when silence is golden

I came across this online article in TheStar Online, dated 15 Aprill 2011. Reading it made me feel angry, frustrated, and ashamed. These feelings are so intense that i need to ventilate my emotion by writing about it hence this post.

KUANTAN: Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Adnan Yaakob said the whole of the Gebeng industrial zone may as well be closed if the public continues to protest against the setting up of a rare earth refinery.

He said this was because every industry in Gebeng, the nation's chemical and petrochemical hub, produced some form of emission.

“If the people really feel strongly about it, then we can recommend for a total closure of Gebeng, and we shall see the reaction of the 20,000 people working there and that of their families,” he said yesterday.

He said the state government was drafting a way to ensure a more effective means of disseminating information about Lynas Corp - the owner of the rare earth refinery - to the public.

Adnan said armed with proper information, the public could then choose whether they want investment that could give them benefits or the opposition who wanted to be popular.

“If we want to be paranoid like them, we can argue that they are being instigated by a Lynas rival,” said Datuk Shahaniza Shamsuddin (BN - Kuala Sentul).

She said Australia and the United States were competing for the lion's share of the rare earth futures market since supply from China, the biggest producer of rare earth minerals now, would dry up by 2015.

Quoting from a report, Shahaniza said Lynas would produce one-third of the world's supply of rare earth minerals after two years of operation in Gebeng.

Several senior officers from the Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) and Nuclear Malaysia were seen in the public gallery.

Among them were Nuclear Malaysia's waste and environmental technology division director Dr Muhamat Omar and AELB licensingdirector Hasmadi Hassan.

They also gave demonstrations on radiation reading to state assemblymen including the opposition during tea break.

When met later, Adnan said the state government planned to engage international experts in his road show on Lynas' operations.

The sitting resumes on Monday.

After reading this article, there can only be one conclusion that can be made about this sort of people - immature and unprofessional. Their mentality and way of thinking is so shallow and their way of responding to this issue (and many other issues i believe) is just so childish it makes me feel like killing myself for having leaders like this to (supposedly) move the country forward. Okay so maybe the suicide part is a bit exaggerated but seriously, i am that frustrated.

Firstly:

"We may as well close Gebeng." That's the english translation. Try imagining it being said in Bahasa Malaysia, "Kalau macam tu, kita tutup je la kawasan Gebeng tu."

So the situation is: Kalau kita takut sangat Lynas tu bukak kilang kat sini, takut radioaktif, tutup je la semua kilang yang ada kat Gebeng tu. Kata takut sangat kan? Kenapa tak suruh je kilang2 lain tu tutup je operasi dia?

So what are you trying to imply here? If we can't have one, then don't have all? How does your answer change anything in the management? Or are you even thinking at all? I find this stupid and silly answer being given time and again by those people whose knowledge and understanding is so poor that their answer serves merely as a diversion from the real issue at stake.

Yes, other various industries we can find in Gebeng (or anywhere else for that matter) do emit or produce harmful waste products. Nobody is even denying this fact. However, this should not be made as a baseline or comparison for future decisions, especially when even the current situation does not seem to paint a pretty picture. The country has outlined various rules and regulation that seem very appealing but how much is this being enforced? With all the pollution and contamination despite all the detailed protocols, is it safe to embark on yet another project for which its danger and harm is proven? Do we need more potential source of contamination and pollution when we already have many? Is it worth the risk?

If they (the leaders) are genuinely concerned about this issue, they should be asking these questions instead of jumping to an impulsive conclusion as being made by the abovementioned individuals. Oh well, perhaps it requires a higher degree of intelligence and wisdom to be able to direct one's thinking correctly, something which they probably do not possess as yet.

Secondly:

"If the people really feel strongly about it, then we can recommend for a total closure of Gebeng, and we shall see the reaction of the 20,000 people working there and that of their families,” he said yesterday.

This is another strategy that I find very unfair and cannot be used as a tool to make a decision especially one involving the lives of millions. People like to use sentiments that involve families. The like to provoke the people's emotion, which will then affect their judgment and future decision. When making important decisions, the mind should be clear and objective. Unfortunately, humans being humans, the clarity of mind is easily clouded by strong sense of emotion. When strong emotion comes into play, the decision being made is no longer objective.

Let us compare this to an analogy. Once upon a time, there was a very poor family who barely had anything to eat. The father and mother had poor educational and socioeconomic background and they never seemed to be able to secure a decent and stable job. With 7 mouths to feed, they would starve themselves, giving their portion of food to their children. One day, a man came with a sack filled with small packages of what seemed like white powders. The father was offered a job to deliver the sack to an anonymous person and for that he will be given a hefty amount of cash. One thing led to another and he is now one of the most successful drug pushers in the country.

We know drug abuse is harmful and drug trafficking is a serious offense that carries a death penalty. But at the same time, don't you see how the family has to struggle? Don't you feel sorry for the 7 children who do not have enough to eat? If the father does not sell drugs, how are they going to live? Tak kesian ke?

So, how would you decide? Would you decide based on the clear fact that drug trafficking is wrong as it causes harm, or would you instead consider the poverty that the family has to go through?

Being clear and objective, one would surely decide that drug trafficking is wrong and must be punished regardless of the circumstances at hand. If we start to become emotional, the drug business will turn into a legal industry because it is an "investment that could give them benefits". Oh, and not to mention the hundreds and thousands of job opportunities that it is able to provide. Perhaps the drug empire can even become one of the main stakeholders in the Malaysian share market.

Is this the right way to go?

Frankly, I am sick of seeing how the gov. makes decision based on how much $$ they can benefit from the decision that they are making. It is sickening how materialistic the gov. has become and it is damn sickening to see how much the worries of the people are being ignored, what more being responded to by people who, by right, should have their voice taken away by God because of the insurmountable stupidity that they demonstrate. In this case, silence is surely golden.