Meaningless Controversy Over ASLI’s Study
Meaningless Controversy Over ASLI’s Study
M. Bakri Musa and Din Merican
On reading ASLI’s report, “Corporate Equity Distribution: Past Trends and Future Policy,” we are struck by the familiar refrain of its findings and conclusions. We too have frequently expressed them in the past.
While our commentaries hardly caused ripples, ASLI was forced to withdraw the study. One reason to the different reaction could be that nobody reads our writings. Our egos however dissuade us from accepting such a pat explanation.
Judging from the ensuing shrill and polarizing comments, we reach another conclusion, one more sobering and discomfiting. That is, as Malays we can critique the NEP with relative impunity; non-Malays do so at their peril.
An equally distressing observation is that the report’s lead author is now a cause celébrè in the Chinese community. You guessed it; he is a Chinese! Likewise, Malay politicians and academics who condemned the report portray themselves as latter-day Hang Tuahs.
A few even dismiss it as “rubbish” or attribute sinister motives to its author. Such despicable performances reflect the sorry state of the nation’s leadership.
Fifty years after independence and Malaysians have yet to escape their tribalism trap. While we do not expect the average villager or hawker to be open minded and liberated from their clannish mentality, we do expect better from our intellectuals, pundits, and leaders.
There are exceptions, to be sure. Sociologist Rahman Embong rightly called for greater tolerance of dissent. Economist Ismail Salleh cautioned about being myopic, and advised us to look at the bigger picture. Shahrir Samad was sensibly more concerned with leakages in the NEP. Unfortunately such isolated sane voices are drowned by the cacophony from the ill informed and the intolerant.
ASLI’s Report
ASLI ambitiously seeks out to assess the NEP, its achievements and delivery mechanisms, in particular the equity ownership of GLCs. A tall order indeed, especially for a report that is only 40 pages long, and half of that is filled with references and useless lists of GLCs together with their elaborate interlinking ownership charts. Valuable space in the comment section is also wasted on serial raw data that could have been better presented though space-saving and readily comprehensible graphs.
The crux of its findings, and what triggered the raging controversy, is that GLCs’ and Bumiputras’ stake in the stock market is not 18 percent as claimed by the government, but closer to 45. The stir that these figures caused matches those referring to Dolly Parton’s bust measurements! Never have so many been so riled up and with so much emotion over such meaningless statistics.
The only reason for the controversy is that the two figures are on opposite sides of the magical 30 percent set by the government. Neither ASLI nor the government addresses the rationale or wisdom of that target. Why not 15 or 50 percent? If either had been chosen, there would not have been any controversy, with ASLI and the government both agreeing that the target had been achieved (with 15) or yet to be (with 50). The reality on the other hand would not have changed. Therein lies the fallacy of the obsession with such figures.
More significant is what the ASLI study reveals but does not address. If the government through its myriad GLCs has such a major presence in the KLSE, is it truly an open market? How fair would the regulatory agencies be, and how would minority shareholders’ rights be protected?
More Commentary Than Scholarly
In style and substance the report is more commentary than scholarly, despite the data, references, and appendices included. We agree with many of its observations, for example, corporate equity is not representative of the national wealth.
The stock market is for those who have money to invest. The economic problems of Bumiputras however, are far more basic, like having food on the table, or even having a table.
Stock market investors are financially sophisticated; they do need the government to hold their hands. Its role is to ensure that the market is orderly and transparent, with no collusion, insider trading, and other shady practices.
We heartily agree with the Report that the selective patronage afforded through NEP (in particular through the GLCs) resulted in serious intra-Malay cleavages while undermining interracial social cohesion and equitable economic development. We go further and assert that such intra-Malay divisions pose a far greater threat to social stability than the familiar interracial variety.
Like ASLI, we too note approvingly the promising development of genuine Sino-Malay ventures. Unlike the old Ali Baba arrangements, these new enterprises make full use of the talent of their participants, each bringing added value to their joint ventures. The government is better off in encouraging such ventures by preferentially awarding them contracts and public tenders.
We disagree with the Report’s recommendation that the NEP be need- rather than race-based. Yes, race is today no longer as valid a surrogate indicator of need as it was a generation ago. Then, the giving of a scholarship to any Malay would mean a greater than 90 percent probability that he or she would be someone poor, the first in the family to go to university, and would not have been able to do so without the extra help. Today that probability has dropped to below 50 percent.
That is the good news; the bad news is that we have not changed the ways we disburse these scholarships and other programs.
Extending the NEP to the poor of other races would not solve the poverty problem; it would only enlarge it. If NEP had been unsuccessful in ameliorating poverty among Bumiputras, there is little hope that it would be any more successful with non-Bumiputras. There is nothing inherently special about them that would insulate them from developing the same subsidy mentality. Worse, the program would suffer even greater leakages than it already now has.
NEP is meant to empower, not entrap Malays; to make them economically competitive, not turn them into permanent wards of the state.
We are for restricting the application of the NEP with a view of eventually getting rid of it. We can begin by “means testing” Bumiputras in order for them to qualify for affirmative action. That would greatly increase the program’s efficacy and reduce its leakages, while simultaneously minimizing non-Bumiputras’ resentments.
Competitiveness, Not Percentages
This obsession with percentages is misplaced; it is essentially a “zero-sum” exercise. Malays can increase their share only by others reducing theirs. If non-Bumiputra including foreign companies were to abandon KLSE and list elsewhere, the GLCs’ and Malays’ percentage would rise very quickly to 100 percent! That would be disastrous for the economy and a hollow victory for Malays.
Instead of being fixated on the capitalization percentages (whether at par or market value is irrelevant), the focus should be on enhancing the competitiveness of GLCs and Malay enterprises. Except for Petronas, Tabong Haji, and maybe MAS, the brand names of their products have no impact in the marketplace. The market share of companies like Tenaga and Telekom is purely a function of their effective monopolies.
As for return on equity (another measure of competitiveness), many are loss ridden. We would rather have fewer but more competitive Malay companies. ASLI, like the government, offers little on addressing this issue.
Regardless of which figures were used, the pattern is clear. There is no appreciable improvement, in fact a decline since 1990 and especially floowing the 1997 economic crisis.
In its estimations, ASLI uses the nominal (face value) ringgit. Obviously the 1996 ringgit is very different from the 1998 because of devaluation. Had ASLI adjusted for this and also for inflation, or better yet expressed the values in constant US dollar, the pattern over the years would be even more dramatic and stark, even if that does not change the percentage distribution.
When the NEP failed to reach its target in 1990, the immediate question should have been on how to enhance Malay competitiveness so we could participate effectively in the modern economy, including the stock market. Had that been asked, then we would have paid more attention to our schools and universities so they could produce trained, skilled, and employable graduates.
Instead, the government pumped more money into GLCs in an attempt to artificially inflate the figure. That would be akin to giving a patient aspirin to treat the fever. More important would be to address the underlying infection, then the fever would subside. If Malays were competitive that would translate into increased participation in the stock market as well as other sectors of the economy.
GLCs the Problem, not the Solution
The crucial but unasked question is what right has the government to squander precious public funds in the stock market? GLCs as instruments of the NEP are meant to facilitate Malay entry into the private sector. The aspiration was that they would be like McDonald’s Corporation; it creates more Black millionaires through its franchise system, or FedEx that spawned thousands of small entrepreneurs who own their trucks to service the company’s deliveries.
GLCs and set-aside shares for Bumiputras have degenerated into nothing more than “get rich quick” schemes for the privileged “UMNOPutras.” While there may have been some vicarious pride in the past on seeing Malays joining the millionaires’ club, hitherto the exclusive preserve of non-Malays, such reflected racial glories have long since vanished, speeded up by the obscenely ostentatious lifestyles of these newly rich Malays. Their flaunting their unearned wealth grates ordinary Malays (and Malaysians) raw.
Implicit in ASLI’s study is the assumption that GLCs are Bumiputra companies, meaning, owned by Bumiputras. That is certainly a surprise to us, as it would be to the poor Malay fishermen in Kelantan or Kadazan padi farmers in Sabah. Perhaps ASLI could use its good offices to ensure that those poor folks (and us) do get the dividend checks!
GLCs are more obstacles against than catalysts for Malay progress. They breed rent seekers and “ersatz capitalists.” GLCs, by using their size and might of the state, muscle out legitimate entrepreneurs – Malays and non-Malays.
These GLCs do not even serve as useful training grounds for would-be Malay executives and managers. The work culture is such that a stint with them is a stigma; it does not enhance your resume in the marketplace. It is instructive that one of the stated requirements when Abdullah Badawi was seeking new heads for these GLCs is that they have significant experience with multinational corporations.
Our solution to the mess is simple: get rid of the GLCs. Sell them to the highest bidders and use the proceeds to improve rural schools, build low cost housing for the poor, and erect vital infrastructures like roads and water treatment plants. That would do more good to more Malaysians, in particular poor Malays.
We could not care less who owns Malaysia Airlines. We care more that we train many Malays as pilots, managers, and mechanics so they could work not only locally but also at other airlines of the world.
There is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of GLCs and crown corporations. America has its Fanny Mae, and Canada, its Petrocanada. Nearby, Singapore has plenty of ready examples of competitive GLCs. Competently managed and with clear missions, they would be wonderful. Otherwise get rid of them and use the funds for other useful pursuits.
Getting rid of GLCs would also remove a major source of corruption, money politics, and influence peddling. Those are good enough reasons to dump these companies, and at the same time spare the nation an unnecessary divisive controversy.
M. Bakri Musa’s latest book, Towards A Competitive Malaysia: Development Challenges in the Twenty-first Century, will be released in early 2007 (www.bakrimusa.com). Din Merican is Senior Research Fellow, Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace, and Visiting Professor, University of Cambodia, Phnom Penh. (dmerican@yahoo.com). The views expressed do not implicate these institutions.
October 22nd, 2006 at 4:57 pm
“Extending the NEP to the poor of other races would not solve the poverty problem; it would only enlarge it. If NEP had been unsuccessful in ameliorating poverty among Bumiputras, there is little hope that it would be any more successful with non-Bumiputras”
“We are for restricting the application of the NEP with a view of eventually getting rid of it. We can begin by “means testing” Bumiputras in order for them to qualify for affirmative action. That would greatly increase the program’s efficacy and reduce its leakages, while simultaneously minimizing non-Bumiputras’ resentments.
While I agree with most of your progressive views, the above two statements, however, contradict each other. If you can be successful in ‘means testing’ the Bumis, why can’t you use the same for the non-bumis? On the other hand, if such a program is doomed to fail, no matter who is intended, why not just abolish it? Why the double standards still?
Why are we so afraid to lift a finger for the poor Indians and poor Chinese? The vicious cycle is colur blind. Therefore, help for the poor should be colour blind too. Period! Saying that the NEP will work for the poor Bumis but not the poor non-Bumis is just terribly racist and void of logic.
October 22nd, 2006 at 7:34 pm
Dr Bakri
Agree with most of your article, however, would disagree with your conclusions.
A proviso exclude land rights eg Malay land and the sultanates.
The NEP should be abolished or stated to reduce poverty, applicable only for certain family income ceiling,however, what should be done, is more emphasis improving the rural poor areas and urban poor areas especially in regards to education and small micro loans.
I am unable to comprehend why there should not be equality of opportunity for the poor of whichever community.
October 22nd, 2006 at 8:03 pm
Dr. Bakri:
“We are for restricting the application of the NEP with a view of eventually getting rid of it. We can begin by “means testing” Bumiputras in order for them to qualify for affirmative action.”
What is wrong with the Malays that they cannot walk themselves and need crutches while the other races have to fend for themselves? The Chinese and Indians came as immigrants, one as mostly as workers in estates under extreme conditions and the other mostly to work on the mines. Many of the estate workers’ children have made better lives but even after so many years of govt handouts, the Malays are still yearning for more. Is something terribly wrong with them, or at least their psyche or whatever, that whatever is done, they will never be able to make it? The present state of affairs seem to support my argument and your argument of using the “means testing” have been done many times over and surprisingly, if not shockingly, they are still pretending that they are still in their mothers’ wombs even after they have come to this world, and still need live suport. Something is terribly wrong here, don’t you agree?
October 22nd, 2006 at 8:55 pm
“GLCs are more obstacles against than catalysts for Malay progress. They breed rent seekers and “ersatz capitalists.” GLCs, by using their size and might of the state, muscle out legitimate entrepreneurs – Malays and non-Malays”.
Worse. They act with arrogance and contempt of even the law. I know of a case where one GLC with a lucrative concession was sued for breach of contract. Such was their contempt of law that they didn’t even bother showing up in court to defend themeselves.
Needless to say, the small and entrepreneurial company that sued them obtained a Judgement in Default.
However, the plaintiffs have been ‘warned’ not to bother serving it as the GLC will then flex its political muscle in not only quashing the judgement but also putting them out of business.
October 22nd, 2006 at 9:11 pm
TrueMalaysian,
Thanks for your comments.
We do not believe in double standards. In our piece, we have tried to be very balanced in our discussion of the NEP, and the equity distribution issue in particular.
The NEP, as implemented over the last 35 years, has accerbated the income disparity between the urban and rural sector, and also widened the intra-bumiputra divide.
Let us focus on the rural sector where the NEP was supposed to benefit the rural bumiputra. The agricultural sector where most bumiputra live and work is low income generating activity.The estates are owned by the likes of Sime Darby and Guthries, and they employ foreign workers because Malaysian labour (mainly Indian labour) has become relatively expensive. But at least the Indian workers enjoy better facilities.
As far as the Chinese New Villages (a vestige of the Emergency) is concerned, we have a different set of problems. The Chinese in the new villages need access to SME loans and micro-credit. Right now, these facilities are not readily available to them.
We are right in saying extending the NEP,as it is, to other disadvantaged Malaysians in the rural sector will not help, if it is, for example, only to distribute shares. They cannot afford to own shares directly. They can only participate in ASN or the state unit trusts, if they are allowed to do so; even then, if they have low income and hence no capacity to save, they will not be able to participate.
We should raise the income of our rural folks. Maybe, turn them into biotechnologists and computer or IT experts as proposed by our Prime Minister!! They can, for example, cultivate grapes (but yet cannot make wine without incurring the ire of the Ulamaks) and other “high value added” crops (for example, export genetically modified pisang emas to Japan under our FTA with them). This is our PM’s rationale for encouraging all of us to go back to Agriculture.
We need to revisit NEP implementation, and should formulate new policies to empower, not weaken all Malaysians. This means better schools and qualified teachers in the rural sector since good early education is essential as the foundation for future advancement. It also means better access to markets for farm produce. Better health facilities will be needed. And so on. In short, upgrading the rural infrastructure is top priority.
Means testing should cover all Malaysians, of course. Right now, this approach is not even applied properly to bumiputras. You will find that bumiputras from affluent families are given scholarships at the expense of the less fortunate yet able and deserving ones. We have a buddy-buddy system.
We know that the scholarship system is subject to abuses. All you have to do is to audit the Public Services Department to verify my comment. So, we are saying that NEP is not equitable even to Bumiputras. In our view, extending a flawed NEP will not help anyone.
Thanks.
October 22nd, 2006 at 11:26 pm
Bro Din:
We have no quarrel that all deserving Malaysians, irrespective of their race/religion would need a helping hand through the NEP.
However, there seems to be something fundamentally wrong that is not being addressed and until and unless that is determined and acknowledged, we are just going to go around in circles or into a limitless pit.
There is no denying that the distribution at the intra-ethnic level is wanting, more so within the Bumi group, with wide gaps prevailing.
What is of more concern to us, and I am sincere in finding a solution to this, is the confidence and capabilities among the Malays. When the Malays stood up for Independence, and subsequently joined by the Chinese and Indians, there were capable and educated leaders who led UMNO. Leaders of the govt and most states have always been Malays. The govt has poured into massive schemes billions of ringgit to uplift the Malays. Even to this day quite a number of the Chinese and Tamil schools are only part-aided by the govt. Then, it begs the question on what happened that Malays have not been able to uplift themselves despite so much of help. Licences, contracts and educational opportunities abound, still they are lagging behind, or so it is claimed. While introducing one after another PLAN, somehow the failures and rampant abuses are whitewashed each time.
I honestly believe that, if the past is of any indication, there is no way there is going to be a let-up on the greed to maintain it, as always, the claim would be that the target has not been achieved, either they simple have no capability to achieve it or they do not want to admit that they have achieved it. The recent debate of the 18% or 45% has made many think twice, and the perception is that the govt is hiding something since to this day it has not come clean on explaining in the same way how the 45% could have been achieved. The govt must have the moral to come clean if it has nothing to hide and in the absence of such, would it be wrong for me to have such a perception?
October 23rd, 2006 at 6:11 am
Many Malays who frequent this blog for some reason feel the need to indulge in Malay bashing. One is Din Merican. I find his postings here hypocritical.
October 23rd, 2006 at 6:48 pm
HidupMelayu, you will find that confident people (of any culture) are capable of self criticisms. It’s a sign of maturity and open-mindedness.
True Malaysians don’t view each other through racist eyes. For us, it’s always what’s best for the country, e.g. help for the poor (and not the rich), dedicated and capable teachers (regardless of skin colour) to teach our kids, reliable healthcare to care for our aged, strong law enforcements to police the criminals and politicians, etc.
We all win if we can work together to compete with outsiders. But if we continue to consider one another as outsiders, how can we ever be successful globally?
Just as we are angry that the western press are always generalizing and lumping terrorism with Islam, we should understand that just because there are many rich non-bumis around doesn’t mean that the poor from these communities don’t suffer from the trap of the vicious cycle of poverty.
I am a true Malaysian of average means who has always tried to stand on my own two feet and pay my taxes. I don’t bloody care if the guy driving the luxury cars and lived in the mansions are black, brown or yellow. They never seemed to give me two hoods anyway. However, when it comes to important issues in life, like seeking good healthcare and education, you want the best providers to attend to you. Who cares whether he/she is of what colour?
Finally, have faith in yourself. I believe there is nothing inherently wrong with the Malay race or any race for that matter. The only trouble is that you placed too much faith in your politicians. You allow them to use your name to enrich themselves without regards to the future of our country.
Remember, time waits for no one. If we don’t move ahead together, it’s very likely that we will have to suffer together in the long run. Remember, the enermy is not within the country. The competition is out there.
October 23rd, 2006 at 8:40 pm
Bro Din,
Are you based in Cambodia or do you visit the country frequently? I am in Phnom Penh a lot these days.
Cheerios.
October 23rd, 2006 at 9:44 pm
TrueMalaysian, SaveMalaysia, and other bloggers,
“Remember, the enemy is not within the country. The competition is out there”. I agree. We have to be the best that we can be in an era of globalisation. We need the best brains and brawns to compete in what Thomas Friedman’s “The Earth is Flat”.
This is what Dr. Bakri and I have been saying all these years. Dr. Bakri, for example, has written a few books on globalisation, education and economic development. His latest book will be released in 2007.
We the Malays must learn to take criticisms and defend ourselves when we believe that we are right. Often, we are misled by politicians who use Islam and slogans to opiate us, the Malays. This is a tragedy.
Look around us today and see the abuses of political and administrative power. Even His Royal Highness The Sultan of Selangor has to call in Klang’s Dato Zakaria for his excesses. Why do we need His Highness’ intevention? I have a simple answer: Dato Zakaria’s political bosses are unwilling to take action.
So, HidupMelayu, is this a fact or Malay bashing? “Ketuanan Melayu” must set high ethical standards, if it is to remain credible as a shining example of good governance.
Thanks.
October 23rd, 2006 at 11:52 pm
“The only trouble is that you placed too much faith in your politicians. You allow them to use your name to enrich themselves without regards to the future of our country.”
you’re right.
politicians scare their constituencies into voting, lest the “others” take over. let’s get real, this happens in every ethic group. that’s why undeserving ones are still sworn into service. that’s why people vote despite rampant corruption.
the same scare tactic is used as a smokescreen instead of meaningfully discussing ASLI’s findings.
i thank drs bakri and din merican for this entry. if only our parlimentary reps can do half as good.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:15 am
“Ketuanan Melayu” is a myth.
We as Malaysians must be pragmatic. I do not think there is any argument against the NEP’s goal of eradicating poverty of all races. In that sense, there shouldn’t be any issue there, except the fact that a lot of the initiatives failed to help the Malay and Bumiputera poor, let alone the non-Bumiputeras. I would like to caution against the sole focus on rural poor, as the pockets of poverty in the urban area is also equally distressing.
The real matter that Malaysians need to focus on, per NEP, is how best to create a sizable class of Malays and Bumiputeras with economic power. Previous methods have resulted in a lot of wastage, and we can no longer afford to throw billions around in the hope of creating one or two millionaires, UMNO-linked or not. The patronage system caused a lot of misery when overnight companies were created in the wake of insider guarantees for government contracts.
I would not say that the controversy over the report is meaningless. True, the report was used as a lightning rod for the emergence of ethnic heroes. THAT was truly unfortunate. However, the ASLI controversy also pointed out the fact that government figures should be challenged. If we replicate EPU’s methodology with a smaller sample, it should bring us closer to the government’s estimates as well, no? The key issue here is that ASLI’s study is not as rigourous as it should be, and more importantly, two studies with different methodologies will yield different figures.
What’s the surprise really?
The disappointment I have with the 40-odd page of the report wasn’t the quality. There could be more from where the data came from. What I am disappointed is that there are attempts to shut everyone up.
October 24th, 2006 at 3:29 am
We have an elected govt. We are the citizens. What is so difficult for the govt to come clean with the information to dispel any doubts. This calls for a lot more issues into question, such as population statistics, etc. Can there be a “cover-up” also? After all, look at the situation in Sabah. Isn’t that disgraceful.? Hambali, a renowned terrorist was able to get PR within a short period (2 years, if I am not mistaken) whereas genuine applications, particularly spouses of Malaysians have been waiting for years to get one. No, this govt is not honest with its intentions and thrives with an “agenda”. Let us see what happens in the next general election. We have been on the side-lines all the time and casting our votes for the BN, but this time around we will be actively involved in the run-up to the elections to make sure there is a difference, a big difference. The BN govt does not really value our voice and contribution. Believe me, ALL my Chinese and Indian friends and some Malay friends, too, have decided to vote for the opposition. We are just fed-up with the lies and deceits of the BN govt.
October 24th, 2006 at 6:59 am
This is hypocrisy at its height!
Pseudo intellectuals among the Malays like Din Merican and Bakri engage in Malay bashing because they feel by taking the high moral ground it would be a panacea to the milliard of problems faced by Muslims and Malays in Malaysia.
As a Malay and a Muslim, I feel Malays need to reclaim their heritage which has been under threat from forces like “modernization” which is really another word for “westernization.” I am sorry but I do not feel the need for bloggers like Bakri and Din Merican to tell us what is good and what is not for us.
For many years we were being told the same.
October 24th, 2006 at 8:32 am
So what do you need to be told, Al Qaedah? That in Bolehland everything is boleh in so far as the Malays are concerned. That it’s okay to build “istanas” and “kebas duit” just becuse you are the privilaged one? That Malays like Bakri and Din are nothing but sour grapes? That being a Melayu you are always right?
Come on, my friend, grow up. You can’t have the cake and eat it as well.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:30 am
You can have 72 virgins??
October 24th, 2006 at 11:37 am
In this age of space and plastic technology, yes. You can have the cake and keep it as well. Why not?? Your girlfriend will tell you that, if she chooses, she can be a virgin many times over.
Imagine, with the offer of 72 virgins to everybody who blows himself up and with this offer now being taken up by Iraqis and Afghanis, soon the supply of virgins would be exhausted in no time.
October 24th, 2006 at 11:39 am
Haven’t you heard of re-cycling, my friend?
October 24th, 2006 at 11:41 am
I have.
October 24th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
Hidup Melayu!
October 24th, 2006 at 6:18 pm
HidupMelayu,
If the country is well run, we can all hidup besama. Not just hidup but trive bersama. Look beyond the coconut trees and the fishing boats. You are no longer backward. But unless you can live your faith, which means treating others as you want them to treat you, how can you hold your head up? What good is a man or woman if you can’t hold your head up?
Hidup Malaysia! Be brave and look beyond the horizon.
October 24th, 2006 at 6:18 pm
Al Qaedah, may be you can elaborate more on the heritage of Malay.
Other than the treat from the westernisation, do you consider the influence of arabic cultures also a treat to the heritage of Malay. It seem that some malays are trying to be more holy than others by being more arabic.
October 24th, 2006 at 6:32 pm
You are right Taishan. Wonder what the Malays see in the Arabs when the Arabs themselves don’t like being Arabs? May be we should import horses and camels so they can quicken the Arabisation process.
The Mufti of Perak needs a camel real bad. I’ll have a word with my jihadists in Iraq.
October 24th, 2006 at 8:48 pm
Talking about horses, many members of the Saudi Royal Family relatives of Osama were in the States at the time of 9/11. His cousin brother paid USDLS 1.2 million for a couple of horses before boarding that plane out when all other planes were grounded by the FAA.
Arabs are crazy about race horses.
Even your Anwar Ibrahim was crazy and injured his neck riding one. Your Mahathir was given a special breed of Arabian horses. Some say, not knowing how to ride horses, he ate them.
October 24th, 2006 at 8:50 pm
Hidup Melayu!
October 24th, 2006 at 9:40 pm
Hello Prince Bandar,
How is your Wahabbi Land doing? You surely have lots of money due to high oil price. Please help your struggling Malay Muslim brothers like HidupMelayu. Do send us some “kudas dan untas” and money for their care. Malays expect everything for nothing, just handouts.
Not only is HidupMelayu in the same category as our Imam Bodowi who longs to embrace Imam Al-Ghazali and who does not seek riches for himself but allows his son, Kamaluddin Abdullah and his son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin to amass millions, and grab all the huge projects under the 9MP for themselves and their cronies like Klang’s Dato Zakaria and the MP for Jasin, Melaka.
Alas, HidupMelayu has limited vocabulary. He could even be a “Mat Rempit “or one of Khairy Jamaluddin’s stormtroppers for all I care. Fortunately, many Malays of the present generation are not as myopic or zenophobic as he is. He has yet contribute intelligently to the discussion here.
Let us thank Prince Bandar and give the horses and camels to HidupMelayu. He expects, as a matter of right for being a Malay, to get everything “buta”/foc. Let him care for them and let Prince Bandar continue to subsidize the feed for these creatures. He can then allow the kris wielding Hishamuddins of the Malay world to ride them without charge, and after that he can clean up the dung and the mess.
Selamat Hari Raya to him and his types who are still living in the Age of Ignorance. Hidup Bangsa Malaysia!!!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:53 am
Salam and well wishes to all.
A lot had been said about the ASLI report.
Here’s something I read in The STAR(Monday 23rd October 2006, page N2) writen by Karen Chapman.
20,000 Year Six pupils can’t read or write well.
Putrajaya:
About 20,000 Year Six pupils in schools have been identified as lacking in basic literacy skills and are currently undergoing an intensive two month programme to help them.
The number represents about 4% of 12-year olds in school who, after six years of primary scholing,are either very weak in reading and writing,maths or both.
“We are taking the matter seriuosly as such pupils are at risk of dropping out of the school system and can face a hard time continuing with their education or pursuing a career” said Curriculum Development Centre(CDC) director Mahzan Bakar.
He told The STAR that the pupils were selected by their teachers based on their obervation and the performance of the children in rests.
The intensive programme for them was conducted immidiately after the UPSR in September and they will sit for an evaluation test on November 15 to see how much they have learnt.
In August, Education Ministry director-general Datuk Dr Ahamad Sipon announced that those yet to to master basic literacy skills would receive help under the “Three Rs(Reading,writing and Arithmetic)Programme(Protim)”.
Mahzan said the CDC worked with teachers to create two modules to help the pupils in both national and national-type schools- one on reading and writing and the other on arithmetic.
Protim is carried fulltime during school hours. The classes are small to ensure these pupils receive individual attention.”
In general,most schools have fewer than 10 pupils who have yet to grasp these basic skills,he added.
“Not all the identified pupils will have to sit in for these intensive classes.Some who have already grasped arithmetic skills would only need to attend reading and writing classes or vice versa while others who lacked these three skills will attend the whole session.” he said in an interview after a visit together with The STAR to SK Sunagi Ramal Dalam to observe a Protim class.
Asked why some pupils had yet to grasp the basic skills,Mahzan said some of them could have learning difficulties that had not been diagnosed.
He said Protim which would become an annual programmejust like the Early Intervention Class Programme for Reading and Writing(KIA2M) introduced in April this year for Year One pupils.
The ministry introduced KIA2M to ensure Year One pupils would not go through each level of primary schooling without being able to read and write.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
For an officer to say that these Year Six pupils could have learning difficulties that had not been diagnosed is a bit difficult for me to accept. 6 years in school and no teacher noticed these kids can read and write?
Why are the teachers unable to recognise this?Is it that difficult for them to notice and Year Three that these pupils actually lacked the skills? What about the parents? don’t they ever realised their children can’t read/write?
Goodness! Whats happening here. I remember in 1975 some of my new found friends can’t raed well. They were put in the back classes, but the Headmaster upon identifying these problems draw up a plan of putting them through the Industrial Arts classes. For him its better if the acquire some Industrial/vocational skills before the fail their LCE examinations.
I don’t know wether his action had the approval of the state Education Dept or not. But when some of these friends did fail the LCE they were able to work in motorcycle repair shops, at motorcar workshops and as carpenters.( This was before SM Vokasional was in its infancy).
Anyway, its better late than never. I really hope some good will come out of these problems.
Sorry for writing up something which is unrelated from our main topic, but I think it needs attention.
Ayub Tulakang
October 25th, 2006 at 11:09 am
Ayub Tulangbelakang, you write too long.
Hidup Melayu!
October 25th, 2006 at 11:14 am
Any religion that promises a whorehouse in the sky, to me at least, is suspect. Anybody here knows how they get to the 72nd virgin?? I mean if you think about it, how does one how does anybody cope with that many virgins all at the same time?? Even Hugh Hefner would be jealous.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:20 am
“Selamat Hari Raya to him and his types who are still living in the Age of Ignorance. Hidup Bangsa Malaysia!!! ”
What nonsense!! There is no such thing as “bangsa Malaysia” - it is a term used by shitheads to dupe everybody into thinking that there is one.
In the United States, “American” is never a race but a nationality. You are either a Dutch American, Hispanic American, German American - even a Malay American. Now that is race.
October 25th, 2006 at 11:21 am
Hidup Melayu!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
ASLI report is never intended to enphasis on the percentage of bumi’s corporate equity. It however, made lot of points worth to be given a deep though, like the efficiency of delivery and its economical worthiness etc.
Everyone, no matter how prudent they are, will sum out a distorted view in ASLI, if he see them in the basic of a race. Your conclusion will bound to be ‘ZERO SUM’ game, in where, non will give in one inch.
I, personally don’t agreed with ASLI in the degree that it still talk about unrealistic economical worthiness of wealth distribution! In this globalised world, the democratic economy does not exist! We must let a small amount of people to get rich irregardless of there race! The government shall ‘HAND OFF’ as much as possible! In this way, Malaysia may stand a chance to create some Bill or Warren in the future, they in turn, will help us in creating more employment and booming economy, where everyone of us will benefit!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
IT”S FREE ECONOMY THAT WORK THE WONDER!
October 25th, 2006 at 7:19 pm
HIDUP FREE ECONOMY!
October 26th, 2006 at 6:36 am
I think King Yakin must be more yakin of his English.
October 26th, 2006 at 8:00 am
The issue is not only the accuracy of the figures. In a TV3 interview, a Minister went as as to say that even if it is 60%, so what, we have the right. Excerpt of the interview reproduced:
The future of the Malays should be decided by the Malays themselves, why are others interjecting in this issue? It’s our future, let us decide. Don’t create trouble, everything has been fine so far. Even if the bumi equity is 30%, 45% or even 60% now, this still does not change the fact that Malays are marginalised. We (the government/Umno) do not just look at statistics, but we look at reality. Look around you, Malays are still not achieving wealth on par as other races”.
All the while he was speaking in an angry and irritated tone. Also the TV3 newscasters were obviously pushing the Umno agenda. The Umnoputras are shamelessly playing the racial card again to get the Malays to back them by giving the impression that their rights are being threatened. In reality, it’s the future of the Umnoputras wealth accumulation that is at stake, not that of the ordinary Malay on the street.
The minister also implied that even if the equity target is 60% at this time, the government will not abolish the NEP. This is clearly against the spirit of the BN and the promise that previous administrations made when the NEP was in its infancy. The BN promised to abolish the NEP if the bumiputeras are able to achieve a 30% of equity stake in the country. Now this minister is saying that they can prolong the NEP for however long they wish because they are other ‘measurements’ to be taken into consideration too.
SO DOES HE IMPLY THAT THE MALAYS HAVE REACHED EVEN A HIGHER % THAN 45% AND IT IS NOW 60% AND THEY WILL NEVER GIVE UP. IF THEY ARE GETTING WHATEVER PERCENTAGE BY FAIR MEANS AND METHODS, IT IS WLECOME BUT NOT THROUGH CROYNISM AND NEPOTISM.
October 26th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
KepalaOtak Kau
I’m not ashame of that.
Wrong can be made right if you are sincere.
That why i’m yakin.
Practice make perfect.
Thank you.
No shame YaKin
It’s Free Economy that work!
November 16th, 2006 at 11:56 am
Heres an interesting article about this topic
http://www.michaelbackman.com/LatestAgeColumn2.html