Wednesday, September 8, 2010
SEMBANG 3 - QBB GHEE
Be careful what we eat…
Salam Semua,
QBB Ghee ada Lard (Lemak Babi)
Forward this email to boycott the product.
2 April 2010
Atte n tion: Ms. Tan Poh Hong
CEO
Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority
5, Maxwell Road
Tower Block, MND Complex
Singapore 069110
Dear Madam
We wish to inform your goodself that for years, our consumer group as many other faithful consumers have been using “QQB” Ghee for various delicacies and religious functions without doubt, with full confidence that the said product is manufactured from the milk of dairy cows by its highly reputable manufacturer based in Queensland, Australia.
However, lately, we found that although the colour and aroma had now varied much, the taste seemed to be somewhat different. Therefore, we investigated this matter and concluded the following matters:
· Its manufacturer Butter Producers’ Co-operative Federation Ltd (BPCF) addressed as No. 489, Kingsford Smith Drive, Hamilton, Brisbane, Australia had ceased operations in September 2006 and was no longer listed in the website of Australian trade authority being http://www.austrade/ . gov.au/ . In fact the satellite picture as the website http://maps . google.com shows that the following site is vacant land.
· Printed on the tin is that the said product is manufactured from milkfat of dairy cows of Australia and in even smaller and rather unclear script, it is mentioned that its manufacturer is Q.B.I. Packaging Sdn Bhd, No. 19, Lorong Keluli 1C, Kawasan Perindustrian Bukit Raja Selatan, 41050 Shah Alam, Selangor DE., Malaysia and that the said product is manufactured under license from QBB (Pte.) Ltd., Singapore.
· QBB Pte Ltd.., Singapore was originally the sole agent for “QBB” Ghee for Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei and it is not clear whether at the time when BPCF ceased operations in 2006, the “QBB” trademark rights were transferred from BPCF to QBB Ptd Ltd., Singapore. We suspect that Q.B.I. Packaging Sdn Bhd and QBB Ptd Ltd., Singapore are together carrying an act of piracy i.e. producing and selling a product whose legitimate manufacturing and sales rights were not transferred to them by its original manufacturer BPCF who was since wound up.
· The report of an analysis conducted by a reputable food technology laboratory in Australia on the contents of a 2-lb tin of this product, where the said tin was taken from Malaysia to Australia by one of our group members, mentions the following:-
“This product constitutes of decolorized and deodorized lard (pig fat) in semi-solid state with permitted additives giving the product color, flavor and aroma similar to that of pure ghee color, flavor and aroma.” (Original report is with the sender of this letter).
Therefore, our consumer group had to boycott the use of this product as:-
a) Our muslim members cannot use this product as it is haram by religion
b) Our Hindu and Sikh members cannot use this product for burning of ghee lamps, religious functions or for preparing sweetmeats as places of worship which forbid the use of any animal oil/animal fat.
c) Our vegetarian friends who only consume vegetarian diet cannot consume the said product.
We believe that the “QBB Ghee” sold in Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei ever since BPCF closed down, is a product which is violating the related laws on the principle of “misrepresentation of label”. Therefore we hope that your goodself will take the appropriate action to stop the sale of this product.
Thanking you.
Letter signed by Mohd Kadir bin Mohd Karim (I/C No. 601223-10-6157)
Secretary of Kumpulan Konsumer Satu Malaysia (KKSM)
Note: Copy of this letter and analysis report sent to
YAB Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Abd. Khalid bin Ibrahim, Menteri Besar Selangor DE
Salam Semua,
QBB Ghee ada Lard (Lemak Babi)
Forward this email to boycott the product.
2 April 2010
Atte n tion: Ms. Tan Poh Hong
CEO
Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority
5, Maxwell Road
Tower Block, MND Complex
Singapore 069110
Dear Madam
We wish to inform your goodself that for years, our consumer group as many other faithful consumers have been using “QQB” Ghee for various delicacies and religious functions without doubt, with full confidence that the said product is manufactured from the milk of dairy cows by its highly reputable manufacturer based in Queensland, Australia.
However, lately, we found that although the colour and aroma had now varied much, the taste seemed to be somewhat different. Therefore, we investigated this matter and concluded the following matters:
· Its manufacturer Butter Producers’ Co-operative Federation Ltd (BPCF) addressed as No. 489, Kingsford Smith Drive, Hamilton, Brisbane, Australia had ceased operations in September 2006 and was no longer listed in the website of Australian trade authority being http://www.austrade/ . gov.au/ . In fact the satellite picture as the website http://maps . google.com shows that the following site is vacant land.
· Printed on the tin is that the said product is manufactured from milkfat of dairy cows of Australia and in even smaller and rather unclear script, it is mentioned that its manufacturer is Q.B.I. Packaging Sdn Bhd, No. 19, Lorong Keluli 1C, Kawasan Perindustrian Bukit Raja Selatan, 41050 Shah Alam, Selangor DE., Malaysia and that the said product is manufactured under license from QBB (Pte.) Ltd., Singapore.
· QBB Pte Ltd.., Singapore was originally the sole agent for “QBB” Ghee for Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei and it is not clear whether at the time when BPCF ceased operations in 2006, the “QBB” trademark rights were transferred from BPCF to QBB Ptd Ltd., Singapore. We suspect that Q.B.I. Packaging Sdn Bhd and QBB Ptd Ltd., Singapore are together carrying an act of piracy i.e. producing and selling a product whose legitimate manufacturing and sales rights were not transferred to them by its original manufacturer BPCF who was since wound up.
· The report of an analysis conducted by a reputable food technology laboratory in Australia on the contents of a 2-lb tin of this product, where the said tin was taken from Malaysia to Australia by one of our group members, mentions the following:-
“This product constitutes of decolorized and deodorized lard (pig fat) in semi-solid state with permitted additives giving the product color, flavor and aroma similar to that of pure ghee color, flavor and aroma.” (Original report is with the sender of this letter).
Therefore, our consumer group had to boycott the use of this product as:-
a) Our muslim members cannot use this product as it is haram by religion
b) Our Hindu and Sikh members cannot use this product for burning of ghee lamps, religious functions or for preparing sweetmeats as places of worship which forbid the use of any animal oil/animal fat.
c) Our vegetarian friends who only consume vegetarian diet cannot consume the said product.
We believe that the “QBB Ghee” sold in Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei ever since BPCF closed down, is a product which is violating the related laws on the principle of “misrepresentation of label”. Therefore we hope that your goodself will take the appropriate action to stop the sale of this product.
Thanking you.
Letter signed by Mohd Kadir bin Mohd Karim (I/C No. 601223-10-6157)
Secretary of Kumpulan Konsumer Satu Malaysia (KKSM)
Note: Copy of this letter and analysis report sent to
YAB Tan Sri Dato’ Seri Abd. Khalid bin Ibrahim, Menteri Besar Selangor DE
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
IDEOLOGY & IDEOLOGUES
Bookmark and Share
Ideology and Ideologues
By James Keye
September 03, 2010 "Dissident Voice" -- No one can go through life without believing in some general principles, even if most of us act on those principles regularly without giving them much, if any, thought. But, if you stop a moment in your daily hunt for living your life with some success and dignity; just stop a moment, lift your head up from that ‘walking into a strong wind’ position and widen out that tunnel vision to see more broadly than a specific ambition, job or encounter, then you just might begin to see what humanity is up against.
People are presented with millions of pieces of information every day, from the chemistry of your liver to the latest political outrage, from which they can only select a small percentage to recognize and overtly respond – thus, in part, the head down, tunnel vision push through life hoping for the best. Most people accept this state of affairs, stay at least a little light on their feet, even as they try to find some reasonable and reliable pattern so as not to start each day from scratch, set upon with overwhelming sensation and information.
Karl Marx made the argument that different classes in the same society can have quite different ideas and beliefs about what is real. He called this ‘ideology’ – like styles of clothing and an accent might identify someone in the mid 1800s in England as belonging to a certain class, so would their ideas and beliefs – and these would form the possibilities for their lives. Marx also assumed that such class-based ideologies were inherently untrue in their details measured against human potential and a reality larger than prescriptions of a particular society and its classes.
Ludwig von Mises dismisses this seemingly sound bit of thinking by suggesting, in what sounds to my ear like a “best of all possible worlds” sophistry, that these are beliefs adapted to reality, functionally true beliefs, and thus are not ideological in the sense that Marx means. Why or even how, he asks, could people function from a set of belief principles that are untrue. He argues that mechanical devices depend on correct theory and application and that there could not be an ideological (false) science of mechanics; and by implication that if societies function, then the principles that underlie them cannot be ideologies since they must be ‘true’ working principles.
A larger reality, I would note, can be thought of as a rocky ground that we can cushion with adapted beliefs in good times, but that delivers its full discomfort, demonstrating the narrowness and failures of those beliefs, in bad times. A whole social design can be ultimately mal-adjusted to biophysical reality – a condition that might not critically show itself for some generations.
Some people are not so disposed to the ambiguities of a general ideology. Such people construct an internal system of ideas bulwarked and buttressed against all bending and flexing – prepared to go through life like an ice-breaker ship, crushing out a path in a hostile environment – and even thinking, because they can allow themselves to see only what they wish to see, that the narrow channel created is really the whole ocean. These are the ideologues.
Ideologues are confident, certain and claim to be in complete possession of THE truth. They use the language of reality and truth just as if they possessed them. Actually humanity has been deciding between the Real (what would be functioning in the universe if people were not present) and realities that are local in a time, a place and a belief system for a very long time. Add to this difficulty what I will call ‘highly adaptive individuals’ who use existing ideas, confusions, beliefs and desires without regard to their connection to Reality, as social and political devices for their own ends.
But remember the analogy to an ice-breaker; the world of their competence is very narrow and often fleeting. One of the signs that a person is an ideologue is an unwillingness to consider anything beyond their narrow path as being part of the actual world (the rejection of consideration does not prevent the ideologue from claiming wide, forthright examination of all opinion). Such a test is useful, though not fool-proof: the ideologue can claim that a refusal to accept their reality is the true act of narrow exclusion.
If we stir together a large number of regular people with a few hard-core ideologues, many of the regular folks end up sticking to the ideologues; drawn by the crushing power of their certainty and the way that certainty appears to ease the path through life.
Religions are good examples of ideology-based systems and the role of ideologues (though once religions were local environmentally-based belief systems that organized complex highly adaptable human behavior to function ecologically in the environment). Religious people, for the most part regular folks stuck to ideological institutions, believe that their way of making observance to their image of a higher power is the correct way and that other ways range from misguided to dangerous. It is necessary for religious (regular) people to gather in sufficient number that their local individual realities are mutually supported in the face of inevitable contrary evidence; and often they require a true ideologue (or ‘highly adaptive person’ to play one) to act as the prow on the ice-breaker.
An issue of greatest concern is how to measure notions of truth, accuracy, honesty, reality, effective adaptation, environmental fit – the actions of our human world that are answerable to biophysical reality – in a social/political world in which ideologies are the standards of truth and ideologues can seem like honest brokers.
Now everything cannot be true. It has become our habit these days to assume that there is “some truth in everything.” At least it is the habit among the least ideological. But that is just foolishness. The atomic mass of chlorine is about 35.46 atomic mass units. This is not open to argument; you can’t pick an atomic mass that you like for chlorine. Why this mass and not another is more open to opinion, but that opinion needs to be informed; the theoretical foundations for atomic structure are pretty solid these days. While it is clearly, and unarguably sound, to have “true” answers for the nature of chlorine, would it not be very useful to have testable and measured answers to many questions that, today, we leave to typical ideologues?
What is believed depends on how those beliefs are arrived at. If it is our dominant social habit to believe in authority, beliefs will come from established institutions and adapt in the self-referenced way that they have for thousands of years. It was the great contribution of the Enlightenment that knowing should come from direct experience and that there had to be epistemological principles to properly use that experience; an understanding of understanding that seems to be weakening just as we need it the most.
More than ever humans are confronted with new and surprising experiences: many a day whether we realize it or not. What belief system, what ideology, would be best for a world in which two conditions, previously not a primary concern, have become essential to respond to; (1) huge amounts of rapidly changing information and (2) an immediate need for our actions to comport very closely with biophysical reality. Would you select an ideology that is confident in an existing set of answers even as new information is conflicting or would you select an ideology that doesn’t base its beliefs on unchallengeable facts, but on a method to evaluate new information and with a track record of discovering the ‘truths’ that underlie our understanding of the physical and biological worlds?
This is not a new observation. How to discover the truth of things and make an understanding of what is true into appropriate and meaningful lives is one of the oldest questions on the books. You’d think that an animal that can build the Large Hadron Collider and produce energies approaching those of the origin of the universe might spend an effective moment or two getting clear how not to destroy the world it lives in through the madness of its political and economic actions… you’d think!
What if part of a belief system is the demand that the specific content of belief be put to test? What if the ideology – the belief system – required testing and replication of basic data from which testable hypotheses are organized into theories about the general form and function of the stuff that happens in the world? Is it not possible that an ideology of process, scientific method and epistemological philosophy, would more accurately and consistently discover ways of thinking and behaving that are closer to capital ‘R’ Reality than the local adaptation of idea to form, ad hoc, in the service of the immediate and the self-interested?
This would demand a great deal of people, to learn about these things, to develop a clear understanding and reasoned use of scientific method, have a basic comprehension of statistical probability and epistemology, but what the hell! It was demanding for 4 or 5 guys to kill a mammoth; it was difficult and demanding to sail in a little tub of a wooden ship around the world; it was demanding to march across Europe in 1944 -45.
I am talking about a critical mass of humanity developing the critical understandings and using processes that have demonstrably attached our human technical reality to the physical reality. It is time that we attach our human reality to the biophysical reality – there is just no choice. Now how is that for an ideological statement?
Ideology and Ideologues
By James Keye
September 03, 2010 "Dissident Voice" -- No one can go through life without believing in some general principles, even if most of us act on those principles regularly without giving them much, if any, thought. But, if you stop a moment in your daily hunt for living your life with some success and dignity; just stop a moment, lift your head up from that ‘walking into a strong wind’ position and widen out that tunnel vision to see more broadly than a specific ambition, job or encounter, then you just might begin to see what humanity is up against.
People are presented with millions of pieces of information every day, from the chemistry of your liver to the latest political outrage, from which they can only select a small percentage to recognize and overtly respond – thus, in part, the head down, tunnel vision push through life hoping for the best. Most people accept this state of affairs, stay at least a little light on their feet, even as they try to find some reasonable and reliable pattern so as not to start each day from scratch, set upon with overwhelming sensation and information.
Karl Marx made the argument that different classes in the same society can have quite different ideas and beliefs about what is real. He called this ‘ideology’ – like styles of clothing and an accent might identify someone in the mid 1800s in England as belonging to a certain class, so would their ideas and beliefs – and these would form the possibilities for their lives. Marx also assumed that such class-based ideologies were inherently untrue in their details measured against human potential and a reality larger than prescriptions of a particular society and its classes.
Ludwig von Mises dismisses this seemingly sound bit of thinking by suggesting, in what sounds to my ear like a “best of all possible worlds” sophistry, that these are beliefs adapted to reality, functionally true beliefs, and thus are not ideological in the sense that Marx means. Why or even how, he asks, could people function from a set of belief principles that are untrue. He argues that mechanical devices depend on correct theory and application and that there could not be an ideological (false) science of mechanics; and by implication that if societies function, then the principles that underlie them cannot be ideologies since they must be ‘true’ working principles.
A larger reality, I would note, can be thought of as a rocky ground that we can cushion with adapted beliefs in good times, but that delivers its full discomfort, demonstrating the narrowness and failures of those beliefs, in bad times. A whole social design can be ultimately mal-adjusted to biophysical reality – a condition that might not critically show itself for some generations.
Some people are not so disposed to the ambiguities of a general ideology. Such people construct an internal system of ideas bulwarked and buttressed against all bending and flexing – prepared to go through life like an ice-breaker ship, crushing out a path in a hostile environment – and even thinking, because they can allow themselves to see only what they wish to see, that the narrow channel created is really the whole ocean. These are the ideologues.
Ideologues are confident, certain and claim to be in complete possession of THE truth. They use the language of reality and truth just as if they possessed them. Actually humanity has been deciding between the Real (what would be functioning in the universe if people were not present) and realities that are local in a time, a place and a belief system for a very long time. Add to this difficulty what I will call ‘highly adaptive individuals’ who use existing ideas, confusions, beliefs and desires without regard to their connection to Reality, as social and political devices for their own ends.
But remember the analogy to an ice-breaker; the world of their competence is very narrow and often fleeting. One of the signs that a person is an ideologue is an unwillingness to consider anything beyond their narrow path as being part of the actual world (the rejection of consideration does not prevent the ideologue from claiming wide, forthright examination of all opinion). Such a test is useful, though not fool-proof: the ideologue can claim that a refusal to accept their reality is the true act of narrow exclusion.
If we stir together a large number of regular people with a few hard-core ideologues, many of the regular folks end up sticking to the ideologues; drawn by the crushing power of their certainty and the way that certainty appears to ease the path through life.
Religions are good examples of ideology-based systems and the role of ideologues (though once religions were local environmentally-based belief systems that organized complex highly adaptable human behavior to function ecologically in the environment). Religious people, for the most part regular folks stuck to ideological institutions, believe that their way of making observance to their image of a higher power is the correct way and that other ways range from misguided to dangerous. It is necessary for religious (regular) people to gather in sufficient number that their local individual realities are mutually supported in the face of inevitable contrary evidence; and often they require a true ideologue (or ‘highly adaptive person’ to play one) to act as the prow on the ice-breaker.
An issue of greatest concern is how to measure notions of truth, accuracy, honesty, reality, effective adaptation, environmental fit – the actions of our human world that are answerable to biophysical reality – in a social/political world in which ideologies are the standards of truth and ideologues can seem like honest brokers.
Now everything cannot be true. It has become our habit these days to assume that there is “some truth in everything.” At least it is the habit among the least ideological. But that is just foolishness. The atomic mass of chlorine is about 35.46 atomic mass units. This is not open to argument; you can’t pick an atomic mass that you like for chlorine. Why this mass and not another is more open to opinion, but that opinion needs to be informed; the theoretical foundations for atomic structure are pretty solid these days. While it is clearly, and unarguably sound, to have “true” answers for the nature of chlorine, would it not be very useful to have testable and measured answers to many questions that, today, we leave to typical ideologues?
What is believed depends on how those beliefs are arrived at. If it is our dominant social habit to believe in authority, beliefs will come from established institutions and adapt in the self-referenced way that they have for thousands of years. It was the great contribution of the Enlightenment that knowing should come from direct experience and that there had to be epistemological principles to properly use that experience; an understanding of understanding that seems to be weakening just as we need it the most.
More than ever humans are confronted with new and surprising experiences: many a day whether we realize it or not. What belief system, what ideology, would be best for a world in which two conditions, previously not a primary concern, have become essential to respond to; (1) huge amounts of rapidly changing information and (2) an immediate need for our actions to comport very closely with biophysical reality. Would you select an ideology that is confident in an existing set of answers even as new information is conflicting or would you select an ideology that doesn’t base its beliefs on unchallengeable facts, but on a method to evaluate new information and with a track record of discovering the ‘truths’ that underlie our understanding of the physical and biological worlds?
This is not a new observation. How to discover the truth of things and make an understanding of what is true into appropriate and meaningful lives is one of the oldest questions on the books. You’d think that an animal that can build the Large Hadron Collider and produce energies approaching those of the origin of the universe might spend an effective moment or two getting clear how not to destroy the world it lives in through the madness of its political and economic actions… you’d think!
What if part of a belief system is the demand that the specific content of belief be put to test? What if the ideology – the belief system – required testing and replication of basic data from which testable hypotheses are organized into theories about the general form and function of the stuff that happens in the world? Is it not possible that an ideology of process, scientific method and epistemological philosophy, would more accurately and consistently discover ways of thinking and behaving that are closer to capital ‘R’ Reality than the local adaptation of idea to form, ad hoc, in the service of the immediate and the self-interested?
This would demand a great deal of people, to learn about these things, to develop a clear understanding and reasoned use of scientific method, have a basic comprehension of statistical probability and epistemology, but what the hell! It was demanding for 4 or 5 guys to kill a mammoth; it was difficult and demanding to sail in a little tub of a wooden ship around the world; it was demanding to march across Europe in 1944 -45.
I am talking about a critical mass of humanity developing the critical understandings and using processes that have demonstrably attached our human technical reality to the physical reality. It is time that we attach our human reality to the biophysical reality – there is just no choice. Now how is that for an ideological statement?
Saturday, September 4, 2010
from zahiruddin.net
Zaharuddin.net
Zaharuddin.net Sedarlah rezekimu tidak akan dimakan orang lain, maka hatimu tenteram. Sedarlah amalmu tidak akan dikerjakan oleh orang lain, maka sibuklah mengerjakannya. Sedarlah kematian itu datang tiba-tiba, maka bersiap-siaplah menghadapinya. Sedarlah hartamu tiada kekal, maka jgn diizin ia terikat dihati. Sedarlah tiada yg lepas... dari penglihatan Allah, maka Malulah kepadaNya sentiasa.
Zaharuddin.net Sedarlah rezekimu tidak akan dimakan orang lain, maka hatimu tenteram. Sedarlah amalmu tidak akan dikerjakan oleh orang lain, maka sibuklah mengerjakannya. Sedarlah kematian itu datang tiba-tiba, maka bersiap-siaplah menghadapinya. Sedarlah hartamu tiada kekal, maka jgn diizin ia terikat dihati. Sedarlah tiada yg lepas... dari penglihatan Allah, maka Malulah kepadaNya sentiasa.
from zaharuddin.net
Zaharuddin.net
Sahabat semua, jika individu soleh sentiasa TAKUT & SEDIH DIMARAHI, gementar diherdik, gentar dipukul, diboikot dan lain-lain atas teguran kebaikan & larangan kesalahan sekelilingnya nescaya kezaliman akan mendominasi dunia, keadilan akan berhijrah jauh & kuranglah syurga dari penghuni.
Sahabat semua, jika individu soleh sentiasa TAKUT & SEDIH DIMARAHI, gementar diherdik, gentar dipukul, diboikot dan lain-lain atas teguran kebaikan & larangan kesalahan sekelilingnya nescaya kezaliman akan mendominasi dunia, keadilan akan berhijrah jauh & kuranglah syurga dari penghuni.
Zaharuddin.net
Jangan sesekali kehadiran Syawal menambah beban HUTANGmu & jangan pula pembayarannya tertangguh. Hasil Ramadanmu mampu dilihat bermula Syawal, jika pedulimu terhadap hutang yang boleh menggugat akhiratmu diabai, ia tanda iman masih belum diisi sempurna di Ramadan, juga tanda kamu ingin merasai nikmat dunia melebihi nikmat akhiratmu. Perhatikanlah kemampuanmu.
Jangan sesekali kehadiran Syawal menambah beban HUTANGmu & jangan pula pembayarannya tertangguh. Hasil Ramadanmu mampu dilihat bermula Syawal, jika pedulimu terhadap hutang yang boleh menggugat akhiratmu diabai, ia tanda iman masih belum diisi sempurna di Ramadan, juga tanda kamu ingin merasai nikmat dunia melebihi nikmat akhiratmu. Perhatikanlah kemampuanmu.
Friday, September 3, 2010
tak perlu
Kita
Tak perlu menjadi tua
andai seharian sebok dengan fail
dan folder didokumentasikan
sebagai bukti kerja kita lakukan
Tak perlu menjadi tua
Andai yg wajib, yg sunat, yg haram
Tak nak ditentu
Hanya nak ikut kehendak tertentu
Tak perlu menjadi tua
andai yg miskin dipergunakan
dieksploitasikan untuk mendokumentasikan
amal kebajikan telah dilaksanakan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai tipu muslihat
ditentatifkan
mengabui mata yang berkuasa
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai kawan sendiri digigit jari
tuduhan palsu ke atas kawan diwar-warkan
diminit mesyuaratkan
dibiarkan tanpa diperbetulkan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai skt, pangkat, ganjaran, profesionalisme
dijadi senjata mengumpan bawahan
membuat kerja
tak perlu menjadi tua
Andai bebudak yg baik
dan yg pandai saja ditumpu
yang bodoh, yg nakal, yg undisiplined
dibiar melalak, menghilai, menjerit-jerit macam hantu
dikutuk dicaci dihina hanya di belakang pintu
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai kecemerlangan dikejarkan
adab sopan budaya bangsa tak diendahkan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai yang berdahi licin menutup mata
meng’sah’kan segala tanpa disemak dibaca
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai masih terkial-kial
yang mana emas yang mana kaca
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai hidup masih berpura
di depan memuji menyokong merangsang
mengutuk mengeji membenci di belakang
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai masih tak kenal AKU siapa
hamba siapa
siapa siapa
tak perlu menjadi tua
tapi kita perlu Pengetua
berjiwa waja bersikap terbuka
memahami dan merendah diri
seperti DR yg kita miliki
terima kasih guruku menganugerahiriku
sedikit ilmu ilham dan upayaMu
memaparkan rasa
terdendam di dada
dan kupinta
perkuatkan aku untuk
mengharung risiko kerananya.
Tak perlu menjadi tua
andai seharian sebok dengan fail
dan folder didokumentasikan
sebagai bukti kerja kita lakukan
Tak perlu menjadi tua
Andai yg wajib, yg sunat, yg haram
Tak nak ditentu
Hanya nak ikut kehendak tertentu
Tak perlu menjadi tua
andai yg miskin dipergunakan
dieksploitasikan untuk mendokumentasikan
amal kebajikan telah dilaksanakan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai tipu muslihat
ditentatifkan
mengabui mata yang berkuasa
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai kawan sendiri digigit jari
tuduhan palsu ke atas kawan diwar-warkan
diminit mesyuaratkan
dibiarkan tanpa diperbetulkan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai skt, pangkat, ganjaran, profesionalisme
dijadi senjata mengumpan bawahan
membuat kerja
tak perlu menjadi tua
Andai bebudak yg baik
dan yg pandai saja ditumpu
yang bodoh, yg nakal, yg undisiplined
dibiar melalak, menghilai, menjerit-jerit macam hantu
dikutuk dicaci dihina hanya di belakang pintu
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai kecemerlangan dikejarkan
adab sopan budaya bangsa tak diendahkan
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai yang berdahi licin menutup mata
meng’sah’kan segala tanpa disemak dibaca
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai masih terkial-kial
yang mana emas yang mana kaca
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai hidup masih berpura
di depan memuji menyokong merangsang
mengutuk mengeji membenci di belakang
tak perlu menjadi tua
andai masih tak kenal AKU siapa
hamba siapa
siapa siapa
tak perlu menjadi tua
tapi kita perlu Pengetua
berjiwa waja bersikap terbuka
memahami dan merendah diri
seperti DR yg kita miliki
terima kasih guruku menganugerahiriku
sedikit ilmu ilham dan upayaMu
memaparkan rasa
terdendam di dada
dan kupinta
perkuatkan aku untuk
mengharung risiko kerananya.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)