UMNO & power...

Power Is Not What Corrupts Umno

No matter how much Umno tries to project an image of itself other than one of a big bully, sceptics are far from impressed. In one form or another, most sceptics believe that Umno is the personification of the principle that "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Closely related to this is the saying that "unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it."

I sympathise with these critics that for years, we've had to endure episode after episode of the unrelenting arrogance and authoritarianism of Umno. And to many of these critics, Umno has become so intoxicated with power – power over its subservient BN co-conspirators, power over its internal critics, power over controlling the judiciary, the police, and the civil service – that it has long been corrupted.

Again, if one simply looks closely as how Umno yields power, it's not hard to see that the years of monopoly on power it has had has allowed it to practically assume that it is preordained or part of some natural law of the universe for Umno to govern the country. For many, this is simply further evidence of how power has corrupted Umno and the mindset of its cabal.

But the great warrior of democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi, has it absolutely correct that "it is not power that corrupts, but fear. Fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it, and fear of the scourge of power corrupts those who are subject to it."

This is why I think you can expect two trends to become increasing palpable in the months to come. First, Umno will become progressively desperate – especially as it increasingly fears an erosion of its credibility – to hold on to its power. I am by no means suggesting that this desperation is sure to result in a sudden reverting to the use of draconian measures and clamp downs on the opposition that was reminiscent, for example, during Operation Lalang. Of course it will try the gimmicks – such as the so-called liberalisation measures and other 'sweeteners' they'll try to feed us. But despite such petty gimmicks, there have been clear signs of this fear of losing power in Umno political machinery – which, in turn, has led to some obvious abuses of power and political manipulation. It should not come as a least bit of a surprise to anyone that if the pressure on Umno increases further, there will be more fear within the Umno inner circle and the fear that perhaps its days may be numbered.

Not unlike the Burmese military junta, which persists because of its own fear of losing power, our civilian junta persists with the disguise of the rule of law. But when that disguise gets exposed – from time to time – as now through the abuses of the police, the control of the government media, the abuses of the MACC, the manipulation of the judiciary and such – Umno shall revert to more intense propaganda and actions.

Second, we will see more of the same from the other BN parties; that is, a deafening silence about the path Umno is putting the country on. That is because they are themselves gripped with a fear – through the patronage system - of Umno. For this reason, they are incapable of unshackling themselves from their enslavement to Umno.

And both these factors, unfortunately, could spell more tough times for the rakyat.

But as Suu Kyi has said, for justice to prevail, the people must refuse to let fear dictate their actions. For this reason, the only way to bring the rule of law back into how we govern ourselves is not to allow our fear of Umno to override us. Let us not be misguided by the foolishness – and yes, fear - of some who say such things as "better the devil you know than the devil you don't." Some people consider this approach to be pragmatic.

Actually, it is not pragmatism; such a view is merely the rationalisation of the fear that these people are experiencing. It is precisely the kind of living in "fear of the scourge of power" which also corrupts those of us who have to suffer under Umno's reign of oppression. The obvious example of this is the other BN parties – and those among us – who sheepishly aid and abate Umno.

For us all to live freely, we need to live without fear of Umno.

…in any society where fear is rife corruption in all forms becomes deeply entrenched.

– Aung San Suu Kyi

Article source: http://imagineequality.blogspot.com/2009/07/power-is-not-what-corrupts-umno.html

The story of Temasik

From Sultanate to Brave New World

A Case Study of Singapore. By Hasbullah Shafi'iy 20.07.2009

(gm). On the 29th of January 1819, Stamford Raffles, newly appointed Governor-General of Bencoolen, landed on the shores of Singapore. That arrival would shape the next one hundred and forty four years of the island's history. Singapore on that day was still de jure part of the Johor Sultanate of Tengku Abdur Rahman, though it was practically under the administration and legislation of the local vizier, Temenggung Abdur Rahman. Convinced that the British needed a new base in Southeast Asia and with the support of Lord Hastings, the Governor General of India, Raffles had set out on a mission to find the most strategic spot in the region: firstly, to counter Dutch colonial ambitions there and secondly, to enhance the sea trade route between Britain and China. Singapore seemed at once to be the ideal geopolitical decision. Its transition from a Sultanate to a British colony commenced.

Tengku Abdur Rahman was under the influence of the Dutch and therefore would never agree to a British base in Singapore and the Dutch on the other hand had not yet realised the strategic significance of the island. Raffles had to now undertake a Machiavellian approach to the matter to swiftly secure it as a new British colony. He calculated the prevalent political tension with regards to the legitimacy of Tengku Abdur Rahman's succession to the throne of his late father, to be the loophole that can be the catalyst to the transition. The exiled Hussein Mu'azzam Shah, who was considered by some of the nobility in Johor as well as Temenggung Abdur Rahman to be the legitimate heir to the Johor Sultanate, was immediately recognised by the British as the new Sultan and smuggled into Singapore despite Dutch indignation. Through financial support and political recognition, Raffles had gained both Hussein Shah's and the Temenggung's favour to establish a base in Singapore that would soon become a colony.

On the 6th of February 1819, Raffles signed a treaty with Hussein shah and the Temenggung that gave the British permission to establish a trading post in Singapore. Four years later, having realised how beneficial Singapore may be for British power in Southeast Asia, Raffles signed a second treaty with the two puppets on the 7th of June 1823 that extended British possession of most of the island.

In other words, the island was purchased by the British with a meagre annual stipend of $1500 and $800 to the newly recognised Tengku, Hussein Shah, and the old Temenggong respectively. This was just a minor preview of British machinations in the greater Muslim world over the next century – Shah Muzaffaruddin of Persia in return for the entire unexplored petroleum fields of Persia, Shaikh Mubarak Al-Sabah in return for the Gulf port of Kuwait and Sheriff Hussein in return for Jerusalem and the break-up of the Hijaz from the Ottoman Sultanate.

The procurement of Singapore increased tension between the British who were now on the gaining side and the Dutch who were rather appalled most of the time. Then came the 1824 Anglo-Dutch treaty for a final break-up of the Malay Archipelago. The Malaccan Strait became the dividing line between the two powers – North to the British and South to the Dutch. Almost a century later, the Sykes-Picot agreement would similarly divide the greater Muslim Sultanate (Ottoman Empire) into three regions of influence amongst the British, the French and the Russians.

After the break-up, from 1826 to 1942, Singapore functioned as part of the British Straits Settlements and then soon a separate Crown Colony, which was directly administered by the Colonial office in London. The island moved from an important trading port to a major city because of an incremental rise in immigration that commenced with the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. In 1942, the Japanese took over Singapore at the complete surprise and shock of the British superpower as a counter measure to repel them from the region, and for imperial reasons of their own besides Singapore's strategic location per se. However, it did not last long. When the USA devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki forcing the Japanese to surrender, Singapore was given back to the British. From this point, there came a short lull in Singapore's political history, albeit internal social disarray due to disapprobation of British rule since they were not successfully protected from Japan. Independence movements arose and parliamentary politics led to the set up of first an Executive Council and then Legislative Council that eventually ended up in a Merger with Malaysia. That too did not last and finally Singapura became an independent City-State on the 9th of August 1965 under the rule of the People's Action Party (PAP).

Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister and current Minister Mentor, cried the day Singapore was given independence. He mentioned that all his adult life he had believed in the Malaysian merger and the unity of the two territories. The idea of the merger was to make Singapore an autonomous island functioning under its own constitution but joined with Malaysia in its economy. That means three important ports – Singapore, Melaka and Penang – that could collectively benefit the merging states economically and geopolitically. Today, over 50,000 vessels pass through the Malaccan strait per year carrying about one-quarter of the world's traded goods including oil, Chinese manufactures, and Indonesian coffee. When the independence came, Lee Kuan Yew lost that economic and strategic opportunity and therefore had to base the independent island's economy heavily on exports, the entrepot trade and the international financial markets and services.

It can be seen now that from the 29th of January 1819 to the present, Singapore has only existed for geopolitical reasons that have made it the world's busiest port today, in terms of shipping tonnage. Hence, Singapore's existence has always been based entirely on economic reasons. With regards to its evolution over the last forty years since independence, Lee Kuan Yew, had boasted of taking Singapore from the status of a Third-World Nation-state to that of a First-World Nation-state. In truth, Singapore's Independence Day marked the direction the small City-State Island would take not to reach First-World status but Brave-New-World status.

The deceptive tourist image of Singapore – impeccably clean and crime-free, no slums and poverty, minimal unemployment, multi-racial society living in harmony, one of the world's highest GDP growth rates, highly efficient transport system – hides the subtle and silent oppression that lurks beneath.

Aldous Huxley published Brave New World in 1932. It was an accurate socio-political description of a decaying society, which if allowed to carry on in a solely economic direction would lead to the dysfunction of organic human existence and will be replaced by a technical and utilitarian society groomed to serve a Meritocracy devoid of History, Religion, Education and even Emotion living only under the command of the State and for the State, and for Economic efficiency. It was far beyond a gloomy prognostication of the future. Little did he think that half a century later, his novel might serve as apposite education for Singaporeans. Brave New World was not Totalitarianism – the picture that George Orwell painted in 1984, which was the other route many countries had taken after Colonialism. It was a benevolent dictatorship. In connecting it to Singapore, it may best be described as Authoritarian Capitalism, a term the German philosopher, Peter Sloterdijk, has often used. In fact, he has on a few occasions given Singapore as an apt example of that term.

Singapore's one striking parallelism to BNW is its one-party rule since Independence that has assumed an almost parental authority over its citizens. One man, Lee Kuan Yew, has led that one party since 1965. Forty years of psychological conditioning by this parent party, under Lee Kuan Yew the father figure, has rendered its residents absolutely docile so much so that everyone knows the State is above the individual and the family; that to achieve productive efficiency is the primary function of a Singaporean. Everything else is secondary.

More than half of the major businesses in Singapore are state-owned through government entities like Government of Singapore Investment Corporation and Temasek Holdings. They account for sixty percent of the country's GDP. With no natural resources (even water supply is inadequate), no agriculture, and little manufacturing of its own, Singapore has entered deep into international financial markets and services but all at the expense of individual freedom. Politics is not allowed for discussion in public, no press freedom (ranked 153rd out of 195 countries), no legal political rival is allowed to exist in competition with the ruling party, and yet the country has achieved high economic status with a relatively strong currency compared to the other countries of the region. Freedom therefore is not a pre-requisite for Capitalism in Singapore. That was what Huxley portrayed in BNW. No wonder, Sue Anne Tellman in her online article about Singapore (published in the New Internationalist, January 1995) described it as 'Happy-Face Fascism'. Eleven years later (January 2006), John Cobin, Ph.D. wrote two articles about Singapore for the Times Examiner, and entitled them 'Brave New Singapore'.

Singapore has avoided Western Liberalism but has simultaneously concocted 'Asian Democracy' and 'Asian Values' to camouflage this Authoritarian Capitalism. Dr. Christopher Lingle has described this in his book Singapore's Authoritarian Capitalism with great detail. His conclusion was the need to make Singapore democratic. However, this essay is not to show the need for Democracy or Liberalism in Singapore, but to illustrate, besides others, how in the process of this particular country's transformation, society, the individual and the family has been completely conditioned and channelled (and therefore disrupted) to fulfil a specific task on behalf of a Parent State. The disruption of the individual and the family can be clearly seen in the small country's divorce rates (3 out of 10 marriages end in divorce), suicide rates (1 suicide per day) and low fertility rates (1.29 children per woman). Current Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, in his first National Day Rally 2004, dedicated the last part of his speech to 'Babies', but the efficacy of that massive public campaign has not yet been seen because of productive efficiency – women must produce too hence they cannot afford pregnancy, further it is too expensive to have a second baby – and hence the consequent break down of the family.

Singaporeans have also been completely submerged into State-sponsored Religions, which usually bear the prefix Moderate. Religion itself, regardless of whether it is Buddhism, Christianity, Islam or Hinduism, has been confined to the places of worship or to the four walls of one's room. The Muslim heritage that comes from the old Singapura under the Johor Sultanate has been completely erased and refashioned to suit the island's Brave-New-World raison d'etre. Religion in Singapore, or Islam in particular since Singapore was initially part of a Sultanate, has gone through such methodical restructuring and censorship that it would be more appropriate to describe it as ritualism and in the case of Islam, Islamic ritualism.

The education structure in Singapore, with its student streaming system at every level – primary to tertiary – brings to mind BNW's Alphas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons. The young population is conditioned from a very early stage in life to move in the direction of the professions that are 'suitable' for them. Those who are groomed to be at the top control and those who are trained to be at the bottom toil.

The population of Singapore today no more reflects the people of the previous British colony let alone the people of the old Sultanate. The current population is living in what Aldous Huxley once termed Crowd Delirium. 'Everyone belongs to everyone else' and therefore the nation exists without the individual and the family. They all do what everyone else does and because of the crowd delirium that has overwhelming control over the individual and the family, the unwillingness to take part in all that is mainstream is a subtle undercurrent that is not realised until old age when one moves away from the crowd into solitude. Any traveller in Singapore who is familiar with Huxley's BNW would quite easily observe this in the early morning and evening public transport when crowds move in and out of the CBD area – that the family is broken and the people live to serve those in power. In Huxley's words, there is 'no leisure from pleasure'. In Singapore, Life is Work.

The City-State is a company and the citizens are shareholders regardless of personal choice. One fifth of the income of most citizens are deducted monthly and transferred to their CPF (Central Provident Fund) account and locked until retirement when they receive measly allowances from it over a number of years, or which may be used to pay for housing loans. This Central Provident Fund is then invested in other international projects and in financial stock exchanges. Over the past few years, the government has been distributing dividends to citizens from such investments. Contrarily, it should be termed Central Deprivative Fund for it deprives 20% of every month's labour under the pretext of investments and savings for the future. This is usury; this is Authoritarian Capitalism.

According to two BBC reports on 18 March and 15 June, with the onset of the world financial crisis, the Singapore economy suffered a great blow that has reduced its exports dramatically and has shrunk its GDP growth. Its economy is shrinking at a faster pace than at any time in its recent history, by as much as ten percent this year. Unemployment rates have shot up: 12,000 workers retrenched and 200,000 jobless foreign workers are expected to leave Singapore by the end of this year. National University of Singapore business school professor, Koh Seng Kee, correctly pointed out some time ago, "Should there be a financial or political crisis, the wealth of Singaporeans will dissipate quickly."

A new legislation entitled the Public Order Act (POA) was passed in April 2009 boosting the discretionary powers of the People's Action Party-led government, under the pretext of fighting Terrorism. It bans any outdoor activity deemed by the state as political in nature even if it is by one person unless the person has a permit from the government. It has further restricted laws on the media. The spectacular economic downturn of the country has caused much restraint on the people and the passing of the POA seems to police anyone who tries to respond or comment on the situation, including the legal political parties rival to the PAP.

Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, who has refused to step down from the government after he left the Prime Minister post in 1990, made a recent one-week visit to Malaysia last month, where he mentioned that Singapore regards the lands within the radius of 6000 miles as its hinterland. That includes Beijing and Tokyo apart from Malaysia and Indonesia. In his critical reply to this, former Prime Minister of Malaysia Dr. Mahathir quoting Lee Kuan Yew, said, "Of course this self-deluding perception places Singapore at the centre of a vast region. It is therefore the latter day Middle Kingdom (the Ancient Middle Kingdom being China). The rest are peripheral and are there to serve the interest of this somewhat tiny Middle Kingdom." Lee Kuan advised Malaysian politicians on how to run the country, the same way he is advising a delegation that has come from Tatarstan led by its Deputy Prime Minister, this very week in Singapore, on public administration. Because of this new boastful diplomacy, Dr. Mahathir called Lee Kuan Yew, with sarcasm 'the great man from the little country' and 'little Emperor'. He then continued, "(Malaysia) should not have anymore problems now. We have been told the direction to take." With the repercussions of the financial crisis, Singapore has projected to have new economic ambitions to work with Malaysia. Lee Kuan Yew's believe in the Malaysian merger and the unity of the two territories seems to have never faded.

The one-party rule, government control of businesses, structuralisation of education and economy, psychological conditioning of the population, censure of religion and the media, classification of the masses, strict penal code, and the latest passing of the POA, all bring to light the silent oppression that is hidden behind the tourist image. Singapore proves to be an excellent case study of how the greater Muslim world was purchased, divided and are today being transformed to live for the State and in extension for the world economy. The two other nations from the Sultanates of the Malay Archipelago, Malaysia and Indonesia, are moving in the direction of Brave-New-World status and Authoritarian Capitalism so that they may be embraced by the World Community, while Singapore has successfully done so. In terms of its economy, politics, society, and other factors beyond the scope of this essay like international relations and military, Singapore is the perfect model that those in control of the world would want subservient states to follow.

Source: http://www.globaliamagazine.com/?id=781

Norman RA Noordin

Oh tanah airku...

Malaysia no longer a "Tanah Melayu"

Posted by admin

Monday, 20 July 2009 12:16

Azly Rahman Today is July 19, 2009, 40 years after the May 13 1969 tragedy. I dedicate these notes to Teo Beng Hock, a young Malaysian who ought to be an inspiration to many wishing to call Malaysia home. Because we have agreed to become a country rooted in a social contract that ought to give equality, equity, and equal opportunity to all who have given up their natural rights in exchange for "citizenship" and the rights of the State to tax them (with or without representation), we must recognize that Malaysia is for Malaysians. This will be the most humane perspective we ought to work towards in holding. What is needed is a system of check and balance that will ensure that each generation of Malaysians will progress without the trappings of mistrust, hatred, and institutionalized racism. But first, we must all fight for the installation of this reality. Political will that will move this agenda of ethical liberalism must be harnessed and be made the driving force for social, cultural, educational, and psychological change. The idea of "Tanah Melayu" must be reflected upon -- of its relevancy and whether it is a kind of ideological thinking that will help develop a culture of peace or help nurture inter-racial hatred. Communal politics is an old school thinking that cannot survive the wave of cosmopolitanism; just like the any idea that could not survive the inevitability of historical change propelled by changes in material condition and consciousness. In Malaysia, the days of communal politics are numbered, however well it is packaged and propagandized. Multiculturalism, and in fact radical multiculturalism, or better still radical marhaenism is the next wave. Institutions that promote racism must be deconstructed and abolished; institutions that are funded by the ruling regime to ensure the hegemony of this or that race. Dismantle them before they become yet another layer of complexity in our consciousness; a layer that hides the structural violence inherent in a system of racism and false consciousness called "nationalistic history". The only permanent thing is change, as the Chinese philosopher and mystic Lao Tzu said. Man has no nature, what he has is history, said the Spanish philosopher Ortega Gasset. And there will be beauty in this change if we know how to destroy the beast within. I am reproducing an essay I wrote sometime ago on "Ketuanan Melayu" -------------------------------------------------------- A Malay view of 'Ketuanan Melayu' Azly Rahman | Feb 4, 08 2:51pm 'O people! Your God is one and your forefather (Adam) is one. An Arab is not better than a non-Arab and a non-Arab is not better than an Arab, and a red (i.e. white tinged with red) person is not better than a black person and a black person is not better than a red person, except in piety. Indeed the noblest among you is the one who is deeply conscious of God.' - a saying of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) 'Malaysia - to whom does it belong? To Malaysians. But who are Malaysians? I hope I am, Mr Speaker, Sir. But sometimes, sitting in this chamber, I doubt whether I am allowed to be a Malaysian. This is the doubt that hangs over many minds, and ... [once] emotions are set in motion, and men pitted against men along these unspoken lines, you will have the kind of warfare that will split the nation from top to bottom and undo Malaysia.' - Lee Kuan Yew, now Senior Minister, Republic of Singapore Instead of defining Ketuanan Melayu as 'Malay superiority' which is quite meaningless, philologically inaccurate, and philosophically arrogant, I think the word 'dictatorship' is closer in meaning. As you read this piece, please refrain from value judgment and from bring trapped in the prison-house of language pertaining to the word 'dictatorship'. To dictate connotes to tell, which connotes to narrate. To narrate means to weave a story based on an ideology. To ideologise means to encapsulate. To encapsulate means to be trap. Dictatorship, here might also mean an entrapment. Instead of acknowledging one's freedom to rule, one is acknowledging being in an entrapment - and to rule out of that condition. This is a form of false consciousness. Words, as a literary theorist Raymond Williams might say, must also be contextualised/situated within the economic condition they emerge in. Marx's famous dictum that human beings' existence is defined by the economic condition they are in and that this condition is already predetermined. This is a deterministic view of human history. I first read heard the phrase Ketuanan Melayu in the mid-1980s from a book by one Malik Munip. I was reading his work, at the same time reading Lim Kit Siang's 'Malaysia in the dangerous 80s', to get a sense of the argument. I was an undergraduate reading Literature, Education and International Politics. I also heard that Malay students were discouraged from reading Kit Siang's work and encouraged to read 'Ketuanan Melayu'. I love banned books and books that others tell me not to read. There is a sense of intellectual challenge to be able to read banned books. I read Mahathir Mohamad's 'The Malay Dilemma' and Syed Husin Ali's 'Malays: Their Problems and their Future' and Syed Hussein Alatas' 'The Myth of the Lazy Native' at the same time. Again, to get a sense of balance. I read Malaysian official publications on economic outlook, juxtaposing them with a close reading of analyses on the political-economy of the Malaysian capitalist state. I read the work of Freud and Marx to see where some of the major authors of the Frankfurt School of Social Research are going with their arguments on totalitarianism. I read the Quran and the Bhagavad Gita, the Ramayana, and the Mahabharata to see where the arguments on race superiority lie and what the fate of humankind will be. The idea of social dominance and racial superiority might all be primarily about economics, if we are to read the history of the development of ideologies of superiority. But my question is - who has the right to claim that this or that land belongs to this or that group of people. At what point does culture and citizenship meet and negotiate the issue of egalitarianism? When does 'the truth of one's culture' reach its limit and the question of 'the truth of citizenship' dominate? This is a very complex question Malaysians must answer after 50 years of Independence. We must open up the dialogue on this issue. Lyrical propaganda Let us look at how the idea of ketuanan Melayu is disseminated to the young. One way is through indoctrination camps in which songs are used. Over the decades, perhaps millions of Malay students like me were taught the dangerous propaganda song, 'Anak Kecil Main Api'(A Child Plays with Fire). One verse concerns the power of the Malays:: … kini kita cuma tinggal kuasa yang akan menentukan bangsa hasil mengalir, ke tangan yang lain pribumi merintih sendiri… My loose translation of this 1980s propaganda song by the Biro Tata Negara reads: … political power is what we are only left with one that will determine the fate of our nation wealth of this nation flows into the hands of others sons and daughters of the soil suffer in solace... I do not think we have a clear understanding of what the lyrics mean. I doubt if the songwriter even understand what a 'people's history of Malaya' means. It is a song based on racist intents; its lyrics penned by one who does not have a good grasp of the political-economy of Malaysian history, let alone the latest advances in the field of psychology of consciousness. The training programes that encapsulate the theme of this song are meant to instill fear of the Malays, not of others but of themselves, and to project hatred onto other ethnic groups without realising who the enemy of the Malays really are. Using relaxation techniques to bring the brain waves in the alpha and state (conducive for suggestive and subliminal messages), trainees were put under 'half-asleep' conditions to get the ketuanan Melayu message to colonise the consciousness. The technique pioneered by Russian brain scientists Barzakov and Lozanov in the1970s, called 'suggestopedia', is used to instill the deep sense of fear for oneself and hatred of others. History is a complex syntagmatic pattern of interplay between technology, ideology, culture, inscription and institutionalisation not easily reduced to simplistic lyrics as such sung to the tune of pre-war German-nationalistic-sounding compositions. History is about the complex evolution of the ruling class which owns the technologies of control. As Marx would say, at every epoch it is the history of those who own the means of production that will be written and rewritten. The winners write history, the losers write poetry or study anthropology, some would lament. Back to the lyrics. After 50 years of independence, who is suffering in Malaysia? Who has become wealthy? Who has evolved into robber barons? What has become of our judiciary system, our universities, our city streets, our sense of public safety and security, our schools, our youth, and our entire socio-economic arrangements at the eve of the 12th general election. How has the idea of ketuanan Melayu contributed to this state of affairs? Language of power and ideology is at play in those lyrics. The definition of 'bumiputera' is at play. It has become a problematic word in this age of deconstructionism; an age wherein as the poet WB Yeats said, "the centre cannot hold". Rock musicians will recall the Scorpions' famous song 'Winds of Change' to serenade the fall of the Berlin Wall and the beginning of the breakdown of the Soviet Empire. We have to face the 'wrath' of the word. Put an end to Ketuanan Melayu For Muslims in Malaysia, this saying by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is familiar: 'Your descent is nothing to be proud of. Nor does it bring you superiority. O people! All of you are the children of Adam. You are like equal wheat grains in a bowl ... No one has any superiority over anyone else, except in religion and heedfulness. In order to consider someone a wicked person, it suffices that he humiliates other people, is mean with money, bad-tempered and exceeds the limits…' I would say that ketuanan Melayu is a dangerous concept that is threatening race relations. It is an arrogant interpretation of selective history; of a history that is largely benefiting those who profits from the ideology. Those promoting this concept are not well-versed in the matters of philosophy of history. I do not think thinking Malays these days subscribe to the idea of 'Malay dominance and dictatorship'. If there is a ketuanan of one race, then the rest are 'slaves' and 'serfs' and 'sub-citizens', if we are to analyse it from the point of view of 'Master-Slave' narrative? As a Malay wishing to see the withering of and an end to the concept of ketuanan Melayu and the birth of a new consciousness that will respect the dignity of all races and the humility of all ethnic groups, I call upon Malaysians to continue to be critical of any attempt by any race to project their own sense of false superiority that would only breed dangerous ethnocentrism bordering on xenophobia. We should work together to deconstruct all forms of race-based political arrangement and work towards establishing a new order based on a more egalitarian economic design that takes into consideration the basic needs and dignity of all races. We should teach our schoolchildren how to deconstruct such sense of racial superiority, through the teaching of not only tolerance but social egalitarianism - via peace education strategies. We will have a lot to gain for generations to come. Article Source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24615/84/

Overdue recognition for Said Zahari

Said Wartawan Cemerlang Negara 2009

SULTAN Ahmad Shah bergambar dengan Said (berkerusi roda), Akmal (kanan), Zaini (dua dari kiri) dan Yazid (dua dari kanan) di Kuala Lumpur, malam tadi.

KUALA LUMPUR: Tokoh wartawan negara, Said Zahari, 81, dinobatkan sebagai Wartawan Cemerlang Negara 2009 oleh Persatuan Wartawan Melayu Malaysia (PWM) di sini, malam tadi.

Pada majlis sama, Pengarang Bintang Popular Berita Minggu, Akmal Abdullah, turut dinamakan pemenang Anugerah Wartawan Melayu 2009, yang pertama kali diperkenalkan oleh PWM. Turut memenangi anugerah sama, Penolong Ketua Pengarang 1 Utusan Malaysia, Mohd Zaini Hassan.

Ketiga-tiga penerima anugerah menerima hadiah berupa sijil, plak dan sagu hati berbentuk wang tunai yang disampaikan oleh Sultan Pahang, Sultan Ahmad Shah.

Source: http://www.bharian.com.my/Current_News/BH/Sunday/Nasional/20090719081618/Article/index_html

from Malaysia Today

Did I not tell you?

Posted by admin

Sunday, 19 July 2009 18:05

The Chinese call these people running dogs. I would not call them that though. I think it is not right to call them running dogs. I love dogs. I think dogs are lovely creatures. Why should we honour these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional by calling them running dogs? NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Umno papers slam MACC critics in Teoh's death The Malaysian Insider, 19 July 2009 Umno-controlled newspapers, Berita Harian and Mingguan Malaysia, today slammed critics for demonising the country's graft-busters over Teoh Beng Hock's death, with one suggesting there is an agenda to weaken Malay-controlled institutions. Both newspapers accused the opposition of politicising the political secretary's death on July 16, with Mingguan saying the federal opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) was using the incident to divert attention away from internal problems and weaknesses. But Berita Harian suggested the agenda was to weaken Malay-controlled institutions in the article, "Kematian Teoh timbulkan pelbagai spekulasi politik", written by the New Straits Times group managing editor Zainul Ariffin Isa. He wrote that political opportunism can turn grief into political capital, and death can be made a catalyst to stoke anger and racial sentiments. "It is not just the Chinese or supporters of the Pakatan Rakyat who know anger and seek justice. "Suspicions have been raised especially among the non-Malays that MACC, which like other departments have many Malay officers, selectively chose non-Malays to be investigated," he wrote. The new boss of the Umno-owned New Straits Times group did not, however, address complaints raised by two DAP men who were also, like Teoh, brought in for questioning. The two DAP men, one a Chinese and the other a mixed Malay-Chinese, claimed racial insults were hurled at them by the MACC officers. Like Teoh, both men were not suspects, but "witnesses," according to MACC officers. So far, leaders of the PR alliance, led by Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, have not referred to race in their statements demanding the MACC be held responsible for Teoh's death. Zainul appeared to suggest that Teoh's death was an accident and that the MACC officer involved was Malay when he wrote in Berita Harian that "when a victim of an accident was non-Malay, who was previously investigated by a Malay, the speculation is great." By suggesting anti-Malay sentiment in Teoh's death, he also appeared to suggest that government departments were Malay-based institutions rather than a non-partisan civil service. "Why did the Selangor MB, a Malay, question those of his own race to act fairly?" Zainul wrote. Mingguan Malaysia, which is also owned by Umno, also attacked the PR alliance for politicising the death. The newspaper said the controversy could not be resolved through demonstrations or wild accusations. Mingguan suggested instead that the opposition was using Teoh's death to distract attention from its own problems. ************************************************* I have tried to explain this in the past but it has fallen on deaf ears. Some even think I may be seeing ghosts in the shadows. But I have attended enough Umno gatherings in my lifetime and have enough Umno friends in high places to know what I am talking about. Nevertheless, most of those who disagree with my views are those who comment from the comfort and safety of their homes and offices and would most likely not be at the Kelana Jaya stadium today. This means, basically, they do not really have their ears to the ground and comment without the benefit of having their fingers on the pulse. Let me put this to you in plain words and as clearly as I can. Umno considers the government machinery as a Malay vehicle. The government machinery -- whether it be the Election Commission (SPR), police, the anti-corruption agency (MACC), the Information Ministry (that controls the mainstream media and radio and television stations), institutions of learning (from kindergartens right up to universities), etc. -- are there to serve Malay interests. And make no mistake about this. There is a government propaganda outfit called Biro Tata Negara (BTN) whose job is to conduct courses and deliver lectures around the clock to government officers and students before and after they enter university. BTN's main focus is to indoctrinate Malays with the idea that Malaysia is a Malay country. The Chinese, Indians and 'others' are immigrants. After allowing them citizenship status these Chinese, Indians and 'others' now demonstrate ingratitude and start demanding all sorts of unreasonable things such as equal rights -- forgetting that they are mere guests in this country and are therefore second-class and not first-class citizens. The army is Malay. The police is Malay. The universities and all institutions of higher learning are Malay. In fact, you name it and it is Malay. There are no two ways about it. And if the Chinese, Indians and 'others' refuse to accept this then they should leave this country and go back to the country where they originally came from -- be it China, India, or wherever. Okay, you may argue that today's Chinese, Indians and 'others' were all born in Malaysia. None were born in China, India, or wherever. Their grandparents or great grandparents may have been born in China, India, or wherever. But almost all the Chinese, Indians and 'others' were born here in Malaysia. So that automatically makes them citizens and not immigrants although they may be descendants of immigrants. I mean, every single US citizen (other than the native Indian) is a descendant of immigrants even if they themselves may have been born in the US and did not migrate to America. So, grandchildren or great grandchildren of immigrants are not called immigrants but are called US citizens. And all US citizens are regarded equal. No US citizen has more rights than another US citizens based on which country his or her forefathers came from. But that is in the US. That does not apply to Malaysia. In Malaysia, the descendants of the immigrants who came from one of the Indonesian islands have more rights than the descendants of the immigrants who came from China, India or any territory that is not part of the Indonesian islands. That is how it works in Malaysia. And the Malays are constantly reminded about this. And all those descendants of immigrants not from one of the Indonesian islands will also be constantly reminded that they are guests in this country, do not have equal rights, and are classified as second-class citizens akin to an immigrant. And that is why Chinese, Indians and 'others' are treated more brutally when arrested or detained. They not only suffer verbal abuse and racial slurs but will be physically abused as well. And that is why the death under detention rate for those who are not descendants of immigrants from one of the Indonesian islands is very high. Most, however, die 'sudden deaths' or collapse and die for no apparent reason other than medically related 'natural causes'. Let me make it clear, again. The Malaysian government is a Malay government. The government's job is to serve the Malays and protect Malay interests. Yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister said so in case anyone may have forgotten this. And this will remain so as long as Barisan Nasional stays in office. Umno has promised the people this. And any Malay who wants to change this arrangement is a traitor to his race. His or her citizenship should be withdrawn and he or she should be expelled from the country. This, Umno has made very clear more than once. The descendants of immigrants from China, India or any territory not within the Indonesian islands have no problem with this though. They accept the fact that they are second-class citizens under the classification of pendatang. And that is why they are members of Barisan Nasional. And the job of these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional is to ensure that Umno stays in power although Umno has less than half the seats in Parliament. On its own Umno is out of office. With the 13 other non-Malay members giving Umno the mandate it can stay in office. The Chinese call these people running dogs. I would not call them that though. I think it is not right to call them running dogs. I love dogs. I think dogs are lovely creatures. Why should we honour these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional by calling them running dogs? Original article: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/24586/84/

Teoh's death: The answer is in the next elections!

by David Seling Sunday, 19 July 2009 11:44 OPINION Our nation has produced varying responses to the violent death of one of her young sons, Teoh Beng Hock. These reactions shed some light on our political system and collective conscience. Ordinary Malaysians have expressed shock, dismay, and anger. Demonstrations and candle-light vigils have begun, symbolising an outpouring of sympathy for Teoh's fiancée and family, and anger that the MACC has washed its hands in public and shrugged off any responsibility. Leaders spanning the political spectrum, from the MCA's Dr Chua Soi Lek, Umno Youth's Khairy Jamaluddin, to PAS Vice-President Salahuddin Ayob, the PKR's Anwar Ibrahim, the DAP's Lim Kit Siang, and the national human rights commission Suhakam, have called for an independent Royal Commission to reveal the truth. A glance at the huge number of readers' comments on news portals like the Malaysian Mirror, and blogs like Malaysia Today, reveals an explosion of rage and mourning. Readers demand an unfettered investigation. Some call for divine justice. A few call for retaliation. Some, including blogger Rocky's Bru, condemn politicians such as the DAP's Lim Guan Eng for trying to gain political mileage from the young DAP aide's death. Yet it is undeniable that Teoh's death is deeply political, for Teoh died during an MACC probe targeted at Pakatan Rakyat (PR) representatives. The MACC has not answered allegations of corruption among Barisan Nasional representatives, such as Dr Mohd Khir Toyo, with nearly the same fanatical hounding the MACC has given PR reps. After Teoh's death, Khir blurted out disingenuous claims that he thought the MACC to be even-handed. He alleged that he, too, had been questioned by the MACC, for eight hours, a "similar treatment" to Teoh's. It can be assumed Khir's "similar treatment" did not involve a fall from a tall building. One or two readers of news sites and blogs said Teoh "must have been guilty" of some unspecified crime. They claimed that otherwise, Teoh would not have been called in for questioning. One reader said Teoh must have felt guilty after being interrogated, and, as a result, jumped to his death. In response, other readers directed furious tirades at the abject stupidity of these remarks. But then the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Nazri Aziz, sprang to the MACC's defence. The minister said the MACC had told him they had released Teoh after questioning him. "Don't just accuse MACC for being responsible for this, wait for the investigation… (Teoh) should have gone home. We couldn't have known he wanted to jump from that building," he argued. Angry readers and journalists poured scorn on the minister's purported telepathic knowledge that Teoh had jumped, and had not been pushed. Perhaps the honourable minister felt he should be appointed as chairman and sole member of the investigative commission, since he seems to have superhuman insight. Well-rehearsed response Leading Cabinet ministers recited identikit lines in a well-rehearsed response: the police were mounting an investigation, and no one should reach premature conclusions (except, it seems, for one psychic Minister in the Prime Minister's Department). Deputy PM Muhyiddin Yassin told Malaysians to "stay calm" and not to over-react. He set a proud example of not over-reacting himself, appearing impassive and completely unmoved by the death of a young MACC witness – a young man planning to be married that day. At first, Muhyiddin paid scant attention to demands for a Royal Commission. The next day, he backtracked, and said the Cabinet, at its meeting next Wednesday, would "consider" a royal investigative panel. The strength of public feeling must have shaken his earlier stand that the public would have to await the results of police investigations. Muhyiddin had claimed the police would be "hands on" and would "leave no stone unturned." Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak offered his condolences to Teoh's family. Najib said, "The government hopes that the people will remain calm and patient. Let's leave it to the authorities to investigate." Is this a tenable proposition? Teoh died after falling from the building where he had been interrogated by the MACC for almost eleven hours. The MACC were the authorities, and the authorities were already investigating. They were investigating PR members of the Selangor State Assembly. The MACC must have placed enormous pressure on Teoh, the young political secretary to the DAP's Executive Councillor Ean Yong Hian Wah, during that long night. Teoh could not be reached on his mobile telephone: he had been isolated and deprived of communication with the outside world. The MACC officers questioning Teoh have not been named. The MACC have not offered an official version of the events of that night. There was no camera coverage of the interrogation. Tan Boon Hwa, Kajang Municipal Councillor, was interrogated by the MACC on the same evening as Teoh. He accused MACC officers of trying to extract a fake confession from him. He says the MACC forced him to stay on his feet from 10pm to 2am, and threatened him with physical violence. Teoh must have been deprived of sleep too, and may have been deprived of food and water. The MACC admitted Teoh had been "tired". It does not require any stretch of the imagination to deduce that Teoh may well have been harassed and abused, as Tan described. Teoh's lawyer, M Manoharan, said the MACC would not allow him to accompany Teoh. Even if Teoh had been a criminal suspect in police custody, rather than an MACC witness, he would have had the right to seek legal advice. The MACC violated the rule of natural justice. Who guards "the authorities"? The question remains: who guards the guardians? If the police investigation is to be "hands on", as Muhyiddin boasted, will this bring us closer to the truth? The police left plenty of evidence of being "hands on", when they beat Kugan Ananthan in police custody in January. The police have been silent on the result of the investigation, classified as murder. Kugan, a previously healthy and strapping 22 year old man, died bearing signs of having been flogged by police. The police then confiscated material evidence from Kugan's post-mortem examination in Universiti Malaya. The "authorities" also fell back on technicalities in court, slowing down efforts by Manoharan, also Kugan's lawyer, from retrieving the seized evidence. The Public Prosecutor's Office, the MACC, the police, and the judiciary have become profoundly politicised. The public perception is that they have become organs of state-sanctioned violence, and that the "authorities" have lost their moral authority. "Leave it to the authorities"? Malaysians may provide a resounding answer to this question in the next elections. Malaysia's police, judiciary and civil service were once respected throughout the world. We have now become an international anomaly. Malaysia is a self-declared democracy, with a proud history of independence and self-determination. Yet our nation is now wracked with unprecedented, catastrophic scandals, hobbling our constitution, such as in Perak, and our state institutions, such as the police and the MACC. Our state institutions can be returned to health, but only if voters insist on accountability and new blood. In the final analysis, though, these state institutions exist merely to serve people; to serve Malaysians. The most abiding and memorable response to this tragedy, the response that matters most, is not to be found in the politicians' speeches, the blogs, or in the headlines. It is to be found in the image of Teoh's grieving fiancée and family, burned indelibly into our collective memory.

Article source: http://malaysianmirror.com/homedetail/45-home/5297-teohs-death-the-answer-is-in-the-next-elections

The real heroes of independence

Heroes of Merdeka.

Who are actually the heroes of Merdeka ?Is it Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tok Janggut, Mat Salleh,Rosli Dobi,Chin Peng, Rashid Maidin, Burhandin Hilmi ? A research of the historical evidence 10 years before Merdeka would reveal a totally different perspective to what the British want us to believe. Those that were really the heroes were either imprisoned under ISA killed under Emergency Laws or pushed or shipped out of the country.

As with Independence/Merdeka all over the world the British made sure that the people given their Independence are their proxys. It ensured the continuation of their Companies,their riba/usury paper money and Capitalist economic systems and culture. World Imperialism in the form of Kafirnomics (making money out of no money) is alive and kicking.

Original post: http://warongpakyeh.blogspot.com/2009/01/heroes-of-merdeka.html

Pre-Independence English teachers

Bring back the Brinsford-Kirby English teachers

by Azly Rahman

I had the opportunity to work with many of them when I was teaching at a Malaysian university a decade or so ago. Some became a central influence in my life as an educator. The Brinsford-Kirby teachers are amongst the finest English teachers the Malaysia produced in preparation for Independence. This group of gifted teachers are well-versed in the Grammar and Mechanics and Literature of the English Language. They are, most importantly too, multicultural and enjoy each others' company -- like brothers and sisters.

Their commitment to teaching the poor and the underprivileged of the newly emerging Malaysia is admirable; teaching became their calling. They take pride in their profession; like how they were trained at the two best British teacher-training institutions. Many of them have passed away, some of the pioneers of Brinsford-Kirby are in their eighties. I hope they are reading this piece and giving advice on the importance of the English Language and the need for the different races to live together and to learn from each other.

Had our prime ministers come from the like of Kirby-Brinsford teachers, we will have a different Malaysia – we will have a population well-versed in English, proud of all the languages including Bahasa Melayu, meticulous and stylish the James Cagney and Katherine Hepburn way, cultured, imbued with wisdom, and most importantly imbued with a no-nonsense kind of nationalism that will nowhere be near any slogan of OneMalaysia we are now hearing. You could enjoy the music of Matt Monroe, Nana Mouskouri, and Frank Sinatra with them. You could also sit and watch Gone with the Wind and enjoy nasi kandar the next hour.

You could sit with them for hours and discuss English grammar, talk about Jane Austen, Wuthering Heights, Middelmarch, Pride and Prejudice, Shakespeare, and literary work of the different time periods of the English Language. And next, you could adjourn for teh tarik and listen to their advice on how to see the world as a gift and enjoy their wit and their jokes as well. The Malays, Chinese, Indians, and Sikhs amongst them are like brothers and sisters.

They are the earliest example of true Malaysians that strive for a Malaysian Malaysia. They are strict disciplinarians to their children and instill deep sense of pride of their culture to the latter. Undoubtedly, coming from poor families themselves, they instill the importance of academics and for the love of learning in their children and grandchildren. Poverty is no reason for the loss of pride and dignity. Being poor does not mean leaving your child to roam around playing truant and giving reasons for the school to practice "social promotion" just because you are of this or that racial group. Many became respected members of their communities, giving back what they cherish most -- their experience as members of the Brinsford-Kirby class and their passion for teaching.

Okay -- maybe we can't brink them back, Nor is Kirby any longer there. But we can learn from that time period when English used to be taught well to Malaysians, according to demands of those times.

One has to read the publications such as "Suara Brinsford" to analyze the nature of nationalism and teaching in those early years of Merdeka.

May God bless them all.

Article source: http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/2009/07/bring-back-brinsford-kirbay-english.html

Our PM...

Najib & Co. (Part 1)

10 Jul 09 : 8.00AM

By Gan Pei Ling
ganpeiling@thenutgraph.com

	"Give me a chance. I will reform and I will make changes."

Then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, speaking at a press conference at the Umno general assembly in April 2009, days before he was made prime minister.

He said he was aware that some parties expected him to act in an authoritarian manner after he took over the premiership from former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Najib pleaded with the people to give him a chance and judge him by his actions, which would "come in due course". (Source: Najib wants 'One Malaysia', The Malaysian Insider, 1 April 2009)

	"Tell them the truth."

Najib, advising leaders to be truthful to the people. He said this was one of the best ways to win the people's trust and confidence. (Source: Be truthful to the people, PM tells leaders, Bernama, 7 May 2009)

Despite Najib's effort to promote honesty and truthfulness, Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil continues to refuse to make public the Penan task force report, and will not say why.

The task force was commissioned in October 2008 by former minister Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen to investigate allegations of sexual violations against Penan girls and women in the Sarawak interior.

In another case, the Port Klang Free Zone report was only made public on 28 May 2009 following public pressure on Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat. Even so, the report was released on three conditions and for a limited period only.

Ong also promised on 14 June 2009 that a copy of the report would be distributed to all Members of Parliament during the recently-concluded parliamentary meeting. However, Public Accounts Committee chairperson Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid revealed on 1 July 2009 that a full report would only be tabled in the October parliamentary meeting.

	"We must seek to include and unlock the potential of our young people who will be the next generation of leaders, business people, engineers, scientists, teachers and doctors. We must give them wings to fly."

Najib, in his inaugural address. He said the government should "draw on talented people across our nation, regardless of their position or background, to re-energise a passion for public service". (Source: Najib Vows One Malaysia, People First, Performance Now, Bernama, 3 April 2009)

On 11 May 2009, however, the annual Public Service Department (PSD) scholarship controversy was reignited when Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong slammed PSD for not awarding overseas scholarship to deserving SPM leavers. Many parties called for a review and even a total revamp of the scholarship system.

But instead of overhauling the system, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin proposed to limit the number of subjects a student could take in the SPM examination to solve the issue. He subsequently announced on 17 June 2009 that all students, except those from religious schools, could only take a maximum of 10 subjects in SPM from 2010 onwards.

Article source: http://www.thenutgraph.com/najib-and-co-part-1

Of languages & national unity... or is it politics?

English can be a language of Malaysian unity and teach Sejarah and Agama in English.

Contrary to many an opinion of Malaysian linguistic nationalists, I do believe that English language can be a powerful force of revolutionary change -- and a language of Malaysian unity primarily.

Bahasa Melayu has its own dignity but do not have the power to become a language of postmodern science and technology. In its current form, Bahasa Melayu is being destroyed by its own internal contradictions and suitable only as a language of literature and Malaysian bureaucracy. Everytime it tries to transform itself into a language of science and technology it become closer to becoming yet another periphery of the Center; it becomes subservient to the English Language. Why English language is a lingua franca can be explained by its ease of transformation. Philologists have written extensively on this phenomena.

Bahasa Melayu is fast evolving into a language of Ketuanan Melayu; abused for political reasons. Language is an expression of culture and helps construct the social reality of that culture. The phrase "kedaulatan Bahasa Melayu" is not a necessary slogan. No language has a dimension of Divine Sanctity unless it is pegged to the concept of "kerajaan" or the maintenance of this or that status quo however oppressive it may be. In this case, no race in Malaysia is challenging the dignity of the Malay language. I believe it is merely a political play.

Malay linguists, academicians, and literary figures are now jumping into the bandwagon of defending the "dignity" of Bahasa Melayu. However, they may in the end be bringing the kampong kids back into the kampong when they grow up. Ignore them. Parents wanting to see the progress of all Malaysians must understand the importance of the English Language and to master it while at the same time respect the status of any language including the Malay language.

Parent must demand that schools teach Maths and Science in the English language. In fact schools should also teach Sejarah Malaysia and Pengajian Agama Islam, and also Pendidikan Moral in English. To erode the influence of Ketuanan Melayu and to start thinking of being Malaysian and to start asking critical questions about history, teach the subject in English. It is a liberal enough language to accept many points of view. To achieve inter-religious understanding, teach Agama Islam and Pendidikan Moral in English. It is a language liberal enough to accept religious differences.

Respect Bahasa Melayu but master the English language. The latter is also a language of global unity and of advanced science and technology.

Article source: http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/2009/07/english-can-be-language-of-malaysian.html

The symbol surfaces...

After Her Rise in China and Expulsion, a Uighur Becomes the Face of Her People

Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

Rebiya Kadeer, a Uighur exile leader, in her Washington office Tuesday with Omar Kanat of the Uighur American Association.

By ERIK ECKHOLM

Published: July 8, 2009

The Beijing government that hailed her as a model citizen in the 1990s, before imprisoning her for stealing state secrets and sending her into exile in the United States in 2005, vilifies her as the unseen hand behind protests that erupted Sunday in the Uighur homeland of western China.

WASHINGTON — As the global face of resistance to what she calls the worsening Chinese repression of the Uighurs, Rebiya Kadeer is displaying the tenacity and sense of destiny that drove her improbable climb inside China in decades past, from laundry girl to famed business mogul.

"All the difficulties in my life prepared me for the tough times we face now," said the woman, who is happy to be called the "Mother of the Uighurs," in an interview on Tuesday.

In a plain wool suit and a traditional Uighur cap topping waist-length pigtails, Ms. Kadeer, 62, veered from impish humor and warmth — she leapt to pump the hand of a reporter who described visiting her childhood town — to intense, hand-waving condemnations of Chinese perfidy.

The walls of her small office in downtown Washington are covered with photographs of meetings with President George W. Bush and Laura Bush, and pictures of several of her 11 children, two of whom are now in prison in China. They were sentenced to long terms after she came to the United States and resumed work for Uighur rights.

The week's events have catapulted Ms. Kadeer to a new level of global recognition, a prominence that seems belied by the few modest rooms here where she and a few aides press their cause with telephones, the Internet and passion.

This week, several office and personal phones rang incessantly, with reporters from around the world seeking a word. Still, it became clear that the Uighurs, long downtrodden and little known in the West, enjoy little of the glamour of their neighbors, the Tibetans. When Ms. Kadeer led a march to the Chinese Embassy on Tuesday, no more than several dozen supporters, mainly fellow exiles, showed up.

If she was disappointed, she gave no sign. In the interview and in her autobiography, "Dragon Fighter," which came out this year, Ms. Kadeer described her survival through famine, persecution during Mao's Cultural Revolution and then — as she threw herself into black-market trading of cloth, underwear and other items — the repeated seizure of her goods and money by corrupt or overzealous officials.

She claims that she had, from the beginning, an irrepressible devotion to Uighur self-determination. In her eyes, even her start in life brought an omen. Money and luck were running out in the mining settlement where her father hoped to strike it rich, she wrote, in a story that may be too good to investigate.

In accordance with tradition, her father went to bury the bloody birth linens. As he dug a hole, he suddenly shouted, "Gold!" From that moment on, she wrote, her parents said, "You don't belong to us; you belong to the people."

What is indisputable is that from early on she was a determined and shrewd businesswoman willing to sell goods from a sack at the side of the road when necessary, buying and selling thousands of sheepskins or logs when she saw the chance. As China's economy opened up in the 1980s, she expanded into real estate and flourished. By the 1990s she was running trading companies all over Central Asia, had built a famous women's bazaar and then a seven-story department store in Urumqi, the capital of the region of Xinjiang, and ran a charity for Uighur women.

Her career had personal costs. In an unthinkable violation of Uighur custom, and angering her relatives, she traveled for months at a time, leaving young children with a working husband or relatives. "Of course it was difficult for me as a woman to leave my children," she said. "But I found out that money is very important to the destiny of a nation, and I decided to find that money."

Five of her children are now in the United States, and have been working computers and phones night and day this week, she said. Another five, including the two in prison, remain in China, and one lives in Australia.

In the mid-1990s, as Chinese officials heralded her as an example of ethnic success and even made her a member of the national legislature, she tried to work for change and never lost sight of her political dream, Ms. Kadeer said.

"I was sincere in my interactions with the Chinese government. I was hoping to solve the problems of the Uighurs," she said. "I still believe we can solve the problems."

But she started speaking out about Uighur grievances and she kept ties with her husband, by then a dissident living in the United States. In 1999 she was imprisoned.

Ms. Kadeer dismisses Beijing's charge that she planned last Sunday's protests.

She is more than happy, however, to tell how she and the two organizations she heads, the Uighur American Association and the World Uighur Congress, both of which receive financial support from the National Endowment for Democracy, mobilized exile groups around the world to protest an episode in Guangdong Province in late June.

Chinese officials say that two Uighur workers were killed by a small group of Han Chinese, who have been detained; Ms. Kadeer says, with evident sincerity, there is evidence that a mob killed up to 60 Uighurs while the police did nothing. But her version has not been independently verified, and Chinese authorities accuse exiles of exaggerating the matter to incite anti-Chinese feelings.

The world congress, based in Munich, has just one paid staff member but is in touch with some 51 exile groups around the world. Ms. Kadeer said that by June 30 she had called all of those groups to encourage demonstrations outside Chinese embassies.

The rumors about mass killings in Guangdong were one trigger for Sunday's protests, but Ms. Kadeer challenged Beijing authorities to release the transcript of a call she made to a brother in Urumqi on Saturday in which, she said, she urged him not to become involved in any demonstrations.

"Instead of blaming me, the Chinese government should start listening to the complaints of the Uighur people and choose dialogue," Ms. Kadeer said.

Her fame and force of personality have given the Uighurs a huge lift, but some exiles wonder about her domination and future leadership.

"I've been looking for someone like me who can take over," she said on Tuesday. For now, she said, "The people will not let me stop because my goal is their liberation."

"Until I lose my consciousness, I'll stay on as the leader."

Article Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/world/asia/09kadeer.html?_r=1&th&emc=th