Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Program Memancing Ikan di Kg Paya Keladan

Program Memancing Ikan di Kg Paya Keladan diadakan pada 25 Jun 2011. Berbagai hadiah diberikan termasuk peserta yang mendapatkan ikan terkecil, ikan terbesar dan peserta yang mempunyai perut paling buncit!




Macam memancing ikan di atas darat!


Sunday, June 19, 2011

Majlis Gotongroyong anjuran Jabatan Kesihatan Temerloh di Taman Rimba

Majlis Gotongroyong anjuran Jabatan Kesihatan Temerloh di Taman Rimba bersama KRT Taman Rimba dan MCA Cawangan Tmn Rimba diadakan pada 19 Jun 2011 Jam 8.30 pagi. Agensi Kerajaan seperti JKR, Alam Flora juga turut hadir dalam menjayakan program ini.




Friday, June 3, 2011

Come on, take a break...

Can we take a break from all the posturing?
2011/05/28
By Datuk Zainul Arifin Mohamed Isa


WHETHER it is fuel prices, electricity tariffs or toll rates, every argument is accompanied by the shrill cry of politicking. To paraphrase Bob Dylan, everyone is talking but no one is listening.

We are in a soapbox climbathon, the higher one clambers than one's opponent and the more outrageous the message, then, presumably, more people will listen.

I wish for a time when people could just argue, debate or disagree without having an eye on the political prize. We should all be outraged at this endless intrusion into our peace and quiet but for some of us, we cannot have enough of it.


Everyone claims to be talking and speaking on behalf of the rakyat but can we be sure? One need not be politically savvy to begin to suspect that politicians, most of the time and most of them, are actually speaking for themselves. They are talking to you with an eye on your vote; if we are lucky, we matter.

We are their raison d'etre? Without us and our problems, they are nothing. No?

But, of course, I am being cynical and I am thinking of the most opportunistic of the lot and the blatantly obtuse who cannot imagine that we can see through their acts.


The latest brouhaha (why do I always feel that the word seems to suggest people losing their heads and we should all laugh at them?) being the Public Service Department scholarships row.

It is a matter of principle that the best should be rewarded. I understand that and agree that every single citizen is important. Yet, everyone claims to be unjustifiably maligned by the policy.

While everyone is avoiding the word "race" publicly and is instead championing "meritocracy", we should not skirt the issue and point out that it is the awarding of scholarships to "ineligible" Bumiputeras that is the issue here.


It is obvious that this becomes a racial issue when Chinese or Indian political parties, or those dominated by them, take up the issue and suggest that members of their communities have been denied.

Are the MCA, MIC -- which are part of the government and have always been able to resolve issues quietly within the confines of Barisan Nasional -- and DAP raging at the PSD while posturing to the Chinese and Indian communities?

One could understand the realpolitik behind this strategy but there are also risks.

The Malays and Bumiputeras may see the protest as a racist thing, too, especially when it is insinuated that many of the recipients are presumed to be unworthy or are incapable of getting such awards without help.

Personally, I feel it is fine and dandy to argue that the best should be rewarded. It is even acceptable to be outraged if there were inconsistencies in the policy.

But should we all be held hostage by a policy that is likely to be flawed in its interpretation -- are the scholarships purely for straight A+ students or deserving ones?

The former required no interpretation except for the string of A+s, while the latter would try to strike a balance between a middle-class child, who was primed for examinations with tuition and prep classes, and the rural or underprivileged kid who had to rely on his wits to get where he was.

Furthermore, the scholarship policy is also challenged by the availability of resources.

Say all those with A+s were to be awarded scholarships, what would happen if the number was ridiculously high, especially when our schools are turning into hothouses of high scorers?

There is only a certain amount of money available to send our brightest abroad. Even if one rages about the unfairness of it all, one can't fight economic reality. Some people will be disappointed.

It must now be clear to everyone that the arguments are never over the availability of scholarships but, specifically, scholarships for abroad.

I had suggested this a few years ago when the same controversy over PSD overseas scholarships came to the fore -- it is now an annual thing, too, along with the outcry over places in medical schools, etc, which are soon to follow -- that the government should only fund postgraduate studies abroad. It is not only cheaper but would rid us of this annual circus.

All students, especially the best ones, should be enrolled in local universities. This will also serve as a signal that our universities are for our best. But this idea is a non-starter since as a society, we put extra currency in foreign degrees, even when they come from schools that are suspect.

Equality or fairness? Should all candidates with straight A+s be treated equally? The demand for equality may not result in fairness, which itself is a major opinion splitter since what is considered fair?

One must understand that scholarships are not only to reward high performers but are also an instrument of social restructuring. There are Malays and Bumiputeras, as there must be Chinese or Indians, who should be awarded scholarships because they would go a longer way towards getting them and their families out of their present situation.

This goes along the universal value of fairness -- the have-nots should be given a leg up. They should be given priority over those who qualify purely on academic performance.

If we were into cliches and admittedly rather racist demographics, then the children of Felda settlers or estate workers, or fishball mee sellers must surely be given priority over others. But yet many of them will be disappointed. Resources are finite.

We should not be making excuses if we are true to this cause of fairness. Yet ambiguities must be cleared and transparency should be the rule of the day.

But when we argue out loud, in the media especially, we are forced to adopt some posturing. For we are not discussing but instead flexing our muscles, or what we think are muscles, not at our opponents but our intended audience.

By posturing, we are trying to telegraph the message that we are fighting for justice, against friend or foe, and we are fighting for you.

This is not a good way to begin consultation since even if one were to get what one wished for, it would leave a bitter taste in the mouth of others. Posturing makes it difficult for anyone to come down from his position, lest he be seen a loser.

It requires a clear head and it would take a lot of confidence and stamina to resist posturing, especially when it is tempting to reap the quick rewards of public approval.

The PSD scholarship issue has been turned into a test case for some and for others, the posturing is getting rather out of hand. There must be a better way to resolve the issue. Stand down. We need a respite from never-ending politicking.

zainul@nst.com.my
http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/20null/Article/index_html#ixzz1OAfsiTnR


日期: 2011年6月3日


無論是油價、電費還是過路費,每種言論都伴隨著政治意圖。人人都在發言,卻沒有人願意聆聽。我希望人們可以在沒有政治利益的考量下,單純地爭辯、辯論或反駁。我們應為我們寧靜的生活不斷受到干擾而感到憤怒,但有些人卻覺得還不夠混亂。

每位政客都說自己為人民的利益著想,但真的是這樣嗎?很多時候,很多政客其實都只為自身利益著想。他們討好你只是為了你手上的選票。沒有我們人民,也沒有我們的問題,他們就不會存在了,不是這樣嗎?最近公共獎學金課題鬧得沸沸騰騰的。

我瞭解,也贊同每位國民都是重要的。但是,現在每個人都說自己受到政策虧待。若每個人都希望避免牽涉種族課題,提倡 「績效」,那我們不應避開不提有「不符合資格」的土著得到獎學金的問題。
當華裔或印裔政黨談論這課題,並表示他們族群受到忽視時,顯然的,這課題就變成種族課題了。
作為執政黨一部分的馬華與國大黨是否每次都能在國陣內部解決課題呢?行動黨嚴厲指責公共服務局獎學金時,是否是在討好華裔及印裔呢?雖然人人都瞭解這些舉動背後的政治意圖,但即使這樣危機是依然存在的。

馬來人及土著也許也認為抗議獎學金分配是種族主義之舉,尤其當抗議的內容暗示大部分獲得獎學金的人沒有資格,或是在受人幫助下才得到此獎賞的。
我個人認為,讓最佳成績的學生得到獎學金是應該的。若政策有漏洞,提出抗議也是應被接受的。

但我們應為一個詮釋有缺陷的政策爭論不休嗎?獎學金應給予考獲全科A+的學生,還是有需要的學生呢?若是前者就不需要對政策作出進一步的詮釋,只要得到全科A+就行了,而後者則必須在中產階級的孩子與窮困的孩子之間取得平衡。

獎學金的分派也受到資源的限制。如果獎學金頒給得到全科A+的學生,那如果考獲這成績的學生人數非常多,該怎麼辦呢?資源的限制讓政府只能資助成績最好的學生出國留學。即使有人大呼不公平,這也是沒辦法的事,最後必定會有人失望。

人們現在應該清楚知道爭論不在於獎學金的份額,而在海外獎學金。

我多年前也曾建議政府應只資助學生到海外修讀碩士或博士課程,這樣不但能節省經費,還能避免每年都要為這課題吵一次。而所有學生,尤其是優秀生,應在本地大學升學。這樣就能顯示我們的大學是提供給我們最好的學生的。

要平等還是公平呢?全部得到全科A+的學生都要受到相同的待遇嗎?平等不等於公平,因為公平的定義因人而異。我們也必須明白獎學金不但是對成績優秀者的獎勵,也是社會重組的工具之一。無論什麼族群都有需要獎學金來脫離貧困的人。

這就涉及公平的普世價值。因此,生活貧困的人應得到優先考慮。而政策不清楚之處也必須解釋清楚,實行時更必須透明。

若我們公開爭論,尤其通過媒體,我們就被迫裝腔作勢。我們不再商討問題,而是在攻擊他人,受到傷害的卻是我們想要幫助的人。

我們不斷向他人表示我們為正義而鬥爭,為人民而鬥爭,但這不是好的商討方法,因為當我們得到我們要的東西時,就會令他人感到不快。裝腔作勢讓人下不了台,因為人人都不想被視為輸家。

公共服務局獎學金的課題對一些人而言是一大考驗,因此裝腔作勢的情況變得一發不可收拾。解決這課題一定有更好的方法。放下身段吧,我們都必須停止將一切課題政治化。


 http://www2.orientaldaily.com.my/fread/2u2d0M4K1X521MLz05RH63Jn0XmP3bNq

Thursday, June 2, 2011

515bagenliuzhu.mp3 (audio/mpeg Object)

515bagenliuzhu.mp3 (audio/mpeg Object)

把根留住
曲:童安格词:童安格 黄庆元

多少脸孔
茫然随波逐流
他们在追寻什么
为了生活
人们四处奔波
却在命运中交错
多少岁月
凝聚成这一刻
期待着旧梦重圆
万涓成水
终究汇流成河
像一首澎湃的歌
一年过了一年
碍一生只为这一天
让血脉再相连
擦干心中的血和泪痕
留住我们的根

九百九十九朵玫瑰



九百九十九朵玫瑰(国)
邰正宵
往事如风 痴心只是难懂
借酒相送 送不走身影蒙蒙
蠋光投影 映不出你颜容
仍只见你独自照片中
夜风已冷 回想前尘如梦
心似冰冻 怎堪相识不相逢
难舍心痛 难舍情已如风
难舍你在我心中的放纵
我早已为你种下
九百九十九朵玫瑰
从分手的那一天
九百九十九朵玫瑰
花到凋谢人已憔悴
千盟万誓已随花事湮灭
夜风已冷 回想前尘如梦
心似冰冻 怎堪相识不相逢
难舍心痛 难舍情已如风
难舍你在我心中的放纵
我早已为你种下
九百九十九朵玫瑰
从分手的那一天
九百九十九朵玫瑰
花到凋谢人已憔悴
千盟万誓已随花事湮灭
我早已为你种下
九百九十九朵玫瑰
从分手的那一天
九百九十九朵玫瑰
花到凋谢人已憔悴
千盟万誓已随花事湮灭
往事如风 痴心只是难懂
借酒相送 送不走身影蒙蒙
蠋光投影 映不出你颜容
仍只见你独自照片中