Retorika Ketuanan Melayu

Ketuanan Melayu adalah suatu konsep yang wujud hanya untuk dimanfaatkan oleh dua golongan.

Golongan pertama adalah mereka yang ingin berselindung di sebalik konsep ‘ghaib’ tersebut untuk mengaut keuntungan. Memastikan Melayu sentiasa menjadi ‘Tuan’, agar senang untuk menjalankan agenda jahat mereka….

Golongan kedua pula adalah mereka yang sengaja menimbulkan konsep Ketuanan Melayu ini agar masyarakat akan melihat bahawa kerja orang Melayu hanya ingin menindas orang bukan Melayu. Tentu, jika mereka konsisten, bukan Melayu akan bersama mereka.

Ketuanan Melayu adalah satu konsep yang non-existent. Hanya sekadar retorik yang dicanangkan oleh kedua-dua kelompok politikawan ekstrim.

Seperkara sahaja, jika benar Ketuanan Melayu itu wujud saya fikir ramai orang bukan Melayu akan menolak tawaran kerakyatan pada peringkat awal kemerdekaan dulu.

Ok, kalau kita debatkan konsep Ketuanan Melayu ini, kita juga akan terjerumus kedalam ‘whirlpool’ yang sengaja direka oleh kedua-dua golongan yang saya sebut diatas itu. Kehangatan kita berdebat mengenai konsep yang ‘vague’ ini akan menyebabkan kita terus melupakan bahawa keperluan utama adalah memastikan Melayu lestari dan berdikari.

Mungkin itu juga hujah utama pengasas kemerdekaan negara untuk mendahulukan bangsa Melayu melalui dasar DEB, MARA dan sebagainya. Dengan harapan agar pada satu masa nanti, apabila padang sudah diratakan, pelari pecut Melayu mampu memiliki ‘spike’ jenama Nike, sama seperti pelari pecut bangsa Cina dan India, barulah pertandingan 100meter itu menjadi lebih adil, bukan?

Ketuanan Melayu, jika disebut berulang kali boleh menzahirkan satu imej segregasi sosial serta memberikan gambaran golongan yang kuat (Melayu) menindas yang lemah (bukan Melayu). Ini tidak benar, kerana yang perlu bantuan adalah Melayu yang diakui ketinggalan pada awal merdeka dahulu. Melayu amat lemah ketika itu. Jurang sosial ini terlalu luas sehinggakan memerlukan satu dasar yang pro-Melayu agar perbedaan sosioekonomi tidak begitu ketara.

Keperluan Melayu adalah untuk ‘sustain’ dan berdikari. Dan saya pasti pada Melayu sekarang sudah tidak seperti dulu. Bangsa ini sudah meningkat daripada majoriti berpendapatan rendah kepada berpendapatan sederhana. Tidak kurang juga yang berpendapatan mewah. Persoalan sekarang, bilakah masa yang sesuai utk menarik balik ‘tongkat’ yang diberikan ini?

Mungkin masanya sekarang, tetapi adakah ianya perlu dilakukan secara drastik?

Sama juga seperti narkoba, jika digunakan dalam kuantiti yang kecil dan terkawal (pengawasan pakar perubatan), manfaatnya ‘superb’. Tetapi jika disalahgunakan, tidak terkawal, ketagihan boleh bawa kepada kematian.

Sekarang tiba masa untuk Melayu tolong Melayu, bukan lagi Kerajaan tolong Melayu. Adakah seruan ini berbau perkauman? Saya rasa tidak. Saya tidak sebut pun walau sepatah seruan untuk menindas kaum-kaum lain.

Sekian.

Will we ever learn? Ref ~ Malaysiakini

Judging from the latest progress in Malaysia’s politic, in Perak particularly, few things can be learned by all of us, the spectators. As I list down few important lessons to be observed by us, the rakyat, we should not stop praying that one day, some one will stand up and bring us out from this hell hole created by those people who claimed themselves as the rakyat’s representatives. Let us throw back this hell straight to their faces, so that by doing so they will get back on track – to serve us, the people.

Lesson No. 1

Don’t steal anything from others, if you couldn’t accept the fact someone else stole something that is yours.

Well, not to say that stealing is OK, it is not, in any given circumstances. I’m just using the analogy of stealing because it’s the best to show how politician actually say things without even thinking. Why did I say so? Looking back after the historic political tsunami on 8th of March 08, we saw how 5+1 states was wrestled from BN by PR via general election. Well done, I must said. PR deserved the 6 states, because the people voted them in. Yes indeed people in Selangor, Kedah, Kelantan, Wilayah Persekutuan and Perak voted them to run the state governments NOT federal government.

However, as a malay adage goes “diberi betis nak paha pula”, Anwar Ibrahim with confidence and full determination said that PR will takeover federal government on 16th of September 08, few months after the election via crossing overs of BN lawmakers. Since then, PR lured BN MPs to jump ship, they attack, they persuade, they stalked, they chased them up to Taiwan, everything they could do to claim Putrajaya. Nasarudding of Bota jumped ship first, into the open arms of Anwar Ibrahim as he announced his latest ‘catch’ in a press conference in PJ. “This is a start of many more crossovers”, “From Bota to Putrajaya” So they started to hit the drums in joy and confidence. Their feet weren’t at all on the ground.

Then suddenly, they dropped face first to the ground!

Three ADUNs in Perak switched from PR to BN, and this caught everyone especially Anwar by surprise. To add salt to the wound, Anwars short lived blue-eye boy, Nasaruddin of Bota, made the most ‘unsangkarable’ U-turn by returning back to BN. Anwar Ibrahim and PR was brought back and down to earth by their own ‘weapon’.

Like a verbal diarrhea, all blames were targeted to BN. One of Anwar’s favourite ammo is statutory declaration, and in no time, one statutory declaration implicating Najib trying to lure ADUNs with cash was brought to the media. Issues of morality regarding issue of crossing over now becomes relevant, something PR never talked about few months back.

If you are not prepared to face the same consequences that your enemy would have experienced as a result of your homemade weapon, therefore don’t pull the trigger, or simply just don’t even talk about it!

I guess lesson well delivered. Well learned? I don’t know.

Lesson No. 2

Morality and Legality, they do not tend to get along together, as you might expect it to

Two issues that happened last month brought me to this point. The first issue is party hopping, and the other one is Elizabeth Wong semi-nude pics.

Remember when Anwar fired his first salvo regarding 16th September plan? BN leaders came to the surface and tried to give an impression that such move by Anwar is immoral, since Anwar tried to takeover Federal government through backdoor. Even I did write an article condemning such act, on basis of morality. Obviously, both sides, be it BN or PKR, never thought of morality. Not even the slightest touch of it. The proofs, when Nasaruddin of Bota jumped into PKR, Anwar didn’t say anything about morality, furthermore, Nasaruddin was lifted as the hero, the brave, the fighter who realized BN is not the right party to him.

Nasaruddin was none of above, at least to PKR supporters’ minds, 10 days after the historical move (quoting from Anwar Ibrahim). From zero to hero, or should I say from hero to zero. Either way, what he did was legally OK, but if you try to debate on basis of morality, we are going nowhere, trust me.

Similarly, when Elizabeth Wong semi-nude pics were circulated in cyber world, the issues of morality and legality arose. This time, I have to admit that Eli Wong is the victim of breach of personal space, but I’ve seen so many pictures of politician’s sons, daughters, and wives being used to paint negative image on particular politicians. This has been a practice in Malaysia’s politics for as long as I can remember.

Okay, let’s put aside Eli’s case, since it has been made a police case, let’s not interfere with police’s investigations. I had also written an article on doctored pictures produced by political party supporters in an effort to defame, and give negative implication on their political enemy. I strongly condemn such act. And if it doesn’t ring any bells still, I should just mentioned the name of the culprit here, you know Tian Chua?

If you don’t, he was the one who wanted to ‘smash’ reporters’ head when asked about any possibilities that he once had a relationship with Eli Wong. Both are singles so people do get curious sometimes.

Okay, so let’s not get ourself mixed up. Morality and legality should be hand in hand, but in Malaysia’s politic, we hardly see that being the case so often.

Lesson No. 3

If you don’t know the content of the constitutions, don’t try to interpret it, experts do at times contradict themselves

This lesson, I will not take credit for. Because, this point was raised by Jebat Must Die (www.jebatmustdie.wordpress.com). When there are confusions with regards to federal or state constitutions, few names will appear in electronic media or press, giving their side of understandings according to their own specialties. The likes of Prof Aziz Bari from UIA, Prof Agus of UKM and others were made the point of references by the media. Even among themselves, we do get different interpretations on the content of the constitution.

But this time, one name that is alien to me surfaced. Tommy Thomas, the constitutional expert, a lawyer by profession is quoted by Anwar Ibrahim in his blog to give pro-PR interpretations of the constitution. Nobody put it more clearer that Jebat Must Die, I thanked him for writing an article highlighting on how inconsistent this so called constitutional expert is, that goes by the name of Tommy Thomas. It’s a worthwhile read, you’ll be amazed by how people can tailor their ‘knowledge’ to justify according to their belief or loyalty to party or certain people.

Back in October 2008, Tommy Thomas (if it is the same person as above) was interviewed by The Nut Graph. This Constitutional expert reiterated time and time again in his interview that it is within the powers of the Monarchy to select who would be the Prime Minister.

Since the state constitution of Perak follows closely to the Federal Constitution, we can juxtapose what he is saying then to the situation we have now in Perak.

Among the pertinent points he said were:

“Then Abdullah would have to visit the palace and inform the king that he has lost the confidence of his own party, and so tender his resignation and the resignation of his cabinet. And the king will accept that.

When that happens, there is a vacancy in the office of the prime minister. At that point of time, the king has a free hand, because Article 43(2)(a) [of the Federal Constitution] — the appointing process — comes into play. The king can decide whether he calls the new leader of the Barisan Nasional (BN), which will be Najib; or somebody else who, in the king’s judgment, enjoys majority support in the Dewan Rakyat.”

Note he continued on to say that dissolution of the Parliament is not necessary:

“As outlined in Article 43(4), if Abdullah himself feels he has lost the majority support for whatever reason, including that he is losing support within Umno, he is entitled to visit the king [to do the following]. He can tell the king he wants to tender his resignation and that of his cabinet because he thinks he no longer enjoys the support of the majority of the lower house (the Dewan Rakyat), and ask for Parliament to be dissolved. And call [for] elections.

He is entitled to ask [which is one of his prerogatives as sitting prime minister]. But it is the king’s prerogative whether to say yes or no. The king can take into account the interests of the nation, economic factors, political turbulence, the fact that elections were held recently, the costs involved, etc. But the discretion is the king’s.”

He even became nostalgic in order to strengthen his point of views:

“We are invited to interpret Article 43(4) which reads: “If the PM (JMD : in this case the MB) ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the House of Representatives, then, unless at his request the Yang diPertuan Agong dissolves Parliament, the prime minister shall tender the resignation of the cabinet.”

What we are trying to do is find out what is the intention of our founding fathers. That is what the task is all about. How do you interpret those words?

Who are the founding fathers? First, the five members of the Reid Commission — two members from the UK, one from Australia, one from India and one from Pakistan — the senior Commonwealth members. The other group of people are Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun VT Sambanthan and Tun Tan Cheng Lock.

What we are trying to do is interpret their words, 43(4), with the intention they had in mind. Some legal experts have said it is limited to a poll, a vote of no confidence in the Dewan Rakyat. My argument is that cannot be the intention because if it is so limited, then the language would have been something like this: “If the Prime Minister is defeated on a motion of confidence in the House of Representatives, then…” So you see the opening words of 43(4) and my imaginary version are very different…the actual wording is far more general, broad and wide, whereas the other is specific and limited to one method.

But the important thing is that it is the king’s satisfaction that matters. The king must be satisfied that the prime minister of the day no longer enjoys the confidence of the majority of the lower house. So what that means actually is that the king cannot act arbitrarily; there must be some objective facts, some proof, some reason for him to act.

How he goes about satisfying himself on this point is up to the king.”

This is from the same lawyer that is representing Pakatan Rakyat now! Of course during that interview, he was justifying whether can Anwar Ibrahim, the potential usurper, be a Prime Minister through crossovers. All Pakatan Rakyat supporters hailed those interviews as a reference point at that time.

Now, they are singing a different tune.

However, since all Pakatan Rakyat lawyers are highly principled and beyond reproach, I am sure they will not flip flop their way in front of public’s eyes. Hopefully V. Sivakumar did not choose the wrong lawyer. Anyway, by being the lead counsel to question the Sultan’s decision, are we now suppose to think that his interviews back in last October were rubbish?

Just asking.

Bravo to JMD, and I finished my article with that. Hope that’s not too heavy for you to read. I hope I will not write about Perak fiasco any longer, this has been going on for ages now. It has to stop, politician should set their minds on economy. Recession is a real thing and with how things are going now, recession might hit Perakians harder.

Mencari titik penyelesaian di Perak? ~ Ref Malaysiakini

Seperti kata seorang rakan, “politik Malaysia lain, tidak ikut buku”. Saya hanya mampu menangguk bersetuju. Perkembangan terkini di Perak lagi menguatkan pendapat tersebut. Untuk mereka yang masih tidak tahu, Malaysia mengamalkan sistem demokrasi dan raja berpelembagaan. Kedua-dua entiti ini adalah saling berhubung kait antara satu sama lain. Runtuh sistem demokrasi, runtuhlah institusi raja, dan begitulah sebaliknya.

Banyak yang kita boleh pelajari dan teladani daripada krisis politik+perlembagaan ini, kita akan dapat melihat bagaimana pentingnya hubungan Dewan Undangan Negeri dan Istana, dan akibat jika kedua-duanya tidak bersefahaman.

Saya melihat peranan Sultan sebagai bukan hanya simbol kepada kekuatan bangsa Melayu, sebaliknya adalah sebagai ‘buffer’ kepada sistem demokrasi sedia ada yang dipraktikkan di Malaysia. Inilah keunikan Malaysia, unik tak semestinya positif, dan tidak juga semestinya negatif.

Beberapa opsyen untuk menyelesaikan masalah di Perak boleh dipertimbangkan,  opsyen ini juga secara tidak langsung akan menampakkan peranan Sultan yang  amat kritikal dalam membentuk kerajaan. Kita seharusnya tidak lupa, di setiap negeri di Tanah Melayu, kerajaan negeri dipayungi Istana, sejarah juga telah membuktikannya.

Antara opsyen yang ada;

1. Menerima cadangan Ir Nizar untuk membubarkan DUN dan mengadakan pilihanraya

2. Menolak cadangan membubarkan DUN, dan mencadangkan sidang tergempar untuk undi tak percaya

3. Mencadangkan perletakan jawatan MB dan Exco dari kerajaan terdahulu yang sudah hilang kepercayaan majoriti ahli DUN.

4. Meneruskan kerajaan minoriti terdahulu, sehingga kes ‘surat letak jawatan tak bertarikh’ selesai di Mahkamah.

Opsyen pertama adalah opsyen pilihan PR dan bukan BN. Walaupun keputusan mungkin belum dipastikan memihak kepada PR mahupun BN (disebalik keyakinan PR untuk menguasai 2/3, BN juga yakin menang jika p/raya diadakan – kedua-duanya cakap politik – doesn’t carry much weight) pilihanraya negeri juga akan menyebabkan;

• 1. Kos yang tinggi untuk mengadakan p/raya negeri
• 2. Komitmen rakyat/kerajaan menyimpang daripada isu ekonomi dan kesan kemelesetan terhadap negara.
• 3. Tiada jaminan keadaaan ‘seri’ antara PR-BN tidak akan berulang lagi.
• 4. Cara ini adalah labour dan cost exhaustive. Yang seronok hanyalah ahli politik dan bukannya rakyat.

Opsyen kedua adalah bersifat ‘gentleman’ dan juga sebagai membuktikan MB sudah hilang kepercayaan majoriti ahli DUN di dalam Dewan. BN sepatutnya berusaha agar sidang tergempar diadakan dan pertukaran kuasa dilakukan melalui dewan yang mulia.

Opsyen ketiga pula akan menimbulkan kontroversi ‘campur tangan’ Istana dalam badan eksekutif, di mana Sultan hanya berperanan untuk melantik dan tidak memecat MB. Isu letak jawatan adalah bergantung kepada soal maruah MB, jika benar ahli sudah hilang kepercayaan kepada beliau dan pegawai-pegawai beliau, seharusnya beliau undur.

Namun, jumlah ADUN yang cenderung kepada BN adalah terlalu kecil untuk memaksa MB meletakkan jawatan diluar kuasa dewan ditambah pula dengan dakwaan dua ADUN (Behrang dan Changkat Jering) yang mana kedudukan mereka dalam DUN dipersoalkan (walaupun SPR telahpun mengumumkan tiada kekosongan pada kerusi DUN yang diwakili mereka)

Opsyen keempat pula adalah opsyen yang tidak digemari BN. Dalam politik macam-macam boleh berlaku dalam jangkamasa sepuluh hari, sebagai contoh ADUN Bota boleh menyertai 2 parti dalam jangkamasa 10 hari. Menakjubkan bukan? Jika hendak ditunggu keputusan mahkamah, macam-macam boleh jadi.

Jika kita beranggapan kita tahu segala-galanya, tiada guna meneruskan bacaan anda sehingga ke tahap ini. Kerana kita tahu sedikit mengenai perlembagaan, sedikit mengenai Institusi diraja tidak bermakna kita ahli dalam isu ini. Oleh sebab itulah saya tidak tahu apakah jalan penyelesaian terbaik untuk krisis poltik+perlembagaan yang melanda Perak ini.

Jika kita ikut emosi penyokong PR – sudah tentu Sultan silap langkah kerana tidak bersama mempertahankan kerajaan Nizar. Dan jika kita ingin berkongsi senyuman dengan penyokong BN – dikata pula kita ini tidak demokratik.

Minggu lepas, ADUN Bota dalam langkah pertamanya menyertai PKR, tiada satu pun isu letak jawatan supaya p/raya semula diadakan timbul, malah kehadiran beliau disambut sebagai wira, siap dengan sambutan penuh keyakinan pemimpin tertinggi PR dengan menyatakan ianya akan memulakan gelombang baru. Ramai dijangka akan melompat ke dalam PR sebagai domino effect – ketika itu lompat masih lagi dianggap bermaruah!

Tidakkah saya katakan dalam politik 10 hari adalah tempoh yang panjang, sekarang lompat itu sudah jadi perkara yang paling dibenci dan digeruni oleh PR. Kegopohan dan overconfident adalah tendon achilles pemimpin tertinggi PR, kegopohan dan kegelojohan ini jugalah yang telah membuka ‘floodgate’ kepada lompat-melompat ini. Apabila ADUN BN ‘dicuri’ ia seakan memberi lampu hijau buat BN untuk membalas tembakan dengan ‘mencuri’ daripada kantung mereka pula.

Salah siapa semua ini berlaku? Ingat kita bukan hendak mencari kesalahan, kita hanya ingin belajar dari kesilapan orang lain.

Apakah ada penyelesaian krisis di Perak ini? Ada, asalkan kita terus menghormati prinsip demokrasi dan institusi diraja mengikut lunas-lunas yang ada dalam perlembagaan negeri dan negara.

Artikel-artikel yang wajar dibaca

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/97651

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/97687

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/97620

http://nobisha.blogspot.com/2009/02/apa-salah-nizar-apa-betul-najib.html

http://kadirjasin.blogspot.com/2009/02/implikasi-tumbangnya-kerajaan-pr-perak.html

http://msomelayu.blogspot.com/2009/02/politik-tempoyak-8.html

Politik Kongkalikong

Saya merujuk kepada posting Anwar Ibrahim dalam blog beliau yang menyindir Abdullah Badawi sebagai “PM kongkalikong”. Secara jujur saya tidak punyai kamus Dewan untuk merujuk apa makna sebenar kongkalikong itu, maka saya fikir ianya mungkin boleh ditakrifkan sebagai flip flop ataupun kluk klek dalam loghat Terengganu. Disini DS Anwar menjadikan konsistensi kepada prinsip sebagai topik utama beliau, dan maka elok kita kupas topik ini berdasarkan keadaan caca-merba di Perak dan juga beberapa babak dalam politik tanahair yang masih segar dalam ingatan kita.

Kita buka minda, kita abaikan seketika kejumudan emosi politik partisan, kita rungkai permasalahan dan kesan daripada pertelingkahan politik yang tidak sudah-sudah ini kepada negara kita, Malaysia.

Kedua, PM Datuk Seri Abdullah kongkalikong mengalu-alukan kehadhiran mereka kedalam UMNO walhal beliau dan kelompoknya membebel soal tidak bermoralnya langkah tersebut!

Ketiga, apakah lompatan terbaru melibatkan sogokan wang dan ugutan pendakwaan rasuah yang terdahulu? Datuk Seri Najib perlu menjawab kerana penglibatan beliau memujuk kedua ADUN tersebut.

http://anwaribrahimblog.com/2009/02/02/bingkisan-drama-kehilangan-dua-adun-perak/

Kenyataan diatas adalah sebagai membalas kepada laporan media yang memetik kenyataan Abdullah Badawi mengalu-alukan kehadiran Yang Berhormat daripada parti PR ke dalam BN.

Nampaknya, penghijrahan yang diklasifikasikan sebagai halal dan berprinsip oleh Anwar hanyalah penghijrahan yang menguntungkan beliau sahaja, pada beliau perpindahan YB hanyalah trafik sehala. Dalam erti kata lain, PR boleh ‘curi’ BN punya, BN pula tidak boleh ‘curi’ daripada PR.

Soalnya, siapa yang memulakannya dahulu? Bukankah ADUN Bota yang ‘dipancing’ terlebih dahulu daripada kolam BN? Dan penghijrahan itu digendang-gendangkan sebagai berprinsip dan sebagainya. Sudah ada rumus yang cuba di indoktrinasikan iaitu jika BN lompat ke PR, si pelompat adalah hero, manakala jika PR lompat ke BN, si pelompat telah disogok dengan wang dan kuasa.

Sikap hollier than thou ini sudah jadi amalan beberapa ajaran ekstrim yang sesat lagi menyesatkan, hanya mereka sahaja yang betul, yang tidak bersama mereka semuanya salah. Masih ingat pengikut-pengikut Ayah Pin dan Nabi Kahar? Saya bukanlah hendak menyamakan sesuatu parti dengan ajaran sesat, walaupun jauh berbeda kedua-duanya, tetapi ada sedikit persamaan, itu sahaja.

Sebaliknya apabila ‘hilang’ sahaja ADUN PKR, terus diserang kem BN dengan peluru-peluru seperti akuan bersumpah (yang sudah tiada nilai dalam politik Malaysia), kenyataan akhbar yang tergesa-gesa oleh YB di Kedah, dan sebagainya. Lebih mengejutkan lagi, awal-awal lagi PR sudah memasang fail-safe mechanism iaitu surat meletak jawatan bertandatangan serta tidak bertarikh yang dipegang oleh MB. Rupa-rupanya mengikut kamus demokrasi PR, calon pilihan rakyat boleh dipecat sebagai wakil rakyat tanpa persetujuan rakyat oleh MB. Mungkin kuasa MB membenarkan beliau memecat Exco kerajaan negeri, tetapi bukan wakil rakyat.

Apapun itu cara politik PR, sudahpun didebatkan oleh pakar-pakar perlembagaan, penganalisis veteran pilihanraya, serta peguam-peguam berpengalaman, kita tunggu sahaja keputusan perbincangan itu.

Perkembangan politik di Perak ini diharap akan membuka mata umum akan kesan negatif usaha membeli ataupun memancing sokongan YB melalui lompat parti. Setahu saya DS Anwar Ibrahim secara terbuka mengumumkan usaha beliau untuk mendapatkan sejumlah YB daripada BN untuk menyertai PR agar beliau dapat menjadi Perdana Menteri Malaysia pada 16hb September tahun lalu. Apabila PM Abdullah secara terbuka menerima YB PR melompat ke BN, melenting pula Anwar Ibrahim.

Tentu sekarang beliau faham kenapa Abdullah tidak melayan permintaan beliau untuk mengadakan sidang tergempar parlimen selepas temberang beliau pecah, 16hb September tidak jadi kenyataan. Apabila Abdullah menolak desakan beliau untuk mengadakan sidang tergempar itu, boleh lah Anwar menyembunyikan kelemahan beliau dengan mengkritik keengganan Abdullah untuk menurut kehendak peribadinya itu. Jika masih tidak percaya, cuba teliti kenyataan-kenyataan pemimpin PR Perak, sedikit sebanyak menyerupai kenyataan pemimpin BN tatkala Anwar Ibrahim melipatgandakan usaha beliau untuk ‘memujuk’ MP BN untuk melompat.

Rupa-rupanya, tidak enak rasanya apabila kita sibuk mengemaskan ruang tamu rumah, ada penceroboh yang cuba mengopak pintu dapur di belakang rumah kita.

Mungkin ramai sudah lupa janji yang tidak dikotakan itu, Anwar masih belum lupa, cita-citanya belum tercapai lagi, sedia untuk lakukan apa sahaja untuk merealisasikan impian.

Siapa sebenarnya yang kongkalikong? Siapa sebenarnya yang kluk klek? Saya fikir kita tidak perlu jawab soalan ini, kerana saya pun tidak mahu memanjangkan perbincangan politik yang tak sudah-sudah ini.

Tatkala negara dirundung isu yang lebih besar iaitu ekonomi yang meruncing, tekanan hidup rakyat terbanyak, krisis pengangguran pekerjaan dan halatuju negara menuju Wawasan 2020 yang semakin hari nampaknya semakin pudar, ahli-ahli politik masih lagi giat berusaha untuk mencapai cita-cita peribadi. Di Malaysia, walaupun saban hari kita mendengar suara rakyat adalah suara keramat, sebenarnya yang diperbodohkan selama ini adalah rakyat jua.

Saya rasa dan akan terus menegaskan ini, sudah terlalu lama rentetan perebutan kuasa politik Malaysia ini berterusan. Dan natijahnya pada negara adalah sangat negatif. Memang seronok kita dengar cerita politik, tetapi jika terlalu kerap berpolitik, bila pula masanya untuk menterjemahkan manifesto pilihanraya kepada realiti? Bila pula rakyat akan menikmati ‘pulangan’ hasil dari undi yang telah diberikan?

Tiada guna kita menggelar seseorang itu kongkalikong atau dengan apa-apa nama sekalipun jika yang menggelar itu sendiri tidak pernah melihat cermin!

Tulisan ini adalah analisa dan pandangan kritis saya, bukannya sebuah spekulasi seperti yang kita boleh dapati di blog-blog lain.

Weapon of Mass Deception and Mother of all Bluffs

The Nut Graph is an independent Malaysian news site, which aim to provide space for columnists and reader comments from as broad a political spectrum, and from as many sectors of interest, as possible.

Believing the fact that one cannot draw the big picture if one don’t see all the parts of the elephant in front of oneself. The Nut Graph team believe that both politics and popular culture provide us indicators about the health of our democracy and the directions we may be heading in as a nation.

Hence The Nut Graph tagline: “Making sense of politics and popular culture

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Firstly, let me clarify the title of this article is not my opinion towards this online news site, however, it is directly linked to one of the latest article posted in The Nut Graph. So, I’m doing a bit of advertising for TNG so that my action of copying and pasting the article in my blog will be justifiable.

The article i’m talking about is written by Ooi Ying Nee, entitled Mass of Cotradictions: Taking stock of Pakatan Rakyat’s Conflicting Claims. And the title for this blog above is my version of Ying Nee’s article’s title – should she ask me to help her think of the suitable title for her article.

You can read the article here

Meanwhile, I’ll summarize the main points from the article and try to add up few personal comments to it. I found this article interesting for two reasons. One, It is consistent with my view that no crossovers actions can morally and ethically justify a coup de etat on any Federal Government, and secondly, this article shows that the opposition is not concentrating on substance, instead just playing rhetorical politics to the max.

Excerpt from Ying Nee’s article is pasted in red, and my comments will be in black.

“YOU can hardly tell what’s really going on with Pakatan Rakyat these days. The leaders of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), DAP and PAS, who form the coalition, seem unable to stick to a common line, even when it comes to supporting opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s grab for power.”

Well in this case, not only they can’t stick to a common line, they don’t seem to be able to stick to a common lie too.

“This admonishment came in the wake of the 24 Sept incident where Anwar was forced to admit he was unaware of talks between intermediaries of PKR and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, as announced by the party’s information chief Tian Chua a day earlier.

A red-faced Chua tells The Nut Graph that he had erred, saying he “should have checked with the party” before making such a comment to reporters.”

I could still remember quite clearly Tian Chua’s boastful statement, his full of confidence face (before turning red) prior to his departure to Taiwan to poach BN MPs into PR’s pocket. Surely this slipped of his tongue is going to draw curiosity from the people of his and his party’s credibility.

Oh, there are few PAS youth leaders (junior MPs i suppose) came out with statement that they are seeking audience with YDP Agong, the hopefuls, non believers and on-the-fence observers, were told that no effort to seek audience with the King took place. My take on this, they got a little bit too excited with this so called ‘plan’ to topple the government, hence they didn’t really think of what came out from their mouth.

TNG put up this image to portray too many heads in PR’s pursuit to Putrajaya.

In Greek mythology, the Lernaean Hydra (Greek: ([Λερναία Ὕδρα] (help·info)) was an ancient nameless serpent-like chthonic water beast that possessed numerous heads— the poets mention more heads than the vase-painters could paint— and poisonous breath (Hyginus, 30). Its lair was the lake of Lerna in the Argolid, though archaeology has borne out the myth that the sacred site was older even than the Mycenaean city of Argos, for Lerna was the site of the myth of the Danaids. Beneath the waters was an entrance to the Underworld, and the Hydra was its guardian (Kerenyi 1959, p. 143).

Hydra is also believed to have a poisonous blood (wikipedia)

Yee Ning further elaborated on the impact this inconsistencies might have on ‘future PR government’.

“The differences in opinion and the shifting positions may be a signal of division within the loose opposition coalition, and, perhaps, even a showcase of its unreadiness to form government.

If its leaders can’t demonstrate that they are united in terms of their agenda, how will they present themselves as the alternative to the BN? Or are these discrepancies insignificant, taking into account the change and the new model of politics that the Pakatan Rakyat is trying to bring to Putrajaya?“

I couldn’t agree more with her on this issue, but let’s not forget that PM had also made some flip-flop decisions too, the infamous example would be the 12th General Election date. PM Abdullah Badawi likes to play ‘teka-teki’ with us, including his retirement date.

More alarming is the disagreement on the prospect of forming federal government via MPs defections voiced by leaders of other parties in Pakatan. The loudest is from DAP counterparts, while PAS would prefer to stay on the sideline and comment when it is needed the most. PAS itself is split to two groups on the matter of condoning Anwar Ibrahim’s plan or not. Hence, the birth of Erdogan Team and Cikgu Pa’s (PAS Terengganu) Team.

“In line with DAP’s ethos, its chairperson Karpal Singh has said that he is dead set against defections. He was quoted in a 30 March 2008 New Straits Times report as saying: “Parties that form government through crossovers will be looked upon negatively. The party would be full of traitors.”

On 11 Sept, just days before Anwar’s self-declared deadline, Terengganu PAS Commissioner Datuk Mustafa Ali came right out in a Star news report to say that the defection of MPs was not going to happen.“

Is this discrepancies significant or not? The main issue is, whether Anwar’s claim is true or not. That will determine and explain why should Opposition put unnecessary drama into Malaysia’s politic, when the only thing they should be doing after GE12 is to concentrate on being a productive opposition rather than staging a coup de etat on the mandate given by the people in recent GE.

After a while, people will start to realize all this talks on defections and crossovers are all political hoo-haa which in return distracted majority of general population from paying attention on the most important thing i.e economic slump and other domestic issue (family, self living standard). Many will see TV9 Hujah’s host Prof Agus as one outspoken political analyst. Here is what he said on this issue.

“Political analyst and head of the political science programme at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Dr Mohammad Agus Yusoff believes that all talk of forming government has disintegrated to mere political rhetoric, mainly because Anwar doesn’t have the number of MPs who will support him.

You can continue reading Ying Nee’s round up of other political analyst on Pakatan’s future predictions should Pakatan want to see two party system materialize in Malaysia. I guess we should stop discussing about possible crossovers for it is such an insult not only to democratic principles in Malaysia, but also our intelligence and capability to think that politician should not jeopardize Malaysia’s economy and political stability for their own greed for power, thinly veiled by the promises and sweeteners offered along the way to power.