Archive for April, 2004


28
April

Racial integration : a fallacy?

In Malaysiakini, letter section

Diskriminasi kaum di sekolah kebangsaan

M Sanmugavelu

2:32pm Wed Apr 28th, 2004

Saya sebagai seorang bapa, ingin memberitahu bahawa apa yang Pak Lah katakan terhadap masalah sekolah kebangsaan di negara kita adalah benar.

Tenaga pengajar di sekolah kebangsaan kita terlalu pro-kauman di mana mereka lebih mementingkan satu kaum sahaja.

Mereka akan memarahi anak-anak kaum lain dengan perkataan yang sungguh kesat dan walaupun ibubapa pelajar tersebut membuat laporan kepada polis dan Jabatan Pendidikan Negeri, sehingga kini tiada tindakan diambil.

Kerajaan BN memohon supaya semua kaum mendaftar anak-anak mereka di sekolah kebangsaan kerajaan tetapi tidak sedar bahawa tenaga pengajarnya tidak dididik untuk menyesuaikan diri dengan masyarakat majmuk.

Saya tidak faham kenapa sehingga kini tindakan tidak diambil terhadap guru-guru seperti tersebut di atas. Bolehkah polis daerah Batu Pahat dan Jabatan Pendidikan Negeri Johor memberi jawapan kepada soalan ini?

The tone of desperation of the above parent is evident. Racial discrimination in schools, why is it still happening? It appears that teachers remain the main culprits in the above scenario. It reminds me of another letter in a local paper, where a policeman candidly commented that the chinese should go back to China. So it appears that this mentality is not confined to teachers.

But this is sad as teachers should be the strongest advocates for racial integration. They are the educators of our future generations. They are to shape the mentality of our young children’s minds. Children that will one day be our leaders. Thus a teacher’s important role is undeniable. Unfortunately, they themselves are plagued with skewed beliefs and persecutory complexes.

How then are we to racially integrate? Will it remain a distant dream? It should not.

Being a multi-racial country is in itself challenging. The thoughts of many races being able to live together baffles others. We pride ourselves with this fact. Nevertheless, many deny and refuse to accept that there are cracks. Such denials will certainly be catastrophic if these cracks are left unrepaired and unchecked.

Swift action by the Education Ministry with regards to the above case should be delivered. It would be the first step in mending such cracks. Teachers who racially discriminate should be removed. They should not corrupt an institution that serves to educate the contrary.

Malaysians, in my opinion, requires a total change in mindset. We should no longer see along racial or religious lines. These are only arbitrary variables. We should treat each as an individual with equal rights as ourselves. We need to break down the barriers that have been put before us for centuries. Then only can we be fair and non judgemental.

These are monumental tasks. But not impossible. It requires commitment and sacrifice. It will be a journey that will be fraught with unexpected obstacles. But for the continuing existence of humanity, it is a necessary journey. It is only hoped that at the end of the day, cooler heads will prevail.

Finally, i believe racial integration starts in our education system. Let us only pray that this education system will keep its end of the bargain.

26
April

Proton’s commitment to customer safety??

This is from a recent advertisement by Proton. Their first line is “Customer Safety Comes First”. They also claim that independant tests showed 80% of Gen-2′s cabin remained intact (after collisions). But that is not the whole story. What was shown is a full frontal test which is best for evaluating the performance of seatbelts and air bags. If customer safety really came first, Proton would have installed airbags in all of its cars. IN actual fact, they should recall all its previous versions for ann installation of an airbag. That is the meaning of CUSTOMER SAFETY COMES FIRST!

The tests used to set Standards can be different in different countries. For example, frontal impact crash tests differ from country to country depending on the Standard. The American, Japanese and Australian Standards require the full width of the front of the car to be crashed into a solid barrier at a speed of 48 km/h (United States, Australia) or 50 km/h (Japan). This test is particularly effective for evaluating the performance of occupant restraints like seatbelts and air bags.

The European Standard requires an offset frontal impact crash test instead of a full frontal test. In an offset crash test, 40% of the front of the car (on the driver’s side) strikes a deformable barrier at 56km/h. This test is used because offset frontal collisions are more common in real world crashes than full frontal collisions.

The tests are different but both sorts of test will result in a minimum setting that the vehicles must comply with. It is then up to manufacturers to decide how they will design their cars to comply with a frontal impact Standard.

Extrcted from Land Transport Safety Authority ,NZ

In this picture, it clearly shows the presence of an airbag in the car. Proton still refuses to introduce air bags to local cars. So i assume that local cars are made different and these test will only apply to cars meant for export. Thus a lower quality of safety, perhaps.

A check of its website did not detail the results of such sites unlike some car manufacturers that would produce results of such safety tests to the public. It is our right to know if we are buying cars with a good safety profile.

The other thing is when they mentioned that 80%of Gen-2 cabin remains intact, which 80% is that. That 20% could spell danger if in the wrong places!. How about the results of an offset crash test??

More questions than answers. So Proton don’t fool us with pictures of so called tests. Be specific. We deserve that much!

Daihatsu’s tests