Duta berani redah demo 1,000 aktivis anti-Malaysia
29-11-2007 08:01:59 PM
Oleh MOHD NASIR YUSOFF
JAKARTA: Duta Besar Malaysia ke Indonesia Datuk Zainal Abidin Mohamed Zain memerlukan hanya tiga minit untuk menyuraikan demonstrasi anti-Malaysia, yang sebelum itu berkobar-kobar dan kononnya akan berlangsung satu tindakan nekat di hadapan kedutaan di sini pagi ini.
Lebih 1,000 pendemonstrasi anti-Malaysia daripada kalangan aktivis kebudayaan Reog Ponorogo, yang diapi-apikan semangat anti-Malaysia oleh pelbagai laporan media massa yang menuduh Malaysia telah mengambil dan mengakui berhak terhadap kesenian itu, akhirnya menyuraikan diri selepas mendengar penjelasan itu.
"Saya jelaskan di sini bahawa kerajaan Malaysia tidak pernah mengakui tarian Reog itu berasal dari Malaysia walaupun tarian itu ada di Johor dan Selangor," katanya dengan menggunakan alat pembesar suara.
Lebih 3,000 penari Reog sebelum ini dikhabarkan bakal berdemonstrasi sehingga hampir semua stesen televisyen Indonesia berminat menyiarkannya secara langsung. (foto Associated Press)
Kira-kira 150 tahun lalu, rakyat dari Indonesia yang berhijrah ke Malaysia membawa kebudayaannya dan ia dipraktikkan oleh anak cucu mereka di sana sehingga hari ini, katanya dari atas pentas yang berupa sebuah kenderaan yang digunakan oleh pemimpin demonstrasi itu.
Setelah penjelasan yang menggunakan hanya kira-kira 50 patah perkataan sahaja itu, Zainal Abidin terus turun dari pentas itu dan kembali meneruskan tugas di pejabatnya, meninggalkan para pendemonstrasi itu terdiam seperti terpukau.
Akhirnya, sedikit demi sedikit mereka bergegas meninggalkan Jalan Rasuna Said yang sesak di hadapan kedutaan dan tiada satu pun lagi antara puluhan topeng singa Reog itu yang galak menari-nari dengan garang seperti kira-kira sejam sebelumnya.
Beberapa hari sebelum ini, heboh disebarkan khabar bahawa lebih 3,000 Reog (topeng singa berupa beruk) akan berdemonstrasi anti-Malaysia sehinggakan hampir semua stesen televisyen Indonesia membawa van siaran luar mereka bagi menyiarkannya secara langsung peristiwa itu.
Namun, tidak satu pun media massa dalam talian dan televisyen yang meliputi demonstrasi itu melaporkan aspek kecekapan diplomasi Zainal Abidin yang tampil dengan tenang menamatkan demonstrasi itu tanpa sebarang insiden buruk.
Kerana menjangkakan demonstrasi itu akan melibatkan tindakan keras dan kasar, ratusan polis Indonesia telah dikerah berkawal dan pagar dawai tajam anti-perusuh telah dipasang di hadapan pintu masuk ke kedutaan.
Sebelum keluar bertemu pendemonstrasi itu, Zainal Abidin bersetuju menerima beberapa orang wakil mereka di pejabat beliau.
Bercakap kepada Bernama selepas itu, Zainal Abidin berkata terlalu banyak tuduhan jahat dilemparkan terhadap Malaysia sejak kebelakangan ini dengan banyaknya laporan media dan perbincangan di laman web tempatan kononnya Malaysia telah mencuri pelbagai seni dan budaya Indonesia dan mengakui berhak ke atasnya.
"Entah dari mana timbulnya tuduhan kononnya Malaysia juga telah mempaten semua bentuk seni dan budaya itu termasuk batik dan lagu," katanya yang menjelaskan bahawa semua tuduhan itu tidak benar.
Duta Besar itu sendiri telah berkali-kali mengulangi penjelasan tersebut kepada media massa tetapi tuduhan demi tuduhan terus berlaku sehingga beliau berpendapat ada elemen jahat yang ingin merenggangkan hubungan akrab Malaysia dengan Indonesia dengan mengeksploitasikan seni dan budaya.
Eksploitasi seni dan budaya dilakukan oleh elemen jahat ini kerana ia merupakan isu warisan yang dibanggakan oleh rakyat Indonesia dan sangat sensitif di jiwa mereka serta dapat pula dengan mudah digunakan untuk membakar sentimen anti-Malaysia, jelasnya. BERNAMA
30 November 2007
27 November 2007
Hehehehe....
What’s fat got to do with it?
27-11-2007 10:34:36 AM
By MARY SCHNEIDER
I HATE to keep going on about weight, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult not to. Everywhere I look there are stories about people whose weight has ballooned; stories about people successfully losing weight; and stories about successful slimmers putting their lost weight (and some more) back on again as soon as they resume their old eating habits.
Just in case you’ve been living in a cave since mankind began expanding horizontally, it’s a well-documented fact that stuffing your face with junk food while adhering to an exercise regimen that involves nothing more than multiple presses on your TV’s remote control can lead to obesity. Other than the host of life-threatening illnesses and diseases that are associated with such a condition, obese people must now come to terms with the sad realisation that New Zealand doesn’t want them.
Seemingly, you can go to New Zealand on a holiday and spend all your hard-earned cash on trips to sheep farms and visits to the region where the Lord of the Rings movies were shot, but you might not be able to emigrate there if you are obese.
New Zealand has decided that it won’t accept severely obese applicants into its immigration programme because the country is already suffering from the consequences of having a hugely overweight population. As the number of overweight New Zealanders (more than half the adult population and nearly one-third of all children) rises, the health problems associated with obesity impose an ever-increasing burden on the country’s healthcare system.
One person who felt the full weight of this fatist policy is Briton Richie Trezise, who had his initial application to emigrate to New Zealand rejected on the grounds that he had a body mass index (BMI) of 42 (anything over 25 is considered overweight). Trezise managed to lose two inches off his waistline in order to be accepted, but his overweight wife hasn’t been able to shed the pounds so easily. She now sits home alone in Britain, unable to join her husband until she has a more svelte figure.
With its declining population, New Zealand will soon be populated by nothing but sheep if it insists on turning away prospective residents based on their weight.
If it helps to put things into perspective, Australia also takes into consideration the waistlines of its potential residents. But in the country’s defence, I have to say its emigration policy isn’t as one-sided as the one enforced by New Zealand. Last year, a British woman was refused Australian citizenship because she wasn’t heavy enough. It seems that people who are thinner than average are deemed to be anorexic and, therefore, a liability because of the associated mental health problems.
So the Australian government quickly weeds out the overweight and the thin but has no qualms about granting citizenship to drinkers, TV addicts, workaholics, control freaks, mat rempit and the majority of politicians fleeing from a disgruntled populace back home.
Still, Trezise can’t complain too much. He only has to look at some of the fatist policies in place in Britain to realise that the overweight are being discriminated against on his home turf.
A few months back, a Briton was told she was too fat to adopt – and she was an ex-nanny. It would appear that fat people are incapable of being good parents, simply because they are not agile enough to meet the demands of a normal, energetic child. So instead of being nurtured in a loving home environment, a child languishes in some adoption holding house, waiting for a slimmer, more energised woman to come along.
What happens if a slim person adopts a child but later gains weight? And should fat people have their natural children taken away from them? And what about anorexics, smokers, drinkers, TV addicts, workaholics, control freaks, et al? Should they be allowed to take care of children?
I know some overweight people who are just marvellous parents. I’ve also met many women of normal weight who should never have been given a womb in the first place; they have inflicted so much damage on their children.
If things continue as they are, the majority of people in countries like New Zealand and Britain will soon be considered unfit to parent a child. Still, I guess they could always adopt a sheep
27-11-2007 10:34:36 AM
By MARY SCHNEIDER
I HATE to keep going on about weight, but it’s becoming increasingly difficult not to. Everywhere I look there are stories about people whose weight has ballooned; stories about people successfully losing weight; and stories about successful slimmers putting their lost weight (and some more) back on again as soon as they resume their old eating habits.
Just in case you’ve been living in a cave since mankind began expanding horizontally, it’s a well-documented fact that stuffing your face with junk food while adhering to an exercise regimen that involves nothing more than multiple presses on your TV’s remote control can lead to obesity. Other than the host of life-threatening illnesses and diseases that are associated with such a condition, obese people must now come to terms with the sad realisation that New Zealand doesn’t want them.
Seemingly, you can go to New Zealand on a holiday and spend all your hard-earned cash on trips to sheep farms and visits to the region where the Lord of the Rings movies were shot, but you might not be able to emigrate there if you are obese.
New Zealand has decided that it won’t accept severely obese applicants into its immigration programme because the country is already suffering from the consequences of having a hugely overweight population. As the number of overweight New Zealanders (more than half the adult population and nearly one-third of all children) rises, the health problems associated with obesity impose an ever-increasing burden on the country’s healthcare system.
One person who felt the full weight of this fatist policy is Briton Richie Trezise, who had his initial application to emigrate to New Zealand rejected on the grounds that he had a body mass index (BMI) of 42 (anything over 25 is considered overweight). Trezise managed to lose two inches off his waistline in order to be accepted, but his overweight wife hasn’t been able to shed the pounds so easily. She now sits home alone in Britain, unable to join her husband until she has a more svelte figure.
With its declining population, New Zealand will soon be populated by nothing but sheep if it insists on turning away prospective residents based on their weight.
If it helps to put things into perspective, Australia also takes into consideration the waistlines of its potential residents. But in the country’s defence, I have to say its emigration policy isn’t as one-sided as the one enforced by New Zealand. Last year, a British woman was refused Australian citizenship because she wasn’t heavy enough. It seems that people who are thinner than average are deemed to be anorexic and, therefore, a liability because of the associated mental health problems.
So the Australian government quickly weeds out the overweight and the thin but has no qualms about granting citizenship to drinkers, TV addicts, workaholics, control freaks, mat rempit and the majority of politicians fleeing from a disgruntled populace back home.
Still, Trezise can’t complain too much. He only has to look at some of the fatist policies in place in Britain to realise that the overweight are being discriminated against on his home turf.
A few months back, a Briton was told she was too fat to adopt – and she was an ex-nanny. It would appear that fat people are incapable of being good parents, simply because they are not agile enough to meet the demands of a normal, energetic child. So instead of being nurtured in a loving home environment, a child languishes in some adoption holding house, waiting for a slimmer, more energised woman to come along.
What happens if a slim person adopts a child but later gains weight? And should fat people have their natural children taken away from them? And what about anorexics, smokers, drinkers, TV addicts, workaholics, control freaks, et al? Should they be allowed to take care of children?
I know some overweight people who are just marvellous parents. I’ve also met many women of normal weight who should never have been given a womb in the first place; they have inflicted so much damage on their children.
If things continue as they are, the majority of people in countries like New Zealand and Britain will soon be considered unfit to parent a child. Still, I guess they could always adopt a sheep
20 November 2007
Angkasawan Malaysia
Hari ini 19 November 2007, hari bersejarah buat Nina dan Adam kerana berpeluang bertemu dan bergambar dengan Angkasawan Pertama Malaysia iaitu Dr. Sheikh Muszaphar Sheikh Shukor Al-Masrie. Moga pertemuan ini menjadi sumber inspirasi buat Nina dan Adam untuk belajar lebih tekun dan bersungguh-sungguh untuk masa depan yang cemerlang di dunia dan di akhirat.
Mengapa ya??
Why Malaysia has fallen out of Top 200 ranking?
19-11-2007 12:05:08 PM
JUST as Vice Chancellors must be held responsible for the poor rankings of their universities, the Higher Education Minister, Datuk Mustapha Mohamad must bear personal responsibility for the dismal international ranking of Malaysian universities - particularly for Malaysia falling completely out of the list of the world’s Top 200 Universities this year in the 2007 Times Higher Education Supplement (THES)-Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings.
I find it scandalous that the shocking fall of the ranking of Malaysian universities THES-QS 2007 world Top 200 Universities was totally ignored by last week’s Umno General Assembly, whether by Umno delegates or leaders, although the 2007 THES-QS rankings were revealed when the Umno General Assembly was in session.
Further details and studies have shown that Malaysian universities have suffered a very serious drop in the international league of the world’s best universities, virtually undergoing a free fall when compared to other Top Universities.
For the first time, there is not a single university in the Top 200 Universities list.
Both Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) and Universiti Malaya (UM) had fell out of the Top 200 Universities ranking, with UKM plunging from 185th slot last year to 309th while University fo Malaya plunged from 89th in 2004 to 169th in 2005, 192nd in 2006 to 246th in 2007. Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), which was ranked as the only “outstanding” five-star university in a recent government survey, fell to 307th spot from 277 last year. In 2005, USM was in the 326th spot. But this is not the only dismal result for Malaysian universities in the THES-QS 2007 ranking. Also for the first time, there is not a single Malaysian university in the separate listing of Top 100 Universities for five subject areas – Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities; Life Sciences and Biomedicine; and Engineering and Information Technology.
Last year Malaysia was placed in four of the 500 slots in the five Top 100 Universities for the five subjects - University of Malaya ranked 49 in Social Sciences and 95 in Natural Sciences, UKM No. 62 in Natural Sciences and USM at No. 96 for Life Sciences and Biomedicine.
This year, Malaysia was completely excluded in all the five listings of Top 100 Universities for the five categories.
There are 38 “elite of elite” universities, which are not only ranked in the Top 200 Universities list, but also ranked in every one of the five Top 100 subject list. The country breakdown and details for these 38 “elite of elite” universities are:
United States (15), United Kingdom ( 4), Australia (6), Canada (5), China (2), Japan ( 2), S. Korea (1), Taiwan (1), Singapore (1), Hong Kong (1). Total (38).
United States – (Ranking in Top 200 Universities in bracket): Harvard (1), Yale (2), Princeton (6), Chicago (7), MIT (10), Columbia (11), John Hopkins (15), Stanford (19), Carnegie Mellon (20), Cornell (20), California, Berkeley (22), Brown (32), Boston (47), Texas at Austin (51) and Illinois (73).
While in United Kingdom: Oxford (2), Cambridge (2), UCL (University College London) (9) and Edinburgh (23).
Canada - McGill (12), British Columbia (33), Toronto (45), Montreal (93) and McMaster (108).
Australia - ANU (16), Melbourne (27), Sydney (31), Queensland (33), Monash (43) and New South Wales (44).
Japan - Tokyo (17) and Kyoto (25).
Hong Kong - Hong Kong (18)
Singapore - National University of Singapore (33)
China - Peking (36), Tsinghua (40)
South Korea - Seoul National (51)
Taiwan -National Taiwan (102)
I am very surprised that the Higher Education Minister, who is currently on a visit to universities in China, had asked the Chinese government to recognize more Malaysian universities and colleges for two reasons.
It was news to me and to most Malaysians that China has recognized 50 institutions in the public and private sector in Malaysia – 7 IPTAs (public institutions of higher learning) and 43 IPTSs (private institutions). This is a clear indicator that public universities in the country are losing out in terms of academic excellence and international recognition to private institutions.
Secondly, the Chinese government has recognized more Malaysian universities and colleges than the Chinese universities and colleges recognized by the Malaysian government – when many Chinese universities are internationally recognized for their academic merit and excellence while Malaysian universities have disappeared from the international radar of academic excellence.
In the 2007 THES-QS) World Top 200 University Rankings, six Chinese universities were ranked but not a single one from Malaysia.
The six Chinese universities are: (36) Peking University, (40) Tsinghua University, (85) Fudan University, (125) Nanjing University, (155) University of Science and Technology of China and (163) Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
China has two universities, Peking University and Tsinghua University, which are among the 38 “elite of elite” universities, as they are also listed in all the Top 100 Universities in all five different categories.
Altogether, Chinese universities occupy 21 spots in the 500 slots in the five Top 100 Universities for five categories – but Malaysia does not recognize anyone of them although we do not occupy a single spot in the 500 slots for the five lists of Top 100 Universities.
Malaysia even refuses to accord recognition to the degrees of Peking University and Tsinghua University, two of the “elite of elites” universities as the Malaysian government only recognizes their degrees for Chinese language studies.
Details of the 21 spots occupied by Chinese universities in the five Top 100 lists are:
6 in the Top 100 Life Sciences & Biomedicine (Peking 18, Tsinghua 51, Fudan 52, Nanjing 78, Science and Technology of China 84 and Shanghai Jiao Tong 92); 5 in the Top 100 Natural Sciences (Peking 15, Tsinghua 34, Science and Technology of China 40, Nanjing 76 and Fudan 80); 4 in the Top 100 Engineering & IT (Tsinghua 16, Peking 36, Science and Technology of China 49 and Shanghai Jiao Tong 55);
3 in the Top 100 Social Sciences – (Peking 23, Tsinghua 44 and Fudan 62); and
3 in the Top 100 Arts & Humanities – (Peking 18, Fudan 45 and Tsinghua 91).
Why has the Malaysian government not recognized these internationally-acclaimed Chinese universities for their world-class degrees and courses, when Malaysia does not have any equivalent whatsoever?
It is most strange and extraordinary that a country which has dropped out of world-class university rankings is asking for more recognition for its universities from another country with universities of international repute but which it has refused to recognize?
The Malaysian government should promptly and forthwith recognize all the degrees of Chinese universities which are internationally-recognised as among the world’s top universities, and not just the Chinese Language Studies of four Chinese universities, before we can righteously ask China for more recognition of Malaysian universities by Chinese government.
If the government is serious about its slogan of “Cemerlang, Gemilang, Terbilang” to create a world-class university system to transform Malaysia into a knowledge-based innovative economy, it must end the New Economic Policy (NEP) in the universities and fully restore the policy of meritocracy and academic excellence coupled with social need to provide university education opportunities to economically-backward Malaysians regardless of race.
It is the NEP policy and mentality which caused University of Malaya to fall 213 rankings behind University of Singapore in less than four decades as both universities had started on the same footing some 50 years ago. University of Malaya is ranked No. 246 as compared to the 33rd ranking for National University of Singapore.
The government must recognize that so long as the NEP is kept in place in the universities, there would be no way for any Malaysian public university to compete with other universities from other countries. This is why Malaysia is also losing out to universities from Thailand and Africa – which was unthinkable four decades ago!
If Malaysia is to get back to the trail of world-class academic excellence, all universities should be allowed to enroll the most qualified students, employ the most competent professors and researchers with competitive remunerations and restore a culture of academic excellence and freedom.
One simple test of whether the government is seriously committed to abandon the baggages of past NEP policies to create a world-class university system is whether it has the political will to end the annual brain drain depriving Malaysia of the best and brightest for the development of the country.
For a start, the Cabinet should check the annual four-figure brain-drain of the best and brightest STPM students and Chinese Independent Secondary school students to Singapore by providing them equitable higher education opportunities at home to demonstrate that the government is serious in wanting to build a world-class university system.
LIM KIT SIANG
19-11-2007 12:05:08 PM
JUST as Vice Chancellors must be held responsible for the poor rankings of their universities, the Higher Education Minister, Datuk Mustapha Mohamad must bear personal responsibility for the dismal international ranking of Malaysian universities - particularly for Malaysia falling completely out of the list of the world’s Top 200 Universities this year in the 2007 Times Higher Education Supplement (THES)-Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings.
I find it scandalous that the shocking fall of the ranking of Malaysian universities THES-QS 2007 world Top 200 Universities was totally ignored by last week’s Umno General Assembly, whether by Umno delegates or leaders, although the 2007 THES-QS rankings were revealed when the Umno General Assembly was in session.
Further details and studies have shown that Malaysian universities have suffered a very serious drop in the international league of the world’s best universities, virtually undergoing a free fall when compared to other Top Universities.
For the first time, there is not a single university in the Top 200 Universities list.
Both Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) and Universiti Malaya (UM) had fell out of the Top 200 Universities ranking, with UKM plunging from 185th slot last year to 309th while University fo Malaya plunged from 89th in 2004 to 169th in 2005, 192nd in 2006 to 246th in 2007. Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), which was ranked as the only “outstanding” five-star university in a recent government survey, fell to 307th spot from 277 last year. In 2005, USM was in the 326th spot. But this is not the only dismal result for Malaysian universities in the THES-QS 2007 ranking. Also for the first time, there is not a single Malaysian university in the separate listing of Top 100 Universities for five subject areas – Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities; Life Sciences and Biomedicine; and Engineering and Information Technology.
Last year Malaysia was placed in four of the 500 slots in the five Top 100 Universities for the five subjects - University of Malaya ranked 49 in Social Sciences and 95 in Natural Sciences, UKM No. 62 in Natural Sciences and USM at No. 96 for Life Sciences and Biomedicine.
This year, Malaysia was completely excluded in all the five listings of Top 100 Universities for the five categories.
There are 38 “elite of elite” universities, which are not only ranked in the Top 200 Universities list, but also ranked in every one of the five Top 100 subject list. The country breakdown and details for these 38 “elite of elite” universities are:
United States (15), United Kingdom ( 4), Australia (6), Canada (5), China (2), Japan ( 2), S. Korea (1), Taiwan (1), Singapore (1), Hong Kong (1). Total (38).
United States – (Ranking in Top 200 Universities in bracket): Harvard (1), Yale (2), Princeton (6), Chicago (7), MIT (10), Columbia (11), John Hopkins (15), Stanford (19), Carnegie Mellon (20), Cornell (20), California, Berkeley (22), Brown (32), Boston (47), Texas at Austin (51) and Illinois (73).
While in United Kingdom: Oxford (2), Cambridge (2), UCL (University College London) (9) and Edinburgh (23).
Canada - McGill (12), British Columbia (33), Toronto (45), Montreal (93) and McMaster (108).
Australia - ANU (16), Melbourne (27), Sydney (31), Queensland (33), Monash (43) and New South Wales (44).
Japan - Tokyo (17) and Kyoto (25).
Hong Kong - Hong Kong (18)
Singapore - National University of Singapore (33)
China - Peking (36), Tsinghua (40)
South Korea - Seoul National (51)
Taiwan -National Taiwan (102)
I am very surprised that the Higher Education Minister, who is currently on a visit to universities in China, had asked the Chinese government to recognize more Malaysian universities and colleges for two reasons.
It was news to me and to most Malaysians that China has recognized 50 institutions in the public and private sector in Malaysia – 7 IPTAs (public institutions of higher learning) and 43 IPTSs (private institutions). This is a clear indicator that public universities in the country are losing out in terms of academic excellence and international recognition to private institutions.
Secondly, the Chinese government has recognized more Malaysian universities and colleges than the Chinese universities and colleges recognized by the Malaysian government – when many Chinese universities are internationally recognized for their academic merit and excellence while Malaysian universities have disappeared from the international radar of academic excellence.
In the 2007 THES-QS) World Top 200 University Rankings, six Chinese universities were ranked but not a single one from Malaysia.
The six Chinese universities are: (36) Peking University, (40) Tsinghua University, (85) Fudan University, (125) Nanjing University, (155) University of Science and Technology of China and (163) Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
China has two universities, Peking University and Tsinghua University, which are among the 38 “elite of elite” universities, as they are also listed in all the Top 100 Universities in all five different categories.
Altogether, Chinese universities occupy 21 spots in the 500 slots in the five Top 100 Universities for five categories – but Malaysia does not recognize anyone of them although we do not occupy a single spot in the 500 slots for the five lists of Top 100 Universities.
Malaysia even refuses to accord recognition to the degrees of Peking University and Tsinghua University, two of the “elite of elites” universities as the Malaysian government only recognizes their degrees for Chinese language studies.
Details of the 21 spots occupied by Chinese universities in the five Top 100 lists are:
6 in the Top 100 Life Sciences & Biomedicine (Peking 18, Tsinghua 51, Fudan 52, Nanjing 78, Science and Technology of China 84 and Shanghai Jiao Tong 92); 5 in the Top 100 Natural Sciences (Peking 15, Tsinghua 34, Science and Technology of China 40, Nanjing 76 and Fudan 80); 4 in the Top 100 Engineering & IT (Tsinghua 16, Peking 36, Science and Technology of China 49 and Shanghai Jiao Tong 55);
3 in the Top 100 Social Sciences – (Peking 23, Tsinghua 44 and Fudan 62); and
3 in the Top 100 Arts & Humanities – (Peking 18, Fudan 45 and Tsinghua 91).
Why has the Malaysian government not recognized these internationally-acclaimed Chinese universities for their world-class degrees and courses, when Malaysia does not have any equivalent whatsoever?
It is most strange and extraordinary that a country which has dropped out of world-class university rankings is asking for more recognition for its universities from another country with universities of international repute but which it has refused to recognize?
The Malaysian government should promptly and forthwith recognize all the degrees of Chinese universities which are internationally-recognised as among the world’s top universities, and not just the Chinese Language Studies of four Chinese universities, before we can righteously ask China for more recognition of Malaysian universities by Chinese government.
If the government is serious about its slogan of “Cemerlang, Gemilang, Terbilang” to create a world-class university system to transform Malaysia into a knowledge-based innovative economy, it must end the New Economic Policy (NEP) in the universities and fully restore the policy of meritocracy and academic excellence coupled with social need to provide university education opportunities to economically-backward Malaysians regardless of race.
It is the NEP policy and mentality which caused University of Malaya to fall 213 rankings behind University of Singapore in less than four decades as both universities had started on the same footing some 50 years ago. University of Malaya is ranked No. 246 as compared to the 33rd ranking for National University of Singapore.
The government must recognize that so long as the NEP is kept in place in the universities, there would be no way for any Malaysian public university to compete with other universities from other countries. This is why Malaysia is also losing out to universities from Thailand and Africa – which was unthinkable four decades ago!
If Malaysia is to get back to the trail of world-class academic excellence, all universities should be allowed to enroll the most qualified students, employ the most competent professors and researchers with competitive remunerations and restore a culture of academic excellence and freedom.
One simple test of whether the government is seriously committed to abandon the baggages of past NEP policies to create a world-class university system is whether it has the political will to end the annual brain drain depriving Malaysia of the best and brightest for the development of the country.
For a start, the Cabinet should check the annual four-figure brain-drain of the best and brightest STPM students and Chinese Independent Secondary school students to Singapore by providing them equitable higher education opportunities at home to demonstrate that the government is serious in wanting to build a world-class university system.
LIM KIT SIANG
18 November 2007
Autumn in my heart ~ 3 ~
AUTUMN GLOW.
Autumn is here, the leaves are turning,
Some so brightly they seem to be burning.
There's yellow, orange and bright red too,
All painted against a lovely sky of blue.
Every colour there is taken from the rainbow,
Every colour there is taken from the rainbow,
From up on the mountain to the valley below.
How do we rate? This is mad with love,
By our great creator in the heavens above.
For us all to see; the beauty is there,
For us all to see; the beauty is there,
Through all this we know He does care.
The earth is warmed by the sun's hot rays.
So we have cool nights and warmer days.
All we have to do is slow down our pace,
All we have to do is slow down our pace,
Quit racing around in such a terrible haste.
For on a cold night will come a frost
And this will come with quite a cost.
Then we will find the trees will be bare,
Then we will find the trees will be bare,
No more brilliant colours will we see there.
So enjoy it now. In it take pleasure,
Because autumn is here for us to treasure.
~~By CeNedra.~~
~~By CeNedra.~~
Autumn in my heart ~ 2 ~
AUTUMN LEAVES.SWEEP the leaves together,
Yellow, brown and red,
Let us make a bonfire
Now that they are dead.
Chestnut leaves and beech leaves,
Chestnut leaves and beech leaves,
Ash and lime and oak,
Fir-cones and pine needles
Kindle into smoke.
Leaves that all the summer
Leaves that all the summer
Gave us cool and shade--
What will be left of them
When our bonfire's made?
Only death-like ashes,
Only death-like ashes,
But from this same dust
Suns one day will fashion
Life anew, we trust. 
~~Author Unknown.~~
~~Author Unknown.~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)