What are slogans but meaningless words strung together to sound good and hopefully rhyme and sound poetic? I often wonder what is in the slogan "MALAYSIA BOLEH!" which can be heard in/from all corners of the globe. Such as when we made the biggest yau char kuay-Malaysia Boleh! Scaled Everest- Malaysia Boleh! Siti Nurhaliza held a concert in Albert Hall-MALAYSIA BOLEH SIUT!
We concentrate so hard and intense on making an impression to the world that we forget the troubles we have brewing within the nation. We are SO proud of our national car because we are the only south east asian nation to have a national car, but we forget the cars that are churned out in bulk lacks quality(the "power" window loses whatever "power" it has within a few months-like NOW we know why taxi drivers always open their doors to pay toll), and are much too pricey for the materials with which it is made with. We are SO proud of our MAS which wins the Best Cabin Crew every year( I still wonder why), but we forget that it is one of the most expensive airline to fly(even compared to SIA) and it is spiralling into further debt due to bad management. And as cheap as Air Asia's flight tickets are, the sheer bad service and frequent if not unavoidable delays in their flights just screams "Lets make it LOOK cheap and tempting but once they buy the tickets, lets screw them over!" (Air Asia and MAS bad experience(S) to be explained another day).
So, what is in Malaysia Boleh that makes us beam with pride? Search as hard as I may, I cannot find anything to be proud about. Our own politicians have since descended into the arena of racial politics- pointing fingers at certain races and accusing them of keeping another race backward in order for themselves to succeed. We have electoral promises not kept after 3 years but are being promised it will be done and it will be done "my way"(hopefully if and when it is done, I am still alive to see it). MPs in the Parliament indulging in name calling and speed reading of speeches to avoid any questions he is reluctant to answer and we have Ministers being ticked off for commenting on another Department indicating there might be corruption involved. Also, students attacking another group in a University being reprimanded and let off because "they were only exchanging harsh words and rehabilitation is better than punishment" when it is obvious through the clip that they shoved, screamed and abused them- the race of the group being so obvious, only the blind can deny. And brainwashing being done in Public Universities so that the students are aware of who rules the country and who should sit back and take whatever is being fed to them.
WHY?
Because that is just not the way we Malaysians(Boleh) do it. MPs of the majority party cannot support a backbencher, Ministers from one Department cannot comment on another department, members of the Coalition party cannot question anything for fear of causing unnecessary tensions. And if u screw the rakyat over, its ok. Chances are the PM does not mind because he if he doesnt even know whats going on within his own family, chances are he has no idea whats going on outside. And if u are of a particular race and you do something to another, there is always a good reason or an alternative view to what you are doing which can be justified.
While I have been part of the booing and jeering party of those who disagree with graduates who decide to not to come back and serve the country, I cannot help but also agree(enforced even more as time progresses) with the reasons why they do not return to their homeland. It hurts to know that we will remain an outsider in the land which we call our Home. It pains me to learn that when they say "Malaysia is a multi cultural country living harmoniously", it is nothing but a tourist gimmick and actually means the minorities have been told to shut up and sit back while the majority rule as they like and "tolerate" the minorites. It sickens me to hear Ministers telling minorities who are unhappy with the Country to pack up and leave because nothing is stopping them.
So, really, what is Malaysia Boleh all about?
I can do without the national car, Siti Nurhaliza's concert, longest whatever and scaling wherever. I would rather just be appreciated and integrated into a community who truly accepts and understands instead of being discriminated and dominated. Until that happens, I cannot call myself a Malaysian. I am merely born and bred here. But the Malaysian spirit has long evaporated and disappeared in the haze of racial discrimination.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Monday, September 18, 2006
We forget, therefore we have to pay
Whenever you have an argument, and you tell someone off about something and that person says " Oh, its not like YOU havent done it before!"
Have you ever then find yourself thinking," SO? Just because I was stupid enough to do it before does not make what you are doing right or fair!"
Those who have had this experience would know what I am saying. I thought of this when I read an article in the Sun today whereby the Pope was reminded that the Christians were also guilty of violence in the past. They have also run people out of their own countries and killed those whom they termed "unbelievers". Does it then make it right for the Muslim world to follow suit? Is it only fair for them to have their time to retaliate or to commit similar atrocities just because the Christians have done it before? Does it make it right? Does it mean all Christians should not speak out against the violence? So, theorethically speaking, the Buddhists and Hindus should have free reign in speaking out against the violence right? Cos they didnt commit any atrocities or indulge in violence in the name of their faith.(As far as I know)
I admire Zaid Ibrahim and Malik Imtiaz's courage to speak out and say that Islam is not under attack and that we should always remember that every religion advocates that there is only ONE God. Therefore if you insult another religion, you're indirectly insulting your own. If one were to understand that, I believe there will be less violence and more understanding.
Sometimes I sit around and wonder, with all the violence that the Muslims are practising now, its hard for Non-Muslims (those who did not experience the Christians equally violent practice) to understand and see how the religion advocates peace. Our minds are unfortunately clouded by the numerous bombings and deaths that have happened everywhere. How does the recent bombings in Haatyai be termed something that is done in the name of Islam. How does it further the cause of Islam? How does driving a plane into the towers causing numerous deaths be termed furthering the cause of Islam?
What religion advocates the death of innocent people something that is right? No religion does that as far as I know.
Men have forgotten that religion is something which is between him and God. Noone can make you any less a Christian or Muslim if they insult your religion. No one can make your religion something to be scorned at if he or she does not believe in your God. If indeed you believe in God, you will remember that you are answerable only to God. If you believe in the religion and all that it advocates, why do you find a need to force everyone to see it the way you see it? Or practice it the way you practice it?
Does killing another person who is an unbeliever make us anymore religious? Will God say to us " Well done!You have eliminated an unbeliever and you are therefore a more faithful follower that the other man who has not killed anyone but merely prayed to me!"
We humans have corrupted religion and the beauty of it. We have misinterpreted religion in order to pursue our selfish desires and needs. We have twisted the words and phrases to suit our World today. And it sickens me to think that one can declare him or herself a messenger of God while having a mind filled with intentions of taking another's life.
Isnt God the ONLY one who can determine life and death?
We forget. That is why the World is how it is today.
Have you ever then find yourself thinking," SO? Just because I was stupid enough to do it before does not make what you are doing right or fair!"
Those who have had this experience would know what I am saying. I thought of this when I read an article in the Sun today whereby the Pope was reminded that the Christians were also guilty of violence in the past. They have also run people out of their own countries and killed those whom they termed "unbelievers". Does it then make it right for the Muslim world to follow suit? Is it only fair for them to have their time to retaliate or to commit similar atrocities just because the Christians have done it before? Does it make it right? Does it mean all Christians should not speak out against the violence? So, theorethically speaking, the Buddhists and Hindus should have free reign in speaking out against the violence right? Cos they didnt commit any atrocities or indulge in violence in the name of their faith.(As far as I know)
I admire Zaid Ibrahim and Malik Imtiaz's courage to speak out and say that Islam is not under attack and that we should always remember that every religion advocates that there is only ONE God. Therefore if you insult another religion, you're indirectly insulting your own. If one were to understand that, I believe there will be less violence and more understanding.
Sometimes I sit around and wonder, with all the violence that the Muslims are practising now, its hard for Non-Muslims (those who did not experience the Christians equally violent practice) to understand and see how the religion advocates peace. Our minds are unfortunately clouded by the numerous bombings and deaths that have happened everywhere. How does the recent bombings in Haatyai be termed something that is done in the name of Islam. How does it further the cause of Islam? How does driving a plane into the towers causing numerous deaths be termed furthering the cause of Islam?
What religion advocates the death of innocent people something that is right? No religion does that as far as I know.
Men have forgotten that religion is something which is between him and God. Noone can make you any less a Christian or Muslim if they insult your religion. No one can make your religion something to be scorned at if he or she does not believe in your God. If indeed you believe in God, you will remember that you are answerable only to God. If you believe in the religion and all that it advocates, why do you find a need to force everyone to see it the way you see it? Or practice it the way you practice it?
Does killing another person who is an unbeliever make us anymore religious? Will God say to us " Well done!You have eliminated an unbeliever and you are therefore a more faithful follower that the other man who has not killed anyone but merely prayed to me!"
We humans have corrupted religion and the beauty of it. We have misinterpreted religion in order to pursue our selfish desires and needs. We have twisted the words and phrases to suit our World today. And it sickens me to think that one can declare him or herself a messenger of God while having a mind filled with intentions of taking another's life.
Isnt God the ONLY one who can determine life and death?
We forget. That is why the World is how it is today.
Friday, September 01, 2006
I didn't remember it like that...
Back when I was still in school, donkey years ago, my friend Yoke(my staple table mate throughout secondary school except for that one year when we were 15) and I were always sitting in front of or behind girls who were not the same "bangsa" as us. We made fun of each other constantly. She will say "Amacam Macbeth awak?" (in reference to our English Literature subject) and we in turn will ask them "eh, pokok kelapa you masih sana ke?"( in reference to their Kesusasteraan dalam BM subject). And eventhough after PJ (Pendidikan Jasmani for those who are not in the know) she and her table mate will not openly change their T-shirts in the classroom like us, that did not stop us from "pakating" with each other to run out of the class before it was time for recess, or to have a prefect line up to buy laksa for us so that we dont have to jostle with the masses.
Back then I do not remember thinking to myself that she was not the same race as me and therefore she was very different and should be treated differently. We spoke the same language, we laughed at the same silly jokes, we were all bad in either chemistry or physics, we compared our add maths scores and hope it would add up and make two digits and we all made fun of the teachers. And eventhough she wore a tudung, I never once thought of making a snide remark or stereotyping her. She was just my classmate whom I had lots of fun and enjoyed being able to spend my secondary school days with.
Today, the disparity between the races are being emphasised and taught in schools and Universities. The fact that UPM has not taken action against the students who harassed fellow students (it was quite obvious they were of different races) smacks of biasness. And that they actually produced a book which emphasis on the wrongs the Chinese have done to cause racial riots amazes me. And that our very own PM's son in law made racists comments and was not disciplined shocks me to the very core. (How can the PM not know what his son in law said in the media?) The fact that Hang Tuah is no longer in our history books because they realised that he may have been Chinese (in line with HANG Li Po) and therefore not the national warrior that he was is quite alarming.
Why is it that the country has taken such a sharp turn in the wrong direction? While many people recognise the need to avoid the racial riots of 1969, nothing much has been done to make the country more muhibbah and to encourage better understanding,acceptance and recognisition of each other. We are suppose to recognise and accept each other, not tolerate. I hate that word in this context. To tolerate is to say "Oh, I dont like you very much but to avoid unnecessary conflicts, I shall "tolerate" you."
Damn.
We all have a right to be in this country. No one race is more superior or inferior to another. We all fought for the independence of Malaysia. We all worked hard to make the country what it is today.
How I wish life were just like how it was when I was in school. Those carefree, happy days where we were all happy and we enjoyed each other's company. We were too busy having fun to sit down and think about "tolerating" each other.
Back then I do not remember thinking to myself that she was not the same race as me and therefore she was very different and should be treated differently. We spoke the same language, we laughed at the same silly jokes, we were all bad in either chemistry or physics, we compared our add maths scores and hope it would add up and make two digits and we all made fun of the teachers. And eventhough she wore a tudung, I never once thought of making a snide remark or stereotyping her. She was just my classmate whom I had lots of fun and enjoyed being able to spend my secondary school days with.
Today, the disparity between the races are being emphasised and taught in schools and Universities. The fact that UPM has not taken action against the students who harassed fellow students (it was quite obvious they were of different races) smacks of biasness. And that they actually produced a book which emphasis on the wrongs the Chinese have done to cause racial riots amazes me. And that our very own PM's son in law made racists comments and was not disciplined shocks me to the very core. (How can the PM not know what his son in law said in the media?) The fact that Hang Tuah is no longer in our history books because they realised that he may have been Chinese (in line with HANG Li Po) and therefore not the national warrior that he was is quite alarming.
Why is it that the country has taken such a sharp turn in the wrong direction? While many people recognise the need to avoid the racial riots of 1969, nothing much has been done to make the country more muhibbah and to encourage better understanding,acceptance and recognisition of each other. We are suppose to recognise and accept each other, not tolerate. I hate that word in this context. To tolerate is to say "Oh, I dont like you very much but to avoid unnecessary conflicts, I shall "tolerate" you."
Damn.
We all have a right to be in this country. No one race is more superior or inferior to another. We all fought for the independence of Malaysia. We all worked hard to make the country what it is today.
How I wish life were just like how it was when I was in school. Those carefree, happy days where we were all happy and we enjoyed each other's company. We were too busy having fun to sit down and think about "tolerating" each other.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Problem Solving Tactics
Unless you have been living under a rock, you will know that there is a war between Israel and Lebanon. Of course by now there is a ceasefire in place though for how long it will last, its anyone's guess. While everyone has been busy scrambling to take sides in this war, we in Malaysia have been busy thinking of ways to show our displeasure with Israel, America and Britain(the major 3)
So of course there was the infamous Khairy Jamaluddin protest and demonstration. Then there was the University Student wear-a-hand-bracelet-condeming-Israel demonstration, and of course the many politicians who voice their opinions on the cruelty of Israel and the supply arms to Lebanon stand taken by Tun Dr. M, and oh so many more.
But my FAVOURITE one has to be the recently approved flag burning exercise!
I mean, who can resist burning the major 3's flags? Oh, it will be so much fun!After all, by burning the flags and while its on fire, trampling on it( kids, do not try this at home unless supervised by equally enthusiastic flag burning parents) it will definitely SHOW the world what Malaysians think of the war, oh forgive me,not the war but of the major 3s!
Come to think of it, there really isnt a more effective way of showing our displeasure. While some other countries might pooh-pooh our flag burning exercise, as long as we Malaysians do it with passion and vigour and hatred, it will send along a strong message. Wouldnt it?
The whole idea of flag burning to show the country's displeasure of the war is so downright silly it borders on damn right stupid. What good does it do to burn the flags? Why is it that we Malaysians place so much value on a flag anyway? Just because we dont display a plastic flag (which by the way sticks to your car and doesnt come off without leaving an ugly glue mark) on our car makes us unpatriotic? Does it make us love our country less? Apparently it does according to the Ministers.
Ok, I digress. Back to flag burning. So, what good comes out of it again? Doesnt it just put into focus our lack of skills in problem solving? While we host and chair ASEAN and OIC meetings, and we discuss political and economic problems and ways to overcome them, it amazes me that we still can come out with a silly idea like burning flags!
Oh good gawd.
Who comes up with these ideas anyways? For example, how does THIS
help at all?
I do not mean any disrespect to the religion but one has to wonder how effective these people are when it comes to problem solving!Thought admitedly, there are many out there who can think rationally. All religions advocate peace and forgiveness. Yet we humans have decided to misinterpret and lay down rules to distort the teachings of the religion. If only one day we realise that if we stop using religion as a weapon for our selfish needs, the world might just be a better place.
While I agree we should strive for peace, respect for all religions and a disaster free world, I do not agree with the methods which some have come up to solve these problems. And the worrying thing is that here in Malaysia, those with these ingenious ideas are in the Government.
How did they get there in the first place? Those with similar ideas put them there of course.
Damn. If only I had registered to vote. Then maybe I can try to make a difference. When is the next election again?
So of course there was the infamous Khairy Jamaluddin protest and demonstration. Then there was the University Student wear-a-hand-bracelet-condeming-Israel demonstration, and of course the many politicians who voice their opinions on the cruelty of Israel and the supply arms to Lebanon stand taken by Tun Dr. M, and oh so many more.
But my FAVOURITE one has to be the recently approved flag burning exercise!
I mean, who can resist burning the major 3's flags? Oh, it will be so much fun!After all, by burning the flags and while its on fire, trampling on it( kids, do not try this at home unless supervised by equally enthusiastic flag burning parents) it will definitely SHOW the world what Malaysians think of the war, oh forgive me,not the war but of the major 3s!
Come to think of it, there really isnt a more effective way of showing our displeasure. While some other countries might pooh-pooh our flag burning exercise, as long as we Malaysians do it with passion and vigour and hatred, it will send along a strong message. Wouldnt it?
The whole idea of flag burning to show the country's displeasure of the war is so downright silly it borders on damn right stupid. What good does it do to burn the flags? Why is it that we Malaysians place so much value on a flag anyway? Just because we dont display a plastic flag (which by the way sticks to your car and doesnt come off without leaving an ugly glue mark) on our car makes us unpatriotic? Does it make us love our country less? Apparently it does according to the Ministers.
Ok, I digress. Back to flag burning. So, what good comes out of it again? Doesnt it just put into focus our lack of skills in problem solving? While we host and chair ASEAN and OIC meetings, and we discuss political and economic problems and ways to overcome them, it amazes me that we still can come out with a silly idea like burning flags!
Oh good gawd.
Who comes up with these ideas anyways? For example, how does THIS
help at all?
I do not mean any disrespect to the religion but one has to wonder how effective these people are when it comes to problem solving!Thought admitedly, there are many out there who can think rationally. All religions advocate peace and forgiveness. Yet we humans have decided to misinterpret and lay down rules to distort the teachings of the religion. If only one day we realise that if we stop using religion as a weapon for our selfish needs, the world might just be a better place.
While I agree we should strive for peace, respect for all religions and a disaster free world, I do not agree with the methods which some have come up to solve these problems. And the worrying thing is that here in Malaysia, those with these ingenious ideas are in the Government.
How did they get there in the first place? Those with similar ideas put them there of course.
Damn. If only I had registered to vote. Then maybe I can try to make a difference. When is the next election again?
Friday, August 11, 2006
Making the choice to be ignorant
I think while I am writing this, I have successfully managed to make a few more enemies from a mass email fiasco.(Sigh. I guess only my family will come to my funeral!) Firstly, I have to apologise to my good friend who was caught in the fiasco and had some people writing to her complaining about the contents of what I discussed or pointed out in the email. (I subscribe to the lawyer's egroup discussion and in there, it is common for us to discuss issues and voice our opinions.)
My friend pointed out (correctly) that not everybody in a forum shares the same opinion as me. And sometimes, eventhough some people agree to the discrepancies or errors in something, they do not necessarily want to discuss it publicly. In fact, they do not want to participate in any discussion but would prefer to let it be. Does it not make you wonder why some people are so afraid to voice their opinions? Or offer their take on a subject? Or tell people what they truly do think? It is because of our upbringing? Or it is just that some people are born like that?
Many articles have been published to criticise the youth today for being ignorant of politics and government. It has been said that we do not care about anything which does not directly affect us or our ability to pursue our career and wealth. We were only antsy and upset when the Government increased the petrol prices, because obviously that affected our pockets. However when it comes to the enactment of say, unjust laws or issues of racial discrimination and stereotyping, most of us retreat into our "tidak apa" shell and could not be bothered.
While I do not advocate having mass demonstration (as the youths in the Universities plan to do in their yellow Anti War-STOP ISRAEL!FREE LEBANON!FREE PALESTINE!" wrist band), I do however advocate speaking up on issues which affect us. We must stand up for what is unjust. We cannot ignore all these things which are happening in the world.
Ignorance is the cause of problems which we face in the world today. Ignorance of one's religion and beliefs, culture and upbringing, government and politics, will lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation which in turn will lead to hate and in turn, will lead to war.
What is sad is that youths today CHOOSE to be ignorant. They choose to be such as it is an easy alternative. It is easy not to have an opinion and remain neutral. So this way, if anyone asks, you say "I have no opinions on this" and hope the person who leave it as that. But when it comes to having opinions about why Tom Cruise is not married to Katie Holmes, we can offer not one but a variety of alternative opinions!
If only we would stand up for what we believe in. If only we knew the power which we have in our hands to effect a ripple of change. If only we realise that the world needs change and it needs for humankind to find its path again. If only we understand that we have youth on our side and we can make a change if we want to.
If only.
My friend pointed out (correctly) that not everybody in a forum shares the same opinion as me. And sometimes, eventhough some people agree to the discrepancies or errors in something, they do not necessarily want to discuss it publicly. In fact, they do not want to participate in any discussion but would prefer to let it be. Does it not make you wonder why some people are so afraid to voice their opinions? Or offer their take on a subject? Or tell people what they truly do think? It is because of our upbringing? Or it is just that some people are born like that?
Many articles have been published to criticise the youth today for being ignorant of politics and government. It has been said that we do not care about anything which does not directly affect us or our ability to pursue our career and wealth. We were only antsy and upset when the Government increased the petrol prices, because obviously that affected our pockets. However when it comes to the enactment of say, unjust laws or issues of racial discrimination and stereotyping, most of us retreat into our "tidak apa" shell and could not be bothered.
While I do not advocate having mass demonstration (as the youths in the Universities plan to do in their yellow Anti War-STOP ISRAEL!FREE LEBANON!FREE PALESTINE!" wrist band), I do however advocate speaking up on issues which affect us. We must stand up for what is unjust. We cannot ignore all these things which are happening in the world.
Ignorance is the cause of problems which we face in the world today. Ignorance of one's religion and beliefs, culture and upbringing, government and politics, will lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation which in turn will lead to hate and in turn, will lead to war.
What is sad is that youths today CHOOSE to be ignorant. They choose to be such as it is an easy alternative. It is easy not to have an opinion and remain neutral. So this way, if anyone asks, you say "I have no opinions on this" and hope the person who leave it as that. But when it comes to having opinions about why Tom Cruise is not married to Katie Holmes, we can offer not one but a variety of alternative opinions!
If only we would stand up for what we believe in. If only we knew the power which we have in our hands to effect a ripple of change. If only we realise that the world needs change and it needs for humankind to find its path again. If only we understand that we have youth on our side and we can make a change if we want to.
If only.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Fighting Fire with Fire
As much as I respect Tun Dr. M, the suggestion that the OIC arm Hizbollah to fight Israel makes me recoil in horror and disgust.
Why fight fire with fire?
Why fight fire with fire?
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Eeny, Meeny, Miny, BLAME!
While everyone is still reeling from the shock murder of the bright young boy in Setapak the other day, we are told of the death of another young girl, both due to snatch thefts/robbery.
As soon as we were informed of these deaths, we kicked into the typical Malaysian mode. We looked around for someone, something to blame. Of course the police bore the brunt of the blame. Oh, how come you do not patrol the area often enough? Did you not know of the high crime rate in Setapak? Oh, blame blame blame. (Actually, if we sit down and think about it, every damn place in KL has a high crime rate.)
Then we blame the Government. Oh, there should be bus services to take these students from the LRT to their homes. Why isnt there public transport for the commuters? It isnt safe for the students!Why why WHY?
Then, the doctor who refused to treat the dying boy was next in the line of fire. Oh!Why did you not treat him? Why did you turn him away? We will sue!Why isnt the Ministry doing anything to punish him for refusing to treat the boy? Sue Sue SUE!
Well, before we point fingers at this doctor for not treating him, I wondered if anyone bothered asking him why he didnt treat the boy. Was it because he didnt have the facilities or even the expertise to treat him? Or did he rely on his experience to judge that nothing he could do in his clinic would have saved the boy and the best option would have been to rush him to the hospital where the ER doctors can help him? If the doctor had tried to treat the boy, say, by attempting to stop the bleeding and the boy still dies due to excessive bleeding and delayed ER medical help, are we going to blame the doctor for being negligent? That he should have known that the boy needs immediate professional medical help?
Not all doctors are trained for ER work. That is why some doctors are surgeons and some are GPs and well, some are specialists. Obviously they each know what they can and cannot do.
Why is it that we tend to rush severely wounded persons to the nearest clinic and expect the GP there to perform miracles? It is a clinic. Chances are, the doctors there are not certified surgeons or ER trained. Would it not make more sense to,oh, I dont know, rush them to the nearest Hospital? Yes, I do realise that sometimes the "nearest" Hospital is quite far and the clinic is the nearest alternative. But it is still a clinic. Nothing much can be done to help the wounded person. Nothing substantial anyway. I think it would make better sense to use the time "wasted" at the clinic to rush the person to the Hospital.
Of course it would be blameworthy if a hospital declined to treat a person due to the fact that they had no insurance. That I agree is abhorrent.
Then we turn to blame the management of the building. Why is it that you do not ask your guards to patrol the building? Why is it that you allow glue sniffers in the shopping mall? Mat Motors and China Ah Bengs allowed to sit around and harrass us patrons and harm us as well?Tsk tsk tsk!
Ok, firstly, I think it is hard to control WHO hangs around the shopping mall. Sure, if there were glue sniffers hanging around and a complaint was made to the management, their failure to chase these people away would be to a certain extent, negligent. But how can you control who hangs around OUTSIDE the shopping complex? Do we blame the management for failure to control the people who choose to hang around outside? If lets say I were to step out of MidValley and while walking over to the Boulevard Hotel someone rushes at me and stabs me in the stomach, do I say, "Oh the Management did not do their jobs? They should have chased that mad man away!?If they did he would not have attacked me!"
Yes, I do agree the Management must take some responsiblity in creating a safe environment for their patrons, such as maintaining their CCTVs and ensuring the parking lots are safe but everything has its boundaries and limits. It would make sense to assume they will keep the inside of a shopping mall safe but it would be harder for us to assume they would keep the outside safe as well. Maybe within certain parameters, but not too much of it.
Let us not be quick to blame and threaten to sue. Let us not run to the press and point fingers at everybody whom we think is blameworthy. Firstly, there must be an investigation and the result of the investigation will prove whether there was in fact negligence. And IF negligence is established, then we consider whether there should be legal action.
Lest it be misunderstood, I sympathise with the families of the victims and I am sorry to know that Malaysia has reached such a state of crime that it is impossible to feel safe anywhere,anymore.
But still, I wish that at least if the Press were to ask victims of crimes(or their families), so what is the next course of action? They will not always start with "Its (fill in the blank) fault!" And follow it with "WE WILL SUE!"
It such a game of eeny,meeny,miny BLAME!
As soon as we were informed of these deaths, we kicked into the typical Malaysian mode. We looked around for someone, something to blame. Of course the police bore the brunt of the blame. Oh, how come you do not patrol the area often enough? Did you not know of the high crime rate in Setapak? Oh, blame blame blame. (Actually, if we sit down and think about it, every damn place in KL has a high crime rate.)
Then we blame the Government. Oh, there should be bus services to take these students from the LRT to their homes. Why isnt there public transport for the commuters? It isnt safe for the students!Why why WHY?
Then, the doctor who refused to treat the dying boy was next in the line of fire. Oh!Why did you not treat him? Why did you turn him away? We will sue!Why isnt the Ministry doing anything to punish him for refusing to treat the boy? Sue Sue SUE!
Well, before we point fingers at this doctor for not treating him, I wondered if anyone bothered asking him why he didnt treat the boy. Was it because he didnt have the facilities or even the expertise to treat him? Or did he rely on his experience to judge that nothing he could do in his clinic would have saved the boy and the best option would have been to rush him to the hospital where the ER doctors can help him? If the doctor had tried to treat the boy, say, by attempting to stop the bleeding and the boy still dies due to excessive bleeding and delayed ER medical help, are we going to blame the doctor for being negligent? That he should have known that the boy needs immediate professional medical help?
Not all doctors are trained for ER work. That is why some doctors are surgeons and some are GPs and well, some are specialists. Obviously they each know what they can and cannot do.
Why is it that we tend to rush severely wounded persons to the nearest clinic and expect the GP there to perform miracles? It is a clinic. Chances are, the doctors there are not certified surgeons or ER trained. Would it not make more sense to,oh, I dont know, rush them to the nearest Hospital? Yes, I do realise that sometimes the "nearest" Hospital is quite far and the clinic is the nearest alternative. But it is still a clinic. Nothing much can be done to help the wounded person. Nothing substantial anyway. I think it would make better sense to use the time "wasted" at the clinic to rush the person to the Hospital.
Of course it would be blameworthy if a hospital declined to treat a person due to the fact that they had no insurance. That I agree is abhorrent.
Then we turn to blame the management of the building. Why is it that you do not ask your guards to patrol the building? Why is it that you allow glue sniffers in the shopping mall? Mat Motors and China Ah Bengs allowed to sit around and harrass us patrons and harm us as well?Tsk tsk tsk!
Ok, firstly, I think it is hard to control WHO hangs around the shopping mall. Sure, if there were glue sniffers hanging around and a complaint was made to the management, their failure to chase these people away would be to a certain extent, negligent. But how can you control who hangs around OUTSIDE the shopping complex? Do we blame the management for failure to control the people who choose to hang around outside? If lets say I were to step out of MidValley and while walking over to the Boulevard Hotel someone rushes at me and stabs me in the stomach, do I say, "Oh the Management did not do their jobs? They should have chased that mad man away!?If they did he would not have attacked me!"
Yes, I do agree the Management must take some responsiblity in creating a safe environment for their patrons, such as maintaining their CCTVs and ensuring the parking lots are safe but everything has its boundaries and limits. It would make sense to assume they will keep the inside of a shopping mall safe but it would be harder for us to assume they would keep the outside safe as well. Maybe within certain parameters, but not too much of it.
Let us not be quick to blame and threaten to sue. Let us not run to the press and point fingers at everybody whom we think is blameworthy. Firstly, there must be an investigation and the result of the investigation will prove whether there was in fact negligence. And IF negligence is established, then we consider whether there should be legal action.
Lest it be misunderstood, I sympathise with the families of the victims and I am sorry to know that Malaysia has reached such a state of crime that it is impossible to feel safe anywhere,anymore.
But still, I wish that at least if the Press were to ask victims of crimes(or their families), so what is the next course of action? They will not always start with "Its (fill in the blank) fault!" And follow it with "WE WILL SUE!"
It such a game of eeny,meeny,miny BLAME!
Friday, August 04, 2006
What are the boundaries of Parental Responsibilities?
A friend of mine was very, and I mean, VERY pissed off when someone else's mother told her that her parents were not doing a good job as parents as they allowed her to take a loan to fund her own studies. According to the self proclaimed supermum she would never allow her golden boy to have to be burdened with loans to fund his own studies. (its obvious he is pampered as he is now constantly whining about his job eventhough he is paid more than any of us fresh graduates are.Whiner.)
So the soalan cepu emas is, for how long do our parents need to support us?
The Star today featured an article by an 18 year old who said that her father who left home a few years back, has applied to court to be relieved of his responsiblities to support her as she has turned 18. She said that there was a lacuna (a gap) in the law which allows for her father to abuse the law. The law meaning the Law Reform(Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 . The apex Court had decided amongst others, that once a child has turned 18, the parents no longer need to support them.
The first thought that popped in my mind was that this girl must be from a middle class or upper middle class family. For she assumes she is entitled to higher education as her father can afford it. She assumes he has to pay for it as it is her right to be educated to the degree level in order for her to succed in life. But I think she forgets she is priviliged to be able to actually think she is deprived of these things. There are so many children from poor and broken homes who at an even younger age than she is, have to come out and work to support themselves. To have to make their own money to fund their own studies. And there are some whom with grit and determination have worked their way up the ladder of success with nothing much but SPM qualifications .
So why do we constantly think that our parents "owe" it to us to educate us? I believe that we have been pampered too much. We assume that it is their duty as a parent to provide us with all that we want. But i think their duty, first and foremost, is to love us unconditionally and provide for us. By providing I mean to have a roof over our head and to make sure we do not go hungry, that is while we are still unable to fend for ourselves. However, when we turn 18, we can play our role and help out, can we not?
If that 18 year old girl says her father does not want to pay for her education, then all she has to do is to apply to do her form 6(hopefully she was smart enough to work hard and get good grades in high school), and when she finishes that, apply to enter a public university and if she gets in and needs some funding, she can apply to PTPN for a loan. It is not IMpossible for her to obtain her degree. It is just a matter of perseverance and exploring all options open to her.
Instead she chose the easy way out.
She whined and wrote to the newspaper. She says the law is flawed. She says her father has abused the law. Perhaps she forgets that her father may have another family to support as well. Sure, he must be made to continue giving monthly allowances to help her mother feed the family, but perhaps that should be all that he is required by law to do. Is it our legal right to be educated to a degree level? I doubt it.
There are so many out there with sadder stories that you girl. There are so many out there who are not even educated enough to read or write, yet they survive because they have the determination and the grit. While you are pursuing wealth and success, many out there are fighting just to live.
So to her, I say be independent and fight your own battles. Fend for yourself. You are no longer young and helpless. Quit expecting things to be given to you.
So the soalan cepu emas is, for how long do our parents need to support us?
The Star today featured an article by an 18 year old who said that her father who left home a few years back, has applied to court to be relieved of his responsiblities to support her as she has turned 18. She said that there was a lacuna (a gap) in the law which allows for her father to abuse the law. The law meaning the Law Reform(Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 . The apex Court had decided amongst others, that once a child has turned 18, the parents no longer need to support them.
The first thought that popped in my mind was that this girl must be from a middle class or upper middle class family. For she assumes she is entitled to higher education as her father can afford it. She assumes he has to pay for it as it is her right to be educated to the degree level in order for her to succed in life. But I think she forgets she is priviliged to be able to actually think she is deprived of these things. There are so many children from poor and broken homes who at an even younger age than she is, have to come out and work to support themselves. To have to make their own money to fund their own studies. And there are some whom with grit and determination have worked their way up the ladder of success with nothing much but SPM qualifications .
So why do we constantly think that our parents "owe" it to us to educate us? I believe that we have been pampered too much. We assume that it is their duty as a parent to provide us with all that we want. But i think their duty, first and foremost, is to love us unconditionally and provide for us. By providing I mean to have a roof over our head and to make sure we do not go hungry, that is while we are still unable to fend for ourselves. However, when we turn 18, we can play our role and help out, can we not?
If that 18 year old girl says her father does not want to pay for her education, then all she has to do is to apply to do her form 6(hopefully she was smart enough to work hard and get good grades in high school), and when she finishes that, apply to enter a public university and if she gets in and needs some funding, she can apply to PTPN for a loan. It is not IMpossible for her to obtain her degree. It is just a matter of perseverance and exploring all options open to her.
Instead she chose the easy way out.
She whined and wrote to the newspaper. She says the law is flawed. She says her father has abused the law. Perhaps she forgets that her father may have another family to support as well. Sure, he must be made to continue giving monthly allowances to help her mother feed the family, but perhaps that should be all that he is required by law to do. Is it our legal right to be educated to a degree level? I doubt it.
There are so many out there with sadder stories that you girl. There are so many out there who are not even educated enough to read or write, yet they survive because they have the determination and the grit. While you are pursuing wealth and success, many out there are fighting just to live.
So to her, I say be independent and fight your own battles. Fend for yourself. You are no longer young and helpless. Quit expecting things to be given to you.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
Stupids need not apply
When my friend read yesterday's Star headlines, the first person that came to her mind was probably me. She expressed her concern for the contents of my blog and the fact that some people might misunderstand me or misrepresent my ideas and twist it into anti-Government or malicious rumours which will land me into heck of a lot of trouble.
I pondered about it and I realised that I should be ok. Well firstly, I have to clarify my position.
Firstly,
I am not anti-Government. I may not agree to all the Government policies which are or will be implemented but that does not make me an Anti-Government, BN flag burning activist. You definitely will not find me chanting anti Government slogans anytime soon. I think its futile to be anti-Government. The Government as a whole functions very well. The country is up and running. We have a stable economy (though it CAN be better) and the country is peaceful. What is there to be anti about?
The only thing I am anti is stupid. That has always been my stand. I am anti-stupid. And if I could, I would post a notice stating "Stupids need not apply".
For example, does anyone know this:
When you take the Monorail and when u get to thewhatchamacallit to exit the station, and u use your T n G card to get out, you will obviously have to touch the T n G sensor thing to get out. If the machine does not register and the bar does not go up, do not touch it again. Why? Simply because, you get charged according to how many times u touch the sensor thing. If you did it twice, they charge you twice.
Clearly, if the bloody bar doesnt go up and I cannot exit the station, common sense tells me to try again correct?
Wrong.
The stupids in Monorail thought it fit to charge us according to how many times attempts we make to try to exit.
So if you approach the people stationed at the counter and ask them why, they stick your card in the machine reader and tell you that they do not know why you have been charged a penalty but if you are truly interested to know, you can find out from the staff at T n G. The only two counters that have T n G services are found at Kelana Jaya and Masjid Jamek. So you would have to haul your ass to the nearest station and ask the people there.
Once you get there, they will tell you exactly what I said previously. You touch it twice, they charge you twice. Three times?Three times it is.
Of course they follow it up with this soundly advice " Lain kali, kalau sudah cuba satu kali tak buka, janganlah cuba lagi. Dapatkan bantuan."
If you follow up with a curious question as to why the system is wired that way they will say " Tak tahulah. System itu memang macam tu. Tak sama macam Putra. Putraline you cuba beberapa kali pun kita charge satu kali saja."
And then there is the check in two hours before policy at KL sentral MAS counter. If you make it to the counter exactly two hours before, you're already too late. This is because the system shuts down right on the dot, two hours before the flight. So clearly, the common sensical thing to do would be to tell passengers that one would have to check in THREE hours before or 2 1/2 hours before. But NO, that would be too much for MAS to handle. So they tell you two hours before and when you get there two hours as told to you, they say SORRY, you're too late.
So you see?
It is stupid people and stupid systems like these that I abhor. Unfortunately for mankind, many of these people roam freely around us. If we are unfortunate enough to meet them, we're screwed.
I am somehow very idiot cum stupid prone. I think I should go and mandi bunga sometime to be rid of that.
Secondly,
I do not spread malicious rumours. Simply because by the time I know anything about it, they cease to be rumours and have already happened or proven not to have happened. As much as I would like to consider myself being oh-so-in-the-know, I think I am probably not. My sister all the way in Italy knows more about what is going on in my house then I, who live under that roof, know.
So for those who think I am going to be in trouble for saying the things I say, I hope you are able to understand that the bottom line is not that I am a rebel in the making. Or that I am a trouble maker and I am stirring up anti whatever sentiments which may cause national disunity, I am just simply, one who is very much, anti stupid.
I pondered about it and I realised that I should be ok. Well firstly, I have to clarify my position.
Firstly,
I am not anti-Government. I may not agree to all the Government policies which are or will be implemented but that does not make me an Anti-Government, BN flag burning activist. You definitely will not find me chanting anti Government slogans anytime soon. I think its futile to be anti-Government. The Government as a whole functions very well. The country is up and running. We have a stable economy (though it CAN be better) and the country is peaceful. What is there to be anti about?
The only thing I am anti is stupid. That has always been my stand. I am anti-stupid. And if I could, I would post a notice stating "Stupids need not apply".
For example, does anyone know this:
When you take the Monorail and when u get to thewhatchamacallit to exit the station, and u use your T n G card to get out, you will obviously have to touch the T n G sensor thing to get out. If the machine does not register and the bar does not go up, do not touch it again. Why? Simply because, you get charged according to how many times u touch the sensor thing. If you did it twice, they charge you twice.
Clearly, if the bloody bar doesnt go up and I cannot exit the station, common sense tells me to try again correct?
Wrong.
The stupids in Monorail thought it fit to charge us according to how many times attempts we make to try to exit.
So if you approach the people stationed at the counter and ask them why, they stick your card in the machine reader and tell you that they do not know why you have been charged a penalty but if you are truly interested to know, you can find out from the staff at T n G. The only two counters that have T n G services are found at Kelana Jaya and Masjid Jamek. So you would have to haul your ass to the nearest station and ask the people there.
Once you get there, they will tell you exactly what I said previously. You touch it twice, they charge you twice. Three times?Three times it is.
Of course they follow it up with this soundly advice " Lain kali, kalau sudah cuba satu kali tak buka, janganlah cuba lagi. Dapatkan bantuan."
If you follow up with a curious question as to why the system is wired that way they will say " Tak tahulah. System itu memang macam tu. Tak sama macam Putra. Putraline you cuba beberapa kali pun kita charge satu kali saja."
And then there is the check in two hours before policy at KL sentral MAS counter. If you make it to the counter exactly two hours before, you're already too late. This is because the system shuts down right on the dot, two hours before the flight. So clearly, the common sensical thing to do would be to tell passengers that one would have to check in THREE hours before or 2 1/2 hours before. But NO, that would be too much for MAS to handle. So they tell you two hours before and when you get there two hours as told to you, they say SORRY, you're too late.
So you see?
It is stupid people and stupid systems like these that I abhor. Unfortunately for mankind, many of these people roam freely around us. If we are unfortunate enough to meet them, we're screwed.
I am somehow very idiot cum stupid prone. I think I should go and mandi bunga sometime to be rid of that.
Secondly,
I do not spread malicious rumours. Simply because by the time I know anything about it, they cease to be rumours and have already happened or proven not to have happened. As much as I would like to consider myself being oh-so-in-the-know, I think I am probably not. My sister all the way in Italy knows more about what is going on in my house then I, who live under that roof, know.
So for those who think I am going to be in trouble for saying the things I say, I hope you are able to understand that the bottom line is not that I am a rebel in the making. Or that I am a trouble maker and I am stirring up anti whatever sentiments which may cause national disunity, I am just simply, one who is very much, anti stupid.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
Chanting Slogans Together-gether!
While I was watching the star world news the other day, I chance upon the news of our beloved PM's son in law heading a public demonstration cum protest in front of the KLCC while the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting was goin on.
At first the name Khaery Jamaluddin did not register.. but when they interviewed him and I had a glimpse of his face, I realised that it was our very own UMNO youth president! Taking a stand! Having his headband on!And of course, shouting like a blabbering idiot.
"We did not invite her(referring to Ms. Rice herself), She has no right to be here!"
Or words to that effect. Oh you know, nothing much, just chanting anti America and anti Israel slogans.
Of course in the course of his public protests and perhaps due to the tightness of the headband around his head, he forgot that a) he is the PM's son-in-law and maybe it would have been more appropriate to leave the embarassment of your father in law to someone else, b) that the last time I checked, Malaysia is in NAM.
So, I am quite surprised that this huge protest did not raise so much as an eyebrow. Perhaps because it was done by UMNO? I believe if the PAS supporters or even KEADILAN supporters had been on the streets that day chanting these silly anti-whatever slogans, hell would have broke loose. But because it was headed by Mr. Kheary himself, no one seems to have their panties in a bunch.
Why the anti America and anti Israel slogans? Why the need for "WE SUPPORT HAMAS!" banners? Clearly it was a Muslim/Islam motivated protest. All they see is a Islamic country being attacked by a non Islamic one, hence the "we support Hamas" stand. We are in NAM, we do not take a stand for or against any country. We take a stand against violence, senseless killings, genocide...etc etc. But we as a nation do not and should not be supporting any one country against another or any one political party against the other.Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt that what being in NAM is all about? To remain neutral. To just stick with our own beliefs and our religion(s) and our democracy and government but to keep neutral when it comes to taking sides in the international front.
In the first place,I do not see the point of a public demonstration whether it be against the fuel hike or the war in Iraq because really, what does it achieve?Seriously. What do we get from a public demonstration or protest?
The police have to waste their manpower controlling the crowd, they have to use their tear gas and water guns or what not to disperse the crowd and then they get shit for it.I mean if the crowd DOES go out of control, what do u expect the police to do? Okay, of course we are not saying that they should resort to violence but they are trained to contain a crowd and so they use the only way they are taught.
So the question is why the need for a public demonstration?(of course the othermore relevant question is of course, how do you get leave to go take part in a demonstration?) Has the Government stopped the fuel hike? Did President Bush all the way in America stop the war in Iraq because Malaysians were staging a big protest? Do you think the Malaysian Government will bend to our dissatisfaction and grouses just because there was a massive protest?
Seriously.
The last time I checked, it was to hell with what the rakyat thinks, we in the government do what we want! Like build a massive sports complex in another country and burden us all! Do you actually need more reasons for not wasting your time with public protests? They want to fine and imprison us for losing out MyKads for godssakes. Do you think they care what the rakyat wants?
Sheesh. Be real.
At first the name Khaery Jamaluddin did not register.. but when they interviewed him and I had a glimpse of his face, I realised that it was our very own UMNO youth president! Taking a stand! Having his headband on!And of course, shouting like a blabbering idiot.
"We did not invite her(referring to Ms. Rice herself), She has no right to be here!"
Or words to that effect. Oh you know, nothing much, just chanting anti America and anti Israel slogans.
Of course in the course of his public protests and perhaps due to the tightness of the headband around his head, he forgot that a) he is the PM's son-in-law and maybe it would have been more appropriate to leave the embarassment of your father in law to someone else, b) that the last time I checked, Malaysia is in NAM.
So, I am quite surprised that this huge protest did not raise so much as an eyebrow. Perhaps because it was done by UMNO? I believe if the PAS supporters or even KEADILAN supporters had been on the streets that day chanting these silly anti-whatever slogans, hell would have broke loose. But because it was headed by Mr. Kheary himself, no one seems to have their panties in a bunch.
Why the anti America and anti Israel slogans? Why the need for "WE SUPPORT HAMAS!" banners? Clearly it was a Muslim/Islam motivated protest. All they see is a Islamic country being attacked by a non Islamic one, hence the "we support Hamas" stand. We are in NAM, we do not take a stand for or against any country. We take a stand against violence, senseless killings, genocide...etc etc. But we as a nation do not and should not be supporting any one country against another or any one political party against the other.Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt that what being in NAM is all about? To remain neutral. To just stick with our own beliefs and our religion(s) and our democracy and government but to keep neutral when it comes to taking sides in the international front.
In the first place,I do not see the point of a public demonstration whether it be against the fuel hike or the war in Iraq because really, what does it achieve?Seriously. What do we get from a public demonstration or protest?
The police have to waste their manpower controlling the crowd, they have to use their tear gas and water guns or what not to disperse the crowd and then they get shit for it.I mean if the crowd DOES go out of control, what do u expect the police to do? Okay, of course we are not saying that they should resort to violence but they are trained to contain a crowd and so they use the only way they are taught.
So the question is why the need for a public demonstration?(of course the othermore relevant question is of course, how do you get leave to go take part in a demonstration?) Has the Government stopped the fuel hike? Did President Bush all the way in America stop the war in Iraq because Malaysians were staging a big protest? Do you think the Malaysian Government will bend to our dissatisfaction and grouses just because there was a massive protest?
Seriously.
The last time I checked, it was to hell with what the rakyat thinks, we in the government do what we want! Like build a massive sports complex in another country and burden us all! Do you actually need more reasons for not wasting your time with public protests? They want to fine and imprison us for losing out MyKads for godssakes. Do you think they care what the rakyat wants?
Sheesh. Be real.
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Milking the Cash Cow
Do you remember the whole nude ear squat fiasco? Remember how upset and shocked everyone was? How the police were under scrutiny and how they set up a Commission to investigate into the matter?
I think most of us barely remember it. And some of us didn't care much about it then and really couldnt give a rat's ass about it now. After all, Malaysia is known to practice the knee jerk reaction. We get all upset, angry and we say this and that and once everything blows over, we forget. And only remember when it happens again.
So, considering the fact that some of us barely remember the nude ear squat fiasco, it amuses me to think that the infamous Malay woman who was "filmed" doing the nude ear squat now wants to sue the Government for RM10m due the negligence (kecuaian) of the Police Force and the embarassment caused to her. Now RM10m is heck of a lot of moolah.
She says that the whole video clip of her doing the naked ear squat has been widely circulated and this has caused her much embarassment. She cannot go out of the house without people staring at her or whispering behind her back. Her whole family has suffered considerable embarassment and as much as she wants to move away, she cannot afford to as both she and her husband do not have a job.
Ahhh..you see? THAT is why she wants to sue the Government for the RM10m! It makes sense now. She has a 4 month old daughter. Her husband is too lazy to move his ass to get a job, and apparently she is much to embarassed to go out and get one as well. So what else is left to be done? MILK the government and cite negligence and embarassment! Tell the nation how much she has suffered, how she is still suffering and how she will continue to suffer!
I think it is important to note that this announcement of her filing her claim was done publicly and there was a press conference.
Ok, WTF is up with that?
If you are so damn embarassed, why would you go in front of a camera and expose your face? 98% of Malaysia(maybe even 99.8%) have not seen her face before as her face was not published in the newspaper(maybe glimpses of it only). Only a few of those present at the hearing had a glimpse of her. And she was well covered in her tudung and shades and ran from the press like a cat with its tail on fire. So how many of us can actually recognise her on the streets? I for one cannot. In fact, now that she has exposed her face on TV I think I still cant recognise her on the streets.
Like hello? You are NOT a celebrity. Even celebrities can go unnoticed in public sometimes. Unless of course we're talking about Siti Nurhaliza or Mawi. So, what reputation of hers has been tarnished to require RM10 m to make up for it? Who is she? To me she is just another woman who somehow got caught by the police for allegedly taking drugs and was unfortunate enough to be caught on video doing the naked ear squat.
Sure, the procedure was wrong,though it has been held that the Police do have the right to make arrested persons do the ear squat to dislodge whatever they might keep hidden in places where the sun dont shine, but to sue the Government for it?
Doesnt it make more sense to sue the man who filmed you? After all, its not like all ear squats procedures are caught on tape and distributed to the public. Only she was unfortunate enough to be filmed. Oh wait, he wouldnt have the RM10m to give to her. That is why she is going to the cash cow to milk her worth.
Oh well, I guess since she has decided to make her face public, we might as well stare hard at her face now and remember it and give her a dirty look if you see her. If she wins the RM10m, we as taxpayers end up paying for it, so we might as well make it worth it.
I think most of us barely remember it. And some of us didn't care much about it then and really couldnt give a rat's ass about it now. After all, Malaysia is known to practice the knee jerk reaction. We get all upset, angry and we say this and that and once everything blows over, we forget. And only remember when it happens again.
So, considering the fact that some of us barely remember the nude ear squat fiasco, it amuses me to think that the infamous Malay woman who was "filmed" doing the nude ear squat now wants to sue the Government for RM10m due the negligence (kecuaian) of the Police Force and the embarassment caused to her. Now RM10m is heck of a lot of moolah.
She says that the whole video clip of her doing the naked ear squat has been widely circulated and this has caused her much embarassment. She cannot go out of the house without people staring at her or whispering behind her back. Her whole family has suffered considerable embarassment and as much as she wants to move away, she cannot afford to as both she and her husband do not have a job.
Ahhh..you see? THAT is why she wants to sue the Government for the RM10m! It makes sense now. She has a 4 month old daughter. Her husband is too lazy to move his ass to get a job, and apparently she is much to embarassed to go out and get one as well. So what else is left to be done? MILK the government and cite negligence and embarassment! Tell the nation how much she has suffered, how she is still suffering and how she will continue to suffer!
I think it is important to note that this announcement of her filing her claim was done publicly and there was a press conference.
Ok, WTF is up with that?
If you are so damn embarassed, why would you go in front of a camera and expose your face? 98% of Malaysia(maybe even 99.8%) have not seen her face before as her face was not published in the newspaper(maybe glimpses of it only). Only a few of those present at the hearing had a glimpse of her. And she was well covered in her tudung and shades and ran from the press like a cat with its tail on fire. So how many of us can actually recognise her on the streets? I for one cannot. In fact, now that she has exposed her face on TV I think I still cant recognise her on the streets.
Like hello? You are NOT a celebrity. Even celebrities can go unnoticed in public sometimes. Unless of course we're talking about Siti Nurhaliza or Mawi. So, what reputation of hers has been tarnished to require RM10 m to make up for it? Who is she? To me she is just another woman who somehow got caught by the police for allegedly taking drugs and was unfortunate enough to be caught on video doing the naked ear squat.
Sure, the procedure was wrong,though it has been held that the Police do have the right to make arrested persons do the ear squat to dislodge whatever they might keep hidden in places where the sun dont shine, but to sue the Government for it?
Doesnt it make more sense to sue the man who filmed you? After all, its not like all ear squats procedures are caught on tape and distributed to the public. Only she was unfortunate enough to be filmed. Oh wait, he wouldnt have the RM10m to give to her. That is why she is going to the cash cow to milk her worth.
Oh well, I guess since she has decided to make her face public, we might as well stare hard at her face now and remember it and give her a dirty look if you see her. If she wins the RM10m, we as taxpayers end up paying for it, so we might as well make it worth it.
Monday, July 17, 2006
You see, this is what the rakyat wants....
Notice how the government justifies whatever aborted projects or embarking on super expensive useless projects as what the rakyat wants? In the first place, why must it be rakyat? There IS an english word for it, its called citizens?
However, in order for people to understand me, I must speak in the Government lingo.
Rakyat (notice how it has to be italicised to show that it is a malay word?What is up with that?)
And secondly, how does the Government know what the rakyat wants? As far as I know, the rakyat didnt ask for the Singapore crooked bridge to be scrapped because half the rakyat had no idea it was even being mooted or it was in progress or that it would cost billions to build. And the other quarter of the rakyat was in the know but most didnt have much of an opinion as whether it should or should not be built. And the remaining rakyat consist of Johoreans and the government officials. And here's a question, how can the opinions of Johoreans make up the collective opinion of the rakyat as a whole? Apparently the bridge was scrapped because that was what the rakyat wanted. I dont remember being asked. I dont remember a public opinion poll held by the government. All because the Johoreans allegedly said they want to scrap the bridge, that consist of the rakyat's opinions?
Same goes for the sport complex that they are planning to build in the UK. How in the world does that benefit the rakyat? If it is built in Malaysia, then it makes sense. At least then MAYBE the Malaysians, oh, I'm sorry, the rakyat can utilise it (if it is not exclusive for the national athletes only) If it is all the way in the UK and it costs RM490m, why would we agree to that? Not only does it not make sense, it's just plain stupid. Why do you need a MALAYSIAN sports facility to train our athletes overseas? We have Malaysian sand in it? The seats in the facility is made from teak wood from the Malaysian forest? The water there has been declared holy by the religious leaders in Malaysia? There is a sense of MALAYSIA BOLEH spirit in there?What? What makes the Government want to build a Malaysian sports complex? And what is up with all the secrecy? It is OUR money, it is apparently to train sebilangan of our rakyat,( I am getting the hang of peppering Malay in my English!) so why is there such a thing as there are somethings they can and cannot say? Just SAYLAH!
If you think about it, the sports facilities existing in the UK now is obviously good enough for the British people. They excel in sports. I am sure if we use those facilities, at least we can tumpang glamour and pretend that our national athletes are actually doing well in sports and not just wasting, again, OUR money monthly, and stumbling in every major competition. (Our national football team is actually below Iraq, which is a war torn country. This is just sad.)
So, I think the Government should stop with the fake what-the-rakyat-wants justifications and be transparent in their dealings with our money. I thought the PM advocated transparency? What is the PM doing now with all the brouhaha? Why is he always keeping quiet? What type of transparency are we talking about here?
So in order to make the job of the Government a tad easier, I have made a list of what the rakyat wants:
1) Lower petrol prices and stop lying to us about hikes being the ONLY one this year only to have it hiked up again within the next 2 months.
2) Better public transport system- using the money the government allegedly saved from not subsidising the rakyat's petrol anymore?
3) PRACTISING transparency in the government. Not just saying you want to do it but then never doing it.
4) Better service at government departments. Would a smile really kill them and can they actually move any faster?
5) Not punishing people who lose their MyKard with max fines of RM20K.( If I cannot afford it and I do not pay it will you declare me a bankrupt if it reaches RM30K accumulated from interests?)
6) Making imported cars cheaper because the national cars are still expensive and it is still crap.
The list can go on.
But if the Government implements at least HALF of this list, I will be one heck of a happy rakyat!
However, in order for people to understand me, I must speak in the Government lingo.
Rakyat (notice how it has to be italicised to show that it is a malay word?What is up with that?)
And secondly, how does the Government know what the rakyat wants? As far as I know, the rakyat didnt ask for the Singapore crooked bridge to be scrapped because half the rakyat had no idea it was even being mooted or it was in progress or that it would cost billions to build. And the other quarter of the rakyat was in the know but most didnt have much of an opinion as whether it should or should not be built. And the remaining rakyat consist of Johoreans and the government officials. And here's a question, how can the opinions of Johoreans make up the collective opinion of the rakyat as a whole? Apparently the bridge was scrapped because that was what the rakyat wanted. I dont remember being asked. I dont remember a public opinion poll held by the government. All because the Johoreans allegedly said they want to scrap the bridge, that consist of the rakyat's opinions?
Same goes for the sport complex that they are planning to build in the UK. How in the world does that benefit the rakyat? If it is built in Malaysia, then it makes sense. At least then MAYBE the Malaysians, oh, I'm sorry, the rakyat can utilise it (if it is not exclusive for the national athletes only) If it is all the way in the UK and it costs RM490m, why would we agree to that? Not only does it not make sense, it's just plain stupid. Why do you need a MALAYSIAN sports facility to train our athletes overseas? We have Malaysian sand in it? The seats in the facility is made from teak wood from the Malaysian forest? The water there has been declared holy by the religious leaders in Malaysia? There is a sense of MALAYSIA BOLEH spirit in there?What? What makes the Government want to build a Malaysian sports complex? And what is up with all the secrecy? It is OUR money, it is apparently to train sebilangan of our rakyat,( I am getting the hang of peppering Malay in my English!) so why is there such a thing as there are somethings they can and cannot say? Just SAYLAH!
If you think about it, the sports facilities existing in the UK now is obviously good enough for the British people. They excel in sports. I am sure if we use those facilities, at least we can tumpang glamour and pretend that our national athletes are actually doing well in sports and not just wasting, again, OUR money monthly, and stumbling in every major competition. (Our national football team is actually below Iraq, which is a war torn country. This is just sad.)
So, I think the Government should stop with the fake what-the-rakyat-wants justifications and be transparent in their dealings with our money. I thought the PM advocated transparency? What is the PM doing now with all the brouhaha? Why is he always keeping quiet? What type of transparency are we talking about here?
So in order to make the job of the Government a tad easier, I have made a list of what the rakyat wants:
1) Lower petrol prices and stop lying to us about hikes being the ONLY one this year only to have it hiked up again within the next 2 months.
2) Better public transport system- using the money the government allegedly saved from not subsidising the rakyat's petrol anymore?
3) PRACTISING transparency in the government. Not just saying you want to do it but then never doing it.
4) Better service at government departments. Would a smile really kill them and can they actually move any faster?
5) Not punishing people who lose their MyKard with max fines of RM20K.( If I cannot afford it and I do not pay it will you declare me a bankrupt if it reaches RM30K accumulated from interests?)
6) Making imported cars cheaper because the national cars are still expensive and it is still crap.
The list can go on.
But if the Government implements at least HALF of this list, I will be one heck of a happy rakyat!
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Who determines our right to live?
After having a heated discussion with my dad and sis the other day about euthanasia, abortion and the death penalty, I thought to myself why is it that we cannot determine our own life and what we want to do with it? Of course to a certain extent we can decide on our lives but when it comes to the important questions of taking our own life or giving life to another person, why does the State control all that?
Do we not have the right to determine our own death or whether we want a baby or not?
What is the reason behind religion condemning suicide and abortion?
Only God can determine who lives and who dies.
This is the same reason given by those who are anti-euthanasia and abortion. Because only God can determine who lives and who dies, so we cannot have laws which allows another person to decide on life and death.
However, let us look at it rationally and as a society as a whole.
Euthanasia:
Let us think of a situation whereby a man is involved in a horrific accident. He barely survives, he is a vegetable, brain dead and unable to function. Before this happened, he has written in his will that should he ever be in this condition, he will not want to burden anybody with medical bills and that he would choose to die, peacefully, knowing that he no longer becomes a burden to his family.
Do we grant his wish?
The law says No. Nobody has the right to determine his death. Not his parents. Not the doctors. Nobody. He should die when its time for him to die naturally.
Technically, if we think about it, if he is brain dead, isnt he already dead? He is merely kept alive by a machine. If we liken this situation to say, where a person dies and his parents decide to harvest his organs and donate them, is it similar? To allow his parents to decide after his death? So why not allow a person's parents to decide whether to pull the plug once he has been declared brain dead?
How is it wrong? The person is brain dead. He serves no function in society. He no longer responds to anything or anybody. In fact he is a prisoner in his own body. Isnt the more humane thing to do is to allow him to die as he intimated in his will?
Abortion: The number of babies being dumped daily is astounding. If they are found, they are lucky. But most of the time, they are already dead by the time anybody discovers them. After all, that is the whole point of the mother who left them there. To die.
Does this not make us think of whether the abortion laws are correct?
Is it more humane to terminate the pregnancy when the foetus has no life(scientifically proven) than to push unwed mothers to dump their babies for fear of being ostracised and leaving the babies to die?
Why are we not allowed to decide whether we want or can raise a baby? Society today is not tolerant or understanding of unwed mothers. We have MPs calling them 'gatal' in Parliament. Who can survive being shunned by society? Why not give these women a choice. If they think they are strong enough to raise a child and love the child then they can have the baby. But if they KNOW they are not ready for one or that they know they will be shunned, give them the choice of terminating the pregnancy while it is merely a foetus with no signs of life. Do not push them to the brink of desperation and have to dump their babies after 9 months of pregnancy and going through labour.
Perhaps we should be more open in our understanding of what is termed "right" and "wrong". While we may stick to our religious beliefs, sometimes it is good to be less politically correct or religiously right but search deep within ourselves and try to be humane.
Perhaps then life for some, wouldnt be so hard.
Do we not have the right to determine our own death or whether we want a baby or not?
What is the reason behind religion condemning suicide and abortion?
Only God can determine who lives and who dies.
This is the same reason given by those who are anti-euthanasia and abortion. Because only God can determine who lives and who dies, so we cannot have laws which allows another person to decide on life and death.
However, let us look at it rationally and as a society as a whole.
Euthanasia:
Let us think of a situation whereby a man is involved in a horrific accident. He barely survives, he is a vegetable, brain dead and unable to function. Before this happened, he has written in his will that should he ever be in this condition, he will not want to burden anybody with medical bills and that he would choose to die, peacefully, knowing that he no longer becomes a burden to his family.
Do we grant his wish?
The law says No. Nobody has the right to determine his death. Not his parents. Not the doctors. Nobody. He should die when its time for him to die naturally.
Technically, if we think about it, if he is brain dead, isnt he already dead? He is merely kept alive by a machine. If we liken this situation to say, where a person dies and his parents decide to harvest his organs and donate them, is it similar? To allow his parents to decide after his death? So why not allow a person's parents to decide whether to pull the plug once he has been declared brain dead?
How is it wrong? The person is brain dead. He serves no function in society. He no longer responds to anything or anybody. In fact he is a prisoner in his own body. Isnt the more humane thing to do is to allow him to die as he intimated in his will?
Abortion: The number of babies being dumped daily is astounding. If they are found, they are lucky. But most of the time, they are already dead by the time anybody discovers them. After all, that is the whole point of the mother who left them there. To die.
Does this not make us think of whether the abortion laws are correct?
Is it more humane to terminate the pregnancy when the foetus has no life(scientifically proven) than to push unwed mothers to dump their babies for fear of being ostracised and leaving the babies to die?
Why are we not allowed to decide whether we want or can raise a baby? Society today is not tolerant or understanding of unwed mothers. We have MPs calling them 'gatal' in Parliament. Who can survive being shunned by society? Why not give these women a choice. If they think they are strong enough to raise a child and love the child then they can have the baby. But if they KNOW they are not ready for one or that they know they will be shunned, give them the choice of terminating the pregnancy while it is merely a foetus with no signs of life. Do not push them to the brink of desperation and have to dump their babies after 9 months of pregnancy and going through labour.
Perhaps we should be more open in our understanding of what is termed "right" and "wrong". While we may stick to our religious beliefs, sometimes it is good to be less politically correct or religiously right but search deep within ourselves and try to be humane.
Perhaps then life for some, wouldnt be so hard.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Let's talk about sex, baby
Lets talk about sex baby, Let's talk about you and me..
So, lets get down to the business of sex. Sex at the workplace. Is it common? I think it is more common that we would like to think. What about sex with the boss? Does that actually happen here in Malaysia or its just one of those things we watch on American tv?
Apparently it happens often enough for the new Rape laws being debated in Parliament to consider consensual sex between a boss and a subordinate which was obtained through a boss's influence or authority over the subordinate to be classified as rape.
Let us go behind the whole definition of rape. The determining factor is that there is NO CONSENT given by the victim. That is how we differentiate consensual sex and rape. Consent being the determining factor, if a subordinate has consented to sex, albeit reluctantly, the sexual act cannot then be classified as rape.
While women around the world are fighting for equality at the workplace, demanding salaries equal to that of their qualifications, we here in Malaysia have somehow regressed a good 50, maybe a 100 years with the new rape laws. (Of course there are good points to be noted in the amendments proposed- recognising rape in a marriage is a step forward)
For centuries women were treated as the weaker sex. Women would not be good leaders compared to men because we are more emotional. We were not as educated as men because our calling in life would be to stay at home and serve our husbands. Women have of course fought hard to dispel that notion. First fighting for the right to vote through the suffragettes movement, the right to work and etc, and once all of that were obtained, the right to be treated equally as men.
Why do women fight for these rights? Because we say we are equal if not better than men in terms of running a business or even running a country. (We applaud our Asian counterparts who are more inclined to choosing a female leader than Western countries)
So, why the brouhaha about the Bar Council opposing the amendments to the rape laws that classify consensual sex between a boss and a subordinate which was obtained through his authority over his subordinate as rape?
The Bar Council objects to these amendments based on the simple notion that it would be easy for a woman who had slept with her boss to cry rape once things have gone awry in order to "get back" at the boss. The NGOs retaliated by saying that the Bar Council were not sensitive to the victims of rape and that there is no known formal statistics to prove that women often make false allegations of rape.
While it is recognised that rape is a heinous crime and that victims of rape are often subjected to embarassment due to the nature of having to go through interrogations and medical examinations and having to testify in court in a public gallery, this I believe does not justify making the laws easier for women to cry rape. Of course the NGOs declare that women will not make rape allegations and subject themselves to the torture of having to go through the vigorous process of the law and procedures. But have they not heard of the saying "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"?
Women today are well capable of doing a lot to move up and forward. Just like men, many women are willing to kill and lie to move up the ladder.
Besides, now that there are many women who are bosses, perhaps the NGOs should recognise that women might also use their authority to get their male subordinates to have sex with them. If they fought for the laws to have equal protection of both male and female, then I might agree with the stance taken by them. If they only fight for the women because we are the weaker sex, then I disagree wholeheartedly. Australia now recognises male rape. Perhaps it is time we here in Malaysia do too.
So, for all the steps women have taken in dispelling the notion that we are the weaker sex, these laws that the NGOs are pushing for is taking leaps and bounds backwards. Declaring to the world that women ARE indeed the weaker sex and for the law to recognise that. Like I said before, the law already does actually because rape only applies to women, not men.
I would like to think that women today are educated, sophisticated and intelligent enough to know that it is wrong to sleep with the boss to move forward in a company. I would also like to think that we have the courage to say "No, thanks!" to a sexual proposition and pack our bags and move on to another company. And I would also like to think that if one were to agree to sex with her boss in order to climb up the ladder to success, one would have to suffer the consequences herself if things go awry and there is no promotion in sight.
If you thought it was the best stance to take, then you have to take the risk that comes with it. Dont go crying to the authorities and take advantage of the law to cry rape and ruin another person just because you did not get what you want.
Stop thinking we are the weaker sex. If you want to fight for equality, fight fair. Do not play dirty.
So, lets get down to the business of sex. Sex at the workplace. Is it common? I think it is more common that we would like to think. What about sex with the boss? Does that actually happen here in Malaysia or its just one of those things we watch on American tv?
Apparently it happens often enough for the new Rape laws being debated in Parliament to consider consensual sex between a boss and a subordinate which was obtained through a boss's influence or authority over the subordinate to be classified as rape.
Let us go behind the whole definition of rape. The determining factor is that there is NO CONSENT given by the victim. That is how we differentiate consensual sex and rape. Consent being the determining factor, if a subordinate has consented to sex, albeit reluctantly, the sexual act cannot then be classified as rape.
While women around the world are fighting for equality at the workplace, demanding salaries equal to that of their qualifications, we here in Malaysia have somehow regressed a good 50, maybe a 100 years with the new rape laws. (Of course there are good points to be noted in the amendments proposed- recognising rape in a marriage is a step forward)
For centuries women were treated as the weaker sex. Women would not be good leaders compared to men because we are more emotional. We were not as educated as men because our calling in life would be to stay at home and serve our husbands. Women have of course fought hard to dispel that notion. First fighting for the right to vote through the suffragettes movement, the right to work and etc, and once all of that were obtained, the right to be treated equally as men.
Why do women fight for these rights? Because we say we are equal if not better than men in terms of running a business or even running a country. (We applaud our Asian counterparts who are more inclined to choosing a female leader than Western countries)
So, why the brouhaha about the Bar Council opposing the amendments to the rape laws that classify consensual sex between a boss and a subordinate which was obtained through his authority over his subordinate as rape?
The Bar Council objects to these amendments based on the simple notion that it would be easy for a woman who had slept with her boss to cry rape once things have gone awry in order to "get back" at the boss. The NGOs retaliated by saying that the Bar Council were not sensitive to the victims of rape and that there is no known formal statistics to prove that women often make false allegations of rape.
While it is recognised that rape is a heinous crime and that victims of rape are often subjected to embarassment due to the nature of having to go through interrogations and medical examinations and having to testify in court in a public gallery, this I believe does not justify making the laws easier for women to cry rape. Of course the NGOs declare that women will not make rape allegations and subject themselves to the torture of having to go through the vigorous process of the law and procedures. But have they not heard of the saying "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"?
Women today are well capable of doing a lot to move up and forward. Just like men, many women are willing to kill and lie to move up the ladder.
Besides, now that there are many women who are bosses, perhaps the NGOs should recognise that women might also use their authority to get their male subordinates to have sex with them. If they fought for the laws to have equal protection of both male and female, then I might agree with the stance taken by them. If they only fight for the women because we are the weaker sex, then I disagree wholeheartedly. Australia now recognises male rape. Perhaps it is time we here in Malaysia do too.
So, for all the steps women have taken in dispelling the notion that we are the weaker sex, these laws that the NGOs are pushing for is taking leaps and bounds backwards. Declaring to the world that women ARE indeed the weaker sex and for the law to recognise that. Like I said before, the law already does actually because rape only applies to women, not men.
I would like to think that women today are educated, sophisticated and intelligent enough to know that it is wrong to sleep with the boss to move forward in a company. I would also like to think that we have the courage to say "No, thanks!" to a sexual proposition and pack our bags and move on to another company. And I would also like to think that if one were to agree to sex with her boss in order to climb up the ladder to success, one would have to suffer the consequences herself if things go awry and there is no promotion in sight.
If you thought it was the best stance to take, then you have to take the risk that comes with it. Dont go crying to the authorities and take advantage of the law to cry rape and ruin another person just because you did not get what you want.
Stop thinking we are the weaker sex. If you want to fight for equality, fight fair. Do not play dirty.
Friday, June 30, 2006
gwailo mania
The Kelantanese Government is very upset that Malaysian women are not doing enough to entice foreigners to set up home here. They are impressed with how easily the Thais do it. Many foreigners flock to Thailand to find a wife and we must learn from these Thai women on how they do it!
When I speak of foreigner, I dont mean the Pakistani's or Indonesians or even the Koreans, I mean the white foreigners. White ones only.
This is the logic. No foreigner = No money.
This obsession with foreigners really get to me. Our third world country thinking has not progressed since we achieved Independence. We still worship the foreigners. We kiss the ground the walk on. We pay them in USD for work we can easily obtain from locals because "gwailo better mah!" We pay them ridiculous amounts of money to give a "gwailo" flavour to our companies and universities and homegrown brands.
We proudly declare Padini as our own homegrown brand. ALL MALAYSIAN!
So the question is, where are the Malaysians in the advertisements?
The latest advertisement by Open University Malaysia- a foreigner named Ian chose to do his PHD at OUM! Speaks volumes of the standard of the university! A FOREIGNER!GWAILO! OUM must be THE place to go to now. Who can forget LICT? Its a great university because foreigners from around the world chose that University.
Let us forget about statistics and academic excellence. A foreigner went there. MUST be a great place to further our studies!
While the West celebrate the "Oriental" look, we here in Malaysia worship the look of the West.
Our very own Ling Tan is a supermodel in New York cashing in on her oriental look, but over here in Malaysia, she looks too Chinese. Or too ethnic.
.
We only like the ones who look "mixed". Too Indian, or Chinese or Malay? You're out.
So, what is so good about the westerners? Are they smarter? Are they better looking? In the case of Kelantan, are they richer?
Why do we give out mix signals? We are always proud to be a Malaysian brand but we find the necessity to sell the brand through a foreign face (or faces). All our big companies in Malaysia are headed by a team of foreigners. Because apparently, us locals are just too stupid to head a team to great heights.
I think we have to amend our favourite slogan from MALAYSIA BOLEH!
to MALAYSIA BOLEH ( sekiranya ada orang putih!)
When I speak of foreigner, I dont mean the Pakistani's or Indonesians or even the Koreans, I mean the white foreigners. White ones only.
This is the logic. No foreigner = No money.
This obsession with foreigners really get to me. Our third world country thinking has not progressed since we achieved Independence. We still worship the foreigners. We kiss the ground the walk on. We pay them in USD for work we can easily obtain from locals because "gwailo better mah!" We pay them ridiculous amounts of money to give a "gwailo" flavour to our companies and universities and homegrown brands.
We proudly declare Padini as our own homegrown brand. ALL MALAYSIAN!
So the question is, where are the Malaysians in the advertisements?
The latest advertisement by Open University Malaysia- a foreigner named Ian chose to do his PHD at OUM! Speaks volumes of the standard of the university! A FOREIGNER!GWAILO! OUM must be THE place to go to now. Who can forget LICT? Its a great university because foreigners from around the world chose that University.
Let us forget about statistics and academic excellence. A foreigner went there. MUST be a great place to further our studies!
While the West celebrate the "Oriental" look, we here in Malaysia worship the look of the West.
Our very own Ling Tan is a supermodel in New York cashing in on her oriental look, but over here in Malaysia, she looks too Chinese. Or too ethnic.
.
We only like the ones who look "mixed". Too Indian, or Chinese or Malay? You're out.
So, what is so good about the westerners? Are they smarter? Are they better looking? In the case of Kelantan, are they richer?
Why do we give out mix signals? We are always proud to be a Malaysian brand but we find the necessity to sell the brand through a foreign face (or faces). All our big companies in Malaysia are headed by a team of foreigners. Because apparently, us locals are just too stupid to head a team to great heights.
I think we have to amend our favourite slogan from MALAYSIA BOLEH!
to MALAYSIA BOLEH ( sekiranya ada orang putih!)
Are we smarter now than we were before?
There is a running joke in my family that I HAVE to be the smartest among my siblings because I garnered the most A's in my lifetime. I started off in kindergarten itself where i scored 21 A's. How I got those many A's, I have no idea. Why there are so many A's to be obtained, eludes me. Maybe it was for something like good behaviour, finishing her biscuits during tea break (I was so fat when I was young, I couldnt wear the belt that came with my primary school uniform) or fallin asleep instantaneously during nap time.
What is the value of an A nowadays?
When I was in school, the smart ones aimed for 10A's. If you got 9A's it was a real big deal. If you got the full flush (as in 10A1's) it was a HUGE deal. Every state only had perhaps three to four students who will get the full flush. The examinations were hard. Passing was doable but getting an A1, was tough.
Now it seems like everyone is getting more than 10As in their exams. The record is, what, 17As?(That comes so close to beating my kindergarten record) What is the value of those As? Have the standard of the examinations gone downhill? Why is so easy to get those As? Have the younger generation now suddenly become smarter? Have the teachers become more dedicated and better at teaching the subjects? Or simply, have the examinations become much too easy?
Does the Education Department not notice that there is a SURGE of students obtaining a heap load of As? Have they investigated the reasons why its so easy to get A's nowadays? Have they included stupid subjects which are easy to score? If I remember correctly, while I was in school, there were compulsory subjects that one can take and the alternatives open to us were limited. English Literature, Accounts and Economics, Kesusasteraan dalam BM and a few others. Now I believe they have ridiculous subjects which I believe does nothing to help the student at all when she or he is in college. Seriously, even when I was in school, I thought Moral taught me nothing(now I KNOW it taught me nothing)though it helped improve my memory (much better than History).
So, the question that comes to my mind would be, why is everyone whining about not getting into universities?
Firstly, I believe how many A's you obtained in the SPM is no indication of how smart you are because most of the subjects are crap.
Secondly, with the amount of people with their truckload of A's, competition is tough.
Thirdly, the quota system applies.
I have to agree with what the Education Department says. You have to pepper your application with co-curricular activities. So what if you have 17A1s? or 15A1s? The girl with 9A's and an application which shows her to be active in both sports and other associations will definitely be more of an all rounder.
As a former athlete myself I have to say it takes more grit and determination to suceed in a sport than to be excellent academically. The disappointment you suffer from getting a B instead of an A after studying for 3 months nonstop pales in comparison to not being able to make it to the state competition after training 7 days a week for 3 months. To suceed in sports, one has to have physical AND mental strength.
So to those who didnt get into university eventhough you have SO many As and you were the Head Prefect (still academic requirement) and you were the President of the Chess Club(this is just sad) but you have no other "achievements" in sports or other activities such as Girl Guides, stop whining. You dont deserve a place in university. You were a book worm and you forgo other areas of your life which many have cultivated and worked hard at. This just teaches you to remember that in the real world, academic qualifications is not everything.
Being smart is does not buy you a free ticket to university. So, quit the whining. Its bugging me and wasting newspaper space in my favourite papers.
What is the value of an A nowadays?
When I was in school, the smart ones aimed for 10A's. If you got 9A's it was a real big deal. If you got the full flush (as in 10A1's) it was a HUGE deal. Every state only had perhaps three to four students who will get the full flush. The examinations were hard. Passing was doable but getting an A1, was tough.
Now it seems like everyone is getting more than 10As in their exams. The record is, what, 17As?(That comes so close to beating my kindergarten record) What is the value of those As? Have the standard of the examinations gone downhill? Why is so easy to get those As? Have the younger generation now suddenly become smarter? Have the teachers become more dedicated and better at teaching the subjects? Or simply, have the examinations become much too easy?
Does the Education Department not notice that there is a SURGE of students obtaining a heap load of As? Have they investigated the reasons why its so easy to get A's nowadays? Have they included stupid subjects which are easy to score? If I remember correctly, while I was in school, there were compulsory subjects that one can take and the alternatives open to us were limited. English Literature, Accounts and Economics, Kesusasteraan dalam BM and a few others. Now I believe they have ridiculous subjects which I believe does nothing to help the student at all when she or he is in college. Seriously, even when I was in school, I thought Moral taught me nothing(now I KNOW it taught me nothing)though it helped improve my memory (much better than History).
So, the question that comes to my mind would be, why is everyone whining about not getting into universities?
Firstly, I believe how many A's you obtained in the SPM is no indication of how smart you are because most of the subjects are crap.
Secondly, with the amount of people with their truckload of A's, competition is tough.
Thirdly, the quota system applies.
I have to agree with what the Education Department says. You have to pepper your application with co-curricular activities. So what if you have 17A1s? or 15A1s? The girl with 9A's and an application which shows her to be active in both sports and other associations will definitely be more of an all rounder.
As a former athlete myself I have to say it takes more grit and determination to suceed in a sport than to be excellent academically. The disappointment you suffer from getting a B instead of an A after studying for 3 months nonstop pales in comparison to not being able to make it to the state competition after training 7 days a week for 3 months. To suceed in sports, one has to have physical AND mental strength.
So to those who didnt get into university eventhough you have SO many As and you were the Head Prefect (still academic requirement) and you were the President of the Chess Club(this is just sad) but you have no other "achievements" in sports or other activities such as Girl Guides, stop whining. You dont deserve a place in university. You were a book worm and you forgo other areas of your life which many have cultivated and worked hard at. This just teaches you to remember that in the real world, academic qualifications is not everything.
Being smart is does not buy you a free ticket to university. So, quit the whining. Its bugging me and wasting newspaper space in my favourite papers.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
missing the big picture
I recently watched the interview Anderson Cooper had with Angelina Jolie. I agree with what she is doing to help the poor and the displaced (she is giving away 1/3 of her riches to the people who deserve it!) and I applaud her efforts. She has gone a step further from say, Bono, in her efforts to highlight the plight of these people, by adopting children from these countries. She is even paying her own expenses when she visits these countries. In fact she is highlighting the plight of immigrants in the US. (I was pro Aniston, now I am leaning a little to becoming pro Jolie.Oh!How lalang can I be?!)
It was highlighted in the interview that 1 out of 5 children die before they reach the age of 5. Many of them due to malnutrition as these countries are too poor or embroiled in civil wars. These children do not even have a chance to survive as they fight for their lives as soon as they are born. We take all these things in life for granted. Clean water, food, medical facilities, clothing and shelter. These people have to fight for all these things which we term "basic necessities" and which every person has a right to have.
However, perhaps we should look at the root of the problem. If these children are subjected to all these horrors and deprivation, maybe someone should educate the adults on birth control? These children did not choose to be born and it is certainly unjust to subject them to all of the pain and suffering and at such a young age. If these people were to be educated on birth control and they can control the population, then perhaps the problem can more easily be solved or at least minimised. Once the adults are able to surmount the problems, then perhaps they can think of having children. I mean, some of them have a whole litter of them! Only to have them die one by one.
I respect the rights of these people to have children. To want to have their bloodline continue, but sacrifices have to be made in order for a better life. Children do not need to be exposed to all the injustices. They do not need to suffer.
I think the same applies to the poor in Malaysia. If you do not have the money to sustain your family, please REFRAIN from having so many children! Everytime we watch TV3 highlighting the plight of the poor, we see a family of 6 or 7, 2 adults, 5 children.Why, why, WHY do you have to have SO many children? How can you sustain your family of 7 with your income of RM500 and below? Even those who have a higher income will find it difficult to sustain a family of 7! I know it sounds mean, but how do you expect people to sympathise with you and how your family has to suffer for being too poor to feed your children and yourself when you cannot exercise some self control and restrain from having so many kids?
It is a simple solution. You do not have the means to provide for your family. Have one child. When things get better and you are able to support another, then have another. Not pop them out like bunnies and then cry that you do not have enough to make ends meet. A simple use of brains will really help.
If I were the Prime Minister, I will have a law prohibiting those whose family income (of both spouses combined) are below RM1000 to have more than one child. And of course, that is why I will never get elected. In fact I might get shot and mutilated for enacting this law.
But, I think I make sense. Yes?
It was highlighted in the interview that 1 out of 5 children die before they reach the age of 5. Many of them due to malnutrition as these countries are too poor or embroiled in civil wars. These children do not even have a chance to survive as they fight for their lives as soon as they are born. We take all these things in life for granted. Clean water, food, medical facilities, clothing and shelter. These people have to fight for all these things which we term "basic necessities" and which every person has a right to have.
However, perhaps we should look at the root of the problem. If these children are subjected to all these horrors and deprivation, maybe someone should educate the adults on birth control? These children did not choose to be born and it is certainly unjust to subject them to all of the pain and suffering and at such a young age. If these people were to be educated on birth control and they can control the population, then perhaps the problem can more easily be solved or at least minimised. Once the adults are able to surmount the problems, then perhaps they can think of having children. I mean, some of them have a whole litter of them! Only to have them die one by one.
I respect the rights of these people to have children. To want to have their bloodline continue, but sacrifices have to be made in order for a better life. Children do not need to be exposed to all the injustices. They do not need to suffer.
I think the same applies to the poor in Malaysia. If you do not have the money to sustain your family, please REFRAIN from having so many children! Everytime we watch TV3 highlighting the plight of the poor, we see a family of 6 or 7, 2 adults, 5 children.Why, why, WHY do you have to have SO many children? How can you sustain your family of 7 with your income of RM500 and below? Even those who have a higher income will find it difficult to sustain a family of 7! I know it sounds mean, but how do you expect people to sympathise with you and how your family has to suffer for being too poor to feed your children and yourself when you cannot exercise some self control and restrain from having so many kids?
It is a simple solution. You do not have the means to provide for your family. Have one child. When things get better and you are able to support another, then have another. Not pop them out like bunnies and then cry that you do not have enough to make ends meet. A simple use of brains will really help.
If I were the Prime Minister, I will have a law prohibiting those whose family income (of both spouses combined) are below RM1000 to have more than one child. And of course, that is why I will never get elected. In fact I might get shot and mutilated for enacting this law.
But, I think I make sense. Yes?
Thursday, June 15, 2006
The Perfect Malaysia
If it all works out for Perak Mufti Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria, in the year 2020(or earlier), all those with AIDS and Avian influenza will be cast away on an island to ensure they do not infect others.(Marina Mahathir might have to go along because she works closely with the AIDS foundation-Dr.M wont be too happy)
And all those who have insulted Islam would be dead or living in fear of being killed because his office ran a survey on how best to react to those who insult Islam and the first option on the list was "Hunt them down and kill them or wage war against them."
And there will be no such thing as Kongsi Raya as that could erode the faith of Muslims and lead to blasphemy.
Right. That in turn will be the PERFECT Malaysia.
What would Malaysia do without the Ulama Conference Working Group Chairman?
The Muslims will all spiral into blasphemy and become apostates by celebrating Valentine's Day. I guess there will include another 3 reasons to include in the "55 sebab mengapa wanita Islam akan masuk ke Neraka" (Lelaki Islam are above this list-lucky them!) As to how I stumble upon the book, that calls for another blog and all its lurid details!
And what about the Non-Muslims? I guess we will just have to celebrate CNY, Deepavali and Christmas by ourselves. I will definitely not be inviting any of my Muslim friends because I dont want to be seen to be encouraging blasphemy!(the horror!) and I think hotels and restaurants should have signs during Valentine's Day forbidding Muslims from entering and GOD FORBID celebrate the day of Love. (Actually, its debatable what Valentine's Day is all about but its about love for chrissakes)
Ok, let us all get together and form our own list of stupid things to make public!
No.1- what do we do with Mufti's and their stupid ideas?
Hunt them down and kill them!
Wage war against them!
No.2- what do we do with Mufti's and their stupid ideas...
oh wait, I already asked that.
Damn. Those stupids are infectious.
And all those who have insulted Islam would be dead or living in fear of being killed because his office ran a survey on how best to react to those who insult Islam and the first option on the list was "Hunt them down and kill them or wage war against them."
And there will be no such thing as Kongsi Raya as that could erode the faith of Muslims and lead to blasphemy.
Right. That in turn will be the PERFECT Malaysia.
What would Malaysia do without the Ulama Conference Working Group Chairman?
The Muslims will all spiral into blasphemy and become apostates by celebrating Valentine's Day. I guess there will include another 3 reasons to include in the "55 sebab mengapa wanita Islam akan masuk ke Neraka" (Lelaki Islam are above this list-lucky them!) As to how I stumble upon the book, that calls for another blog and all its lurid details!
And what about the Non-Muslims? I guess we will just have to celebrate CNY, Deepavali and Christmas by ourselves. I will definitely not be inviting any of my Muslim friends because I dont want to be seen to be encouraging blasphemy!(the horror!) and I think hotels and restaurants should have signs during Valentine's Day forbidding Muslims from entering and GOD FORBID celebrate the day of Love. (Actually, its debatable what Valentine's Day is all about but its about love for chrissakes)
Ok, let us all get together and form our own list of stupid things to make public!
No.1- what do we do with Mufti's and their stupid ideas?
Hunt them down and kill them!
Wage war against them!
No.2- what do we do with Mufti's and their stupid ideas...
oh wait, I already asked that.
Damn. Those stupids are infectious.
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
does it bring the dead back?
Abolish the death penalty?
Why?
Why should we abolish the death penalty?
Some say that there is no proof it deters others from committing crimes. Some say its akin to murder. Most of them say it doesnt bring the victim back from the dead.
I say, bullshit.
I say if you have guts to take someone else's life, you pay for it. If you are greedy enough to traffic drugs into a country with one of the strictest drug laws in the world, you pay for it.
Those who want to abolish the death penalty cry that killing the murderer does not bring the victim back. That of course is true. But lets put ourselves in the shoes of those who have had their loved ones brutally murdered. Perhaps even raped before being murdered. Or in this sick sadistic world today, raped, beaten, tortured and brutally murdered.
After having to find out your loved one is dead, you have to identify the badly mutilated body and then go through the pain of waiting for the police to find the murderer. If he/she is found, and they claim innocence, then you go through the painful wait of years and years of trial.And perhaps maybe learning during the trial (if there is one) that he/she did it because he/she is just sick in the head. So, if we abolish the death penalty, lets just lock him up in prison, whip him, and hope he rots in there for 20 years. All this while the taxpayers pay for his stay in prison. Feed and clothe him/her.
Justice is served?
What justice are we talking about here? Knowing that a murderer lies in prison and for killing someone, all they were punished with is imprisonment? Its not like they are made to do labourous work ala building the Great Wall of China, all they do is sweep the compounds of the prisons, plant flowers, perhaps learn a new skill and half the time, doing nothing in particular but stare at the four walls of prison.
All this while the people who have lost their loved ones suffer the pain of loss, of knowing they suffered before they died and also knowing that indirectly they are paying for the murderer's stay in prison.
I believe, in some cases, its true to stick with an eye for an eye.
If you kill, you hang.
Ah, justice is served.
Why?
Why should we abolish the death penalty?
Some say that there is no proof it deters others from committing crimes. Some say its akin to murder. Most of them say it doesnt bring the victim back from the dead.
I say, bullshit.
I say if you have guts to take someone else's life, you pay for it. If you are greedy enough to traffic drugs into a country with one of the strictest drug laws in the world, you pay for it.
Those who want to abolish the death penalty cry that killing the murderer does not bring the victim back. That of course is true. But lets put ourselves in the shoes of those who have had their loved ones brutally murdered. Perhaps even raped before being murdered. Or in this sick sadistic world today, raped, beaten, tortured and brutally murdered.
After having to find out your loved one is dead, you have to identify the badly mutilated body and then go through the pain of waiting for the police to find the murderer. If he/she is found, and they claim innocence, then you go through the painful wait of years and years of trial.And perhaps maybe learning during the trial (if there is one) that he/she did it because he/she is just sick in the head. So, if we abolish the death penalty, lets just lock him up in prison, whip him, and hope he rots in there for 20 years. All this while the taxpayers pay for his stay in prison. Feed and clothe him/her.
Justice is served?
What justice are we talking about here? Knowing that a murderer lies in prison and for killing someone, all they were punished with is imprisonment? Its not like they are made to do labourous work ala building the Great Wall of China, all they do is sweep the compounds of the prisons, plant flowers, perhaps learn a new skill and half the time, doing nothing in particular but stare at the four walls of prison.
All this while the people who have lost their loved ones suffer the pain of loss, of knowing they suffered before they died and also knowing that indirectly they are paying for the murderer's stay in prison.
I believe, in some cases, its true to stick with an eye for an eye.
If you kill, you hang.
Ah, justice is served.
Wednesday, June 07, 2006
the PM showdown
AAhhh...the glory of Malaysia. The 2nd tallest building in the world. (We are not third yet are we?) The only building in the world which was built with tons and tons of concrete instead of steel to sustain its weight. The only building in the world which has double lifts operating in the small space of the interior. The safest building in the world which allows for an escape route for the occupants through the other tower should one tower be in trouble.
The vision of our then PM Tun Dr. Mahathir.
One of many of his visions actually.
Just the other day I met Tun himself in KLCC. So being the typical star struck Malaysian that I was, I lurked around and contemplated to myself whether I should approach him for a picture. After much deliberations and a quick phone call to my mum who told me to stop being a wuss and go approach Tun, I did. And of all the people who were milling around Guardian Pharmacy, I had to ask a middle aged lady to snap a picture of me and Tun and Dr. Siti Hasmah with my hp camera. Of course she didnt know how to zoom so we looked like three tiny ants in a blur picture. It could have been Tun, it might not have been. Who can tell through the small blur picture?!
*Note to self. Avoid middle aged women who do not know how to take pics with hp camera.
SO moving along with the story, I excitedly told everyone that I met Dr. M and lucky me, I snapped a picture with him!
A friend of mine retorted: "Well, its not like everyday you get to take a picture with a scum!"
Ok, time for a pause.
Scum?
But I admire the man for all he has done for this country. He was a man of vision. He had visions of Malaysia which our current PM does not.
He brought Malaysia to the world. We are Malaysia, not the country next to Singapore.
He gave us F1. He gave us KLIA, which on the Discovery channel ad had the tagline, "Maybe one day all airports will be like this one."
Oh, his detractors will say, but he practiced cronyism, he was corrupted, power hungry, he was a dictator!
Tell me which politician is not. If our current PM does not practise cronyism, then why are there rumours that his son's company in charge of the MAS meals in which an egg which normally costs 50 sen costs RM5?(I could be wrong. I stand corrected.)
All politicians are corrupt. It is whether they have the vision and dedication to balance it out.
Pro Badawi camp says: He allowed forums to discuss religions. He allowed forums to discuss the rakyat's fundamental rights. The 9MP benefits the rakyat!
Yeah, he also said religion is a sensitive area which we shouldnt venture into. He also said the police were wrong to ask the participants of the Article 11 forum to disperse and thats all he did. He just said it was wrong. He didnt do anything else. (he terms most things as "sensitive" and then dismiss it) He also said it was the majority's policy not to support the motion of the opposition. He also modelled the 9MP according to Islamic policies.
How do we benefit? How do the Chinese benefit?Actually, how do non-Muslims benefit? How have we benefitted from the religious forums? How have we benefitted at all?
The only thing I remember ever since Badawi came to power is that electricity rates have gone up, petrol prices have gone up, the Singapore bridge has been cancelled, the so called Khidmat Negara (which I see no purpose for) has been implemented, MAS ticket prices keep soaring (national carrier yet is more expensive compared to other airlines in the world) and the police dispersing peaceful protests on fuel and electricity hikes, like it was an angry bunch of demonstrators going against the government with tears gas, a lot of kicking and punching.
I dont remember much else.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)