for Malays to wear during
prayers… Why allow all Non Malays
to wear them, trying to brain-wash them to convert to
Muslims and turn this country into Secular State??
It is Day Dreaming and Bodoh act!
#24 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:26 pm
Guys:
Kit is the one who stands to lose the most out of prolonging this debate. Not you nor I – but the DAP. It has just become fodder for the den of thieves.
#25 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:30 pm
Not at all, the sanctity of the headgear is being protected by the non muslims.
#26 by dranony on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:39 pm
Godfather, the provocation came from the attempt to enforce one emblem of a dominant culture, unto another, a minority.
You are trying to defend that provocation. I wonder though, if even you sometimes feel that such provocation is hard to defend.
If it is really an “honour” as you suggest, then there would be no need to make it COMPULSORY, is there?
Since when have honours been forced unto others?
Honours are offered, NOT forced upon others.
What say you of the black Australian aboriginal children who were similarly “offered” to stay with white parents?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_generations
Should the aboriginal children feel “honoured?”
#27 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:51 pm
Ultimately, the final arbiter of our rights are the courts of law. If anyone feels hard done by, he/she can seek a declaration from the courts that it violates his/her rights under the constitution. The reality is that with the Muslims as the majority in a one-person-one-vote system, and with vastly differential birth rates and immigration rates between Muslims and non-Muslims, it is inevitable that the minorities will feel that their rights are being impinged. Could the minorities get protection from the courts ? Based on recent experiences on the corruption of the judiciary, I think not. The only solution is regime change, so that the rot in the very bastions of protection – judicial, prosecutorial, investigative – are reversed. And the only way for regime change is to work as one, and not to polarize society any further than it currently is.
#28 by Anba on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:54 pm
Dear All,
Why on earth in the first place the principal instructed to wear the songkok?
I disagree with God father. We need to see this as a form of indoctrination by the Malays. Sebol’s notion that says that songkok should be taken as wearing a tie is also not acceptable. Can the ulamak’s and other’s knowledgeable in the Muslim religion step forward and offer some explanation and don’t keep quiet when some issues like this comes out?
Let’s not be happy that the principal says now that it is not compulsory to wear the songkok now. I don’t know which association can appeal this to the government to ensure that such incident never happen in Malaysia again. If we don’t do this, these ‘religiously fanatic’ will attempt to ‘test the waters’ again.
May God bless Malaysia.
#29 by Colonel on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 9:59 pm
“Kit is the one who stands to lose the most out of prolonging this debate.” Godfather
I do not think YB Kit is prolonging anything. There has been criticism earlier by a poster here that there is no report on this blog that the instruction to force the songkok on to those who do not want to wear them has been retracted.
Kit has to highlight and confirm that retraction by the school headmaster. Otherwise his critics would make fodder of him!
We should not oppose for the sake of opposing. We are quick to criticize and expose any wrongdoing. We demand change. Don’t you think we should be equally quick to congratulate those who make that change happen?
#30 by AhPek on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:09 pm
Godfather,
I think you are trying to push your argument thro.Who says this creeping marginalisation or hegemonism is a trivial matter,a small issue in your words.I beg to differ for this tramples into my right not only as citizen but also my right to choose.If you try to propound that I think most of us here would also have an issue on what you are trying to push thro.It is an issue that goes beyond financial(if you think that only financial or corruption issues can be classified as big). This issue strike right at the heart of one’s freedom.
Simple this is not an issue if one were to wear it on one’s own volition.It becomes an issue when one is made to wear as a uniform.Analogy to this…. if one were to circumcise on one’s own volition out of the belief that it is hygienic then one does not see any problem but if I am forced to circumcise then an issue will emerge!!Of course if the UMNOPUTRAS can get away this seemingly ‘small issue’, they will keep looking for other seemingly ‘small issues’ until one day they will become confident enough to suggest unthinkable that since Malaysia is a muslim country why not all citizens become Muslims!!
#31 by AhPek on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:10 pm
Should be ‘……………..to suggest the unthinkable ……………’.
#32 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:19 pm
AhPek:
What is your final recourse if “they” don’t back down on the songkok issue ? You go to the courts to seek a declaration that it violates your rights under the constitution. You think you have a chance of winning ? Do you see the MCA, MIC or Gerakan supporting such a motion ?
We should not equate this with forced circumcision or forced conversion – even the MCA, MIC and Gerakan will not stand idly by under such circumstances. I will lead the street protests.
#33 by assamlaksa on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:22 pm
I was studying Form 6 at MSAB aka EC 20 years ago. There isn’t any choice as there is hardly any schools that has Form 6 classes at that time. In my previous school I was the head prefect but I decided not to join the MSAB prefectorial board due to the songkok thing. However, I need to emphasize here that in those days songkok was already part of the prefect’s uniform but later I found out that it was NOT COMPULSORY. At that time, not many of the prefects wear the songkok all the time, including the Malays. Most of them only wear them during functions.
#34 by U32 on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:27 pm
To the principal of the JB English college, I said good move because he will gain the respect of more people. This is what we mean by earning respect.
Once I listened to a programme in the BBC and it talks about the wearing of uniforms and the psychological effects behind it. One of it being you must all be the same. A form of suppression. On another hand, a uniform comes with it dignity and the meaning behind. But if one does not feel dignified anymore, then the uniform has no more meaning. That is why places like in U.S., the pupils and the students do not wear uniforms.
Back to the Little Napoleon thingy. Who allow the existence of Little Napoleons if not the government itself ? If the government does not take charge of things, it can be sure the people will handle things themselves and that is when they become Little Napoleons. Like this school in JB, the principal does things his ways without consulting anyone and nobody questions him. When nobody questions him and allows him to do as he pleases, that is how he becomes one of the many Little Napoleons. Shouldn’t the authorities stop him instead of leaving the decision to his discretion, thinking that he must be one very clever guy ?
A school is supposed to be one of the safest places on Earth and the environment should be healthy and allow the students to grow. It should be a place which the students think it is the best place to be in. If the student is threatened, it means that the school is not a school and whoever is in charge should correct the situation immediately.
Coming to the issue of dress code, I think that if a person is clothed suitably for a particular event, it should be acceptable. Western clothes belong to the westerners. Malay clothes belong to the Malay. What I mean is that we can wear what they wear but it should not be made compulsory. Once, some non Muslim was wearing a tudung and a baju Melayu. I thought she is converted to Islam. When I asked, she laughed away. Much later, when she got married, I discover that she was wearing the Islam outfit for the reason of cultural exchange. Would wearing a baju Melayu ensures a non Malay, non Muslim gets a job promotion ? Would wearing a baju Melayu proves that you are clever than the rest ? Or why should we place so much importance on appearance ? Isn’t intelligence and wisdom more important ? What is so deficient about looking just neat, clean and tidy, minus the make up ? Will Malayization become successful ? The Baba Nyonya sacrificed a lot except the religion. The same goes for the Chitty. Do we have to follow their footsteps ?
#35 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:27 pm
Malaysia is to consider using mass circumcision ceremonies to promote racial harmony.
[ ]
Dr Abdul Hamid Othman said that with the growing popularity of circumcision among the country’s non-Muslim minorities – who see it as good hygienic practice – they too could be invited to join in the celebrations with their Muslim friends.
He believes the idea could promote better race relations and he wants to see a nationwide circumcision ceremony organised.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3326861.stm
Proposed 3 years ago. Only needs to be revived. Hopefully after the next GE.
#36 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:37 pm
Tickler:
Does it say that Dr Hamid was proposing circumcision as compulsory for non-Muslims ?
#37 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:43 pm
Don`t worry lah. You wouldn`t have to be the first to protest. You didn`t read just fly off the handle:
“they too could be invited” doesn`t sound compulsory does it.
#38 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:46 pm
Sedikit sedikit lama lama jadi bukit. Faham.
#39 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 10:59 pm
I wonder why this feller would want to (being part of godfather`s majority):
“I agreed to go for a DNA test and the results confirmed that they were indeed my biological parents.
“The girl who was always looking at me was actually my elder sister who suspected that I was her brother because of my striking resemblance to our father.â€
Yesterday, the family highlighted their plight to the media because they wanted to change Zulhaidi’s name to a Chinese name, as well as his religion on his identification card to Buddhism instead of Islam.
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/02/03/the-star-woman%e2%80%99s-stares-led-to-reunion-with-biological-parents/
#40 by AhPek on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:03 pm
The analogy with ‘forced’ anything is the same principally for all these amount to curbing your freedom to choose to impose their will on yours.If these seemingly ‘small efforts’ to trample your rights are easily successful, much ‘bigger things’ will come.Nobody suggests that these things can be resolved by the courts especially the courts of Malaysia which are beholden to the Executive.But that doesn’t mean you stand there taking everything dish out by these UMNOPUTRAS and incapable of giving a wimper.
You think KIT is letting this go pass as if nothing has happened and who says DAP will stand to lose for standing behind this lady from JB who posted this case.And who says by not accepting this decision has anything to do with us being racists??I fail to see all this, i am sorry.
The thing I see is ‘it is an attempt to impose what they think is good for you’ and i don’t take kindly to this.Period.
#41 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:08 pm
For the Malays, it is no longer sedikit sedikit lama lama jadi bukit. Very soon, they will jadi bukit, so how do you propose to reverse this ?
#42 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:11 pm
I`m voting for the Govt-In-Waiting.
#43 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:16 pm
“For the Malays, it is no longer sedikit sedikit lama lama jadi bukit.”
That sure will make sebol very miffed.
#44 by Godfather on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:19 pm
At the rate you guys are going, no chance. All the DAP will get will be 15 – 20 seats, and probably retaining its position as head of the Opposition.
#45 by NAR2645 on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:21 pm
I had my form 6 in EC 32 years ago, but I was not aware of the prefects having to wear “songkok” during that time. Anyway, it is simple logic, that no one are to be forced to wear something that is religious related. In this case, songkok is undoubtedly related to Islam, as they are worn during religious activities.
It seems to me that this is another case of administrative biaseness.
#46 by sybreon on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:23 pm
Sigh, I think this is getting a bit out of hand. Maybe everyone should just take a deep breath and think through things a bit more and talk a bit less. This is slowly bordering on a religious argument.
Everyone is in agreement that this was a bad case as it is the compulsory nature that is the issue. So, let’s just agree on that. There are other more important issues to deal with than this one.
#47 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:24 pm
That`s ok. And I support your right to your opinion.
I have mine. We will have to wait and see.
#48 by Tickler on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:27 pm
Perchance, some fresh air after the deep breath:
US financial giant, Morgan Stanley had estimated in 2004 that over the last two decades corruption cost Malaysia US$100 billion (RM 380 billion). With Petronas earning more than RM 500 billion since it was established in 1974, one can imagine how much was stolen and that only RM 120 billon or 24% of the RM 500 billion in Petronas profits were channeled to the people with the remaining 76% or RM 380 billion stolen by corrupt officials.
http://nooryahaya.blogspot.com/2008/01/thats-my-letter-in-malaysiakini.html
#49 by AhPek on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 - 11:30 pm
Well godfather nobody in this country has any idea how to reverse this thro the electoral process or even thro the courts.You and I may cast a vote for opposition as well as all the commenters on Kit’s blog and RPK’s blog and even if you can persuade all your friends to vote opposition, my take is opoosition is not likely to take more than 55 parlimentary seats.And even if they can manage to win 74 seats, BN can still rule as they like only thing is they are not able to amend the constitution. But after all as Jeffrey says they have already amended all what they wanted amending. So the big deal about two thirds majority has not got that much importance as was before.Godfather, you want to change things- how you tell me besides doing what the French did, what Mao Tse Tung did and what the negroes did in USA (black american population in US –slightly more than 12%). So please if you don’t have any solution in reversing this trend of marginalisation don’t pose this question.I don’t but that doesn’t mean I have no opinion on this songkok issue in JB’s English College.
I would like to remind everybody that giving one’s 2 cents worth of opinion is always one’s prerogative which nobody can take away.
#50 by Colonel on Wednesday, 16 January 2008 - 12:32 am
It does not matter if it is 2-cents worth (which is an expression to say for what is worth or your humble opinion) or a $64k question. Freedom of speech is what it is all about. It is your constitutional right to say what you think. You’re right. Nobody can take that away from you. I don’t think we need reminding though.