Comments on: Improve our Understanding on Seditious acts http://dayakbaru.com/weblog08/2008/07/23/improve-our-understanding-on-seditious-acts/ Politics, Education, Economic, Tenchnology Fri, 10 Sep 2010 06:00:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Henry Anak Joseph http://dayakbaru.com/weblog08/2008/07/23/improve-our-understanding-on-seditious-acts/comment-page-1/#comment-406 Henry Anak Joseph Mon, 25 Aug 2008 01:44:10 +0000 http://dayakbaru.com/weblog08/?p=141#comment-406 This of piece writing reminds me of the year 1970. I was in primary three in that year studying in a rural school with only four classrooms. The intake of pupils was done alternately. Thus in 1970 in that school we had primary one, primary three and primary five classes. The primary six class of 1969 had completed its common entrance examination and some of the pupils in that batch who passed the examination were then studying in form one class in a secondary school in a small town down river. At that age many of us including myself were aspiring to becoming soldiers. Somehow we never thought of honour, glory or monetary reward. All that was in our mind was to fight and defend the country from enemies. Very often we played the "soldier-communist" game with mud as our weapon. Like many other boys, I never liked to play the communist role. But luck was not always with me. Whether you played the soldier or the communist role in that game was not a choice but depended on luck. We had to cast lots. The winner had the priority to choose which side he preferred. Either one fought on the soldier's or communist's side, there was one thing that I knew that was very clear, we fought with our hearts, courages and gallantry. We fought to win. We fought with sincererity. Recently I learnt that the mark of a brave man is that he fights to win and the mark of a coward is he fights so as not too lose. I thought this was just a matter of semantic. No, it is not just semantic or pure linguistic construction. The real man, he fights to win. Kanang, Kaya and Likau are symbols of Iban true spirit and trait and they had fought to win. Not to win for themselves but to win for the country against agression and threat. Measured against that standard, our current Iban political leaders in the ruling coalition is something of an ebarrassment and a great disappointment. If for Kanang, Kaya, Likau and Awang Anak Rawang it was not glory and honour or monetary reward that had made them what they are, our Iban political leaders in the ruling coalition are just the opposite. I must somehow acknowledge that when recognition is due it ought to be given. But in the first place recognistion should not have been the hankering motivation. Yes, money is indeed very important and without it we are almost nothing. But then it is not everything. To the younger Iban males, my message is: don't bury that spirit of Kanang, Kaya and Likau. That is what distiguished the Iban and the others. This of piece writing reminds me of the year 1970. I was in primary three in that year studying in a rural school with only four classrooms. The intake of pupils was done alternately. Thus in 1970 in that school we had primary one, primary three and primary five classes. The primary six class of 1969 had completed its common entrance examination and some of the pupils in that batch who passed the examination were then studying in form one class in a secondary school in a small town down river.

At that age many of us including myself were aspiring to becoming soldiers. Somehow we never thought of honour, glory or monetary reward. All that was in our mind was to fight and defend the country from enemies. Very often we played the “soldier-communist” game with mud as our weapon. Like many other boys, I never liked to play the communist role. But luck was not always with me. Whether you played the soldier or the communist role in that game was not a choice but depended on luck. We had to cast lots. The winner had the priority to choose which side he preferred. Either one fought on the soldier’s or communist’s side, there was one thing that I knew that was very clear, we fought with our hearts, courages and gallantry. We fought to win. We fought with sincererity. Recently I learnt that the mark of a brave man is that he fights to win and the mark of a coward is he fights so as not too lose. I thought this was just a matter of semantic. No, it is not just semantic or pure linguistic construction. The real man, he fights to win. Kanang, Kaya and Likau are symbols of Iban true spirit and trait and they had fought to win. Not to win for themselves but to win for the country against agression and threat.

Measured against that standard, our current Iban political leaders in the ruling coalition is something of an ebarrassment and a great disappointment. If for Kanang, Kaya, Likau and Awang Anak Rawang it was not glory and honour or monetary reward that had made them what they are, our Iban political leaders in the ruling coalition are just the opposite.

I must somehow acknowledge that when recognition is due it ought to be given. But in the first place recognistion should not have been the hankering motivation. Yes, money is indeed very important and without it we are almost nothing. But then it is not everything.

To the younger Iban males, my message is: don’t bury that spirit of Kanang, Kaya and Likau. That is what distiguished the Iban and the others.

]]>