A gathering of the National Organisation of Uncouth Morons

David Martin
December 02, 2011

DEC 2 — With the 13th General Elections a day closer with each sunrise, Malaysians are served with a nauseating fare of daily news by major electronic and print media agencies.

It seems that these days, Malaysian lives revolve around that annual gathering of rabid humans in Putra World Trade Centre whose antics would put even simians to shame.

It’s a place where foul language is cheered upon. A place where religious bashing is commonplace. A place where pots and kettles gather to call others black.

It’s a place where one race reigns supreme, not unlike Hitler’s mantra. A place where seeds of hatred are sown, nurtured and watered. A place that reeks of corruption and hypocrisy.

A place where a backdoor minister is angry over dubious goings-on at her hubby’s business venture. A place where warlords of all sorts and sizes gather hoping to find perhaps a scrap in the form of electoral candidacy or senatorships or even cow-rearing projects! Talk about milking moo-lah till the cows come home ...

It’s a place where the gathered are led by a deputy prime minister who is a Malaysian last. A place where a deputy minister accuses a political party of being agents of Christianisation.

A place where the president-cum-PM is a two-faced chameleon in human guise. A PM who espouses a global movement of moderates yet remains silent in suppressing rabid extremism amongst his party comrades.

It is also a place where the average Malaysian see the normally loud, obnoxious, opiniated leaders of the minor parties in the coalition sitting impassively, almost disinterested at the charged up proceedings.

It’s interesting to note the “Mr Nice Guy” and “Mr Cheated on My Wife and Got Caught With Pants Off” presidents of two components parties keeping their zip (not pants) shut despite the obvious racial and religious bigotry on show. If they should ever contemplate an alternative career, I’m sure co-authoring “An Idiot’s Guide to Being A Yes Man” would set them up for life.

Umno is not at a political crossroads. It’s facing execution and with it annihilation in the next GE. What the leaders are trying to do lately is akin to trying to gain a last-second reprieve from the powers-to-be for them to live, to fight another day.

I happened to catch the animated movie “A Bug’s Life” recently. For the uninitiated, it revolves around an ant named Flik who tries hard to fight off a bunch of grasshoppers.

Now these grasshoppers, they’re bullies. They take what they want from the ants without regard, not unlike a government that steals from its people to line its own pocket.

Now, as with most movies, it had a happy ending. Flik makes the colony realise that despite their smaller size, they have the numbers. Needless to say, the grasshoppers get their comeuppance with their leader getting a good blast up the backside.

The people, citizens of Malaysia, must realise that the power is in their hands. You and me, we decide who leads the country and in which direction it is to be led towards.

The time for reckoning is close at hand. The time has come for Malaysians to say enough is enough. It is time to show them political simians that we are the arbiters of our nation’s destiny.

Until then, I’m just going to ignore the gathering of the deluded cult comforted in the knowledge that the end is near.

Taken with a liberal dose of cynicism, it does make for a good laugh or two on a rainy, gloomy day, the antics of these idiots ...

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/a-gathering-of-the-national-organisation-of-uncouth-morons-david-martin/

BN, withdraw Assembly Bill if you respect rakyat

MCCBCHST 7:48PM Dec 2, 2011

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) is against the new proposed Bill as it is restrictive, repressive and against freedom of assembly and against freedom of religion, two sacred fundamental rights guaranteed by the federal constitution.

The proposed Bill clearly gives the police and the home minister more powers and is aimed at stifling democratic space.

MCCBCHST is particularly concerned that the new Bill now specifies places where public assembly cannot be held and they include all places of worship, hospitals, train stations, public transport terminals, kindergartens, schools and many others. This proposed provision in the Bill goes against the letter and spirit of Article 11 of the federal constitution which guarantees freedom of religion.

MCCBCHST is also against the following provision in the Peaceful Assemblv Bill 2011, whose title appears to mislead people into not knowing the true nature of amendments:

• The bill appears to ban all demonstration including peaceful processions, unless approved by the police

• Notification period of 10 days to police is too long. lt does not recognise the right to spontaneous assembly when an important and urgent issue arise.

• The removal of the requirement to obtain police permit is illusory as the assembly cannot proceed if Police object. On notification of the proposed assembly, the police are to reply within 10 days listing conditions including whether could proceed. Thus the assemblv is still dependant on police approval

• lf the police refuse permission, then Bill provides for appeal to Home Minister. This is not acceptable. The appeal should be to the court.

• Processions and peaceful assemblies should be distinguished from street protests. The Bill must reflect this.

• The police have been too much power to impose restrictions and set up conditions to hold gathering including duration of event, participant's conduct and cleaning up costs. The Bill also gives the final say to refuse gathering on ground of cultural or religious sensitivity.

While governments all over the world are opening up democratic space, we appear to be back tracking. Even, Burma which has the military junta governing the country, has now passed a "protest bill" which allows citizens to protest peacefully.

The Burma Bill only requires demonstrators to inform authorities five days in advance and advises them to avoid government buildings, hospitals and embassies (The Sun, Nov 25). Our bill is a far cry from this Burma Bill.

We urge the government to listen to the many objections legitimately voiced and earnestly hope that the Bill would not be rushed through our Dewan Negara.

Finally, the MCCBCHST calls on all leaders of all faiths to dedicate every Friday, from December 2 to pray in their respective places of worship that the leaders of our nation have it in their hearts and minds to find the understanding, truth, respect, compassion and most of all, the wisdom, to withdraw the Peaceful Assembly Bill 2011 and engage all stakeholders.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/183054

PSC must adopt all Bersih’s demands

Bersih 2.0 3:32PM Dec 2, 2011

Bersih 2.0 welcomes certain reforms adopted by the interim report of the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Electoral Reform. However, based on news report, out of Bersih 2.0’s 8 demands, only one is fully adopted while two others are partially adopted but five other demands have yet to be included. The one demand fully adopted is the implementation of indelible ink.

A demand that is partially addressed is the cleaning up of the Electoral Rolls, whereby a thorough audit of the electoral rolls is proposed but without a long-term mechanism. While the removal of RM10 fee for objection of each new voter is adopted, other proposals by Bersih 2.0 are yet to be addressed. These other proposals are:

a. Automatic voter registration, without which 3.7 million eligible citizens will be disenfranchised.

b. A monthly revision of the supplementary electoral roll instead of the current duration of 3 months to ensure timely inclusion of new voters (with or without automatic voter registration).

c. Supplementary electoral roll should be displayed both online and on location in enable easy access for voters. While the PSC interim report recommends for the display time to be extended from 7 days to 14 days, Bersih 2.0 recommends that display time should be a minimum period of 30 days.

d. Certified principal and supplementary rolls must be open for challenge in court and subject to a transparent process of objection and claim.

e. Setting up of an independent auditing committee to maintain and enhance integrity and accuracy of electoral rolls, rather than leaving the regular power of cleaning up at the end of the Election Commission (EC)

f. Reducing the cost of purchasing electoral rolls to enhance public scrutiny.

The other demand partially adopted is reform of absentee voting. We welcome the extension of such right to all Malaysians living overseas and East Malaysians living in Peninsula Malaysia and vice versa. In relation to absentee voting, we would like the PSC final report to make these specific recommendations:

a. In principle, the current practice of separate ordinary voter and permanent postal voters in the electoral rolls, which makes manipulation and intimidation easy, must end. All voters should be on one roll with the right to apply for absentee voting. Hence, the size of absentee voters will depend on application.

b. The right to absentee voting should encompass all civilian voters who are at least 250 km away from their constituencies on polling day. It is unfair if, for instance, Sarawakians are expected to travel from Miri back to Kuching to vote.

c. Military and police voters should be allowed to register for their home constituencies rather than where they serve, as in the case of overseas voters. Forcing the service voters to vote in constituencies where they serve but have no permanent interests is unfair to both themselves and the locals. For instance, in the last Sarawak state elections, more than 18,000 or 2% strong of the electorate were postal voters. Majority of them were non-Sarawakian soldiers and police, who could be king-makers in marginal constituencies.

d. Postal voting must be abolished for all except overseas voters beyond the reach of our foreign missions. This is to terminate the flawed practice of allowing postal voters to bring home their ballots and return them some time later.

e. Distance voting centres must therefore be set up in all our foreign missions, major towns in every West Malaysian state, every division in Sarawak and every residency in Sabah.

f. We support the proposals of allowing military and police voters to vote in advance but the polling centres for them must be out of their barracks and police stations, and the voting process must be under full scrutiny of party agents.

g. To make absentee voting possible, the campaign period should be extended to a minimum of 21 days or more to ensure adequate time for voters to apply for absentee voting and subsequent logistic preparation.

We note that the PSC has also taken on board other recommendations made by Bersih 2.0 in our submission to the PSC on 12 November 2011 and in the past. These include:

1. Election Commission to be made independent and empowered to enforce election laws

2. Forming a Royal Commission of Inquiry to probe into allegations of citizenships being given out in exchange for votes at Sabah

3. Rearranging of desks in polling centres to enable better scrutiny

However, the PSC interim report has yet to respond to five other immediate demands of Bersih 2.0 which are:

1. Setting a minimum campaign period of 21 days

2. Free and Fair Access of Media:

a. Free airtime on state media

b. Televised debate between candidates for Prime Minister and key party leaders

c. Provision for right of reply

3. Strengthening Public Institutions

a. Regulate the conduct of the governments in general or by-elections to ensure impartiality and neutrality, including establishing a Code of Conduct

b. Adopt the practice of an impartial caretaker government

4. Stop Corruption

a. The EC should use its enforcement unit to actively deter corrupt practices and lodge police reports when allegations emerge

b. Vigilant monitoring mechanism for pre- and during elections should be established to detect and prevent corruption including a reporting system to allow for public to report evidences of vote buying

5. Stopping Dirty Politics

a. A Code of Conduct should be established to regulate behaviour of parties and candidates such as the Model Code of Conduct for the Guidance of Political Parties and Candidates used by the Election Commission of India.



We note that there has been no recommendation made to the issues plaguing the process of constituency re-delineation despite strong representations made by Bersih 2.0 and other citizens. Reforming the current manner of the drawing of boundaries is equally of grave importance in ensuring that each vote is accorded its due value.

Bersih 2.0 is also gravely concerned that the recommendation to remove serial number on ballot papers may create possibility of ballot stuffing. It would be wiser to give ballot papers to voter at random instead of following the serial numbers. This can be done by tearing a few ballot papers at once and letting the voter pick his or her own ballot paper. We call for this recommendation to be withdrawn.

Bersih 2.0 emphasises that the EC and any other relevant government agencies must implement the Bersih 2.0 8 demands and the recommendations made by the PSC without further delay while the PSC prepares its final report. The aspiration to improve democratic processes and to guarantee the basic right to free and fair elections of every Malaysian must be present in the national electoral management body and any other enforcement agencies with a role to play in the electoral process. We hope to hear of no more excuses from the EC, but more action taken towards improving the electoral system.

Bersih 2.0 also calls on the EC and other stakeholders to publish a monthly progress report on the implementation of the PSC recommendations and recommendations made by Bersih 2.0 and other groups.

Finally, Bersih 2.0 reminds the PSC, the EC and the Government that the 8 demands of Bersih 2.0 is the bare minimum to ensure that the 13th General Elections will be reasonably clean and fair. The public will not tolerate any attempts to use the PSC to divert pressure on electoral reform.

Salam Bersih 2.0!


Issued by the steering committee of the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih 2.0) comprising:

Ambiga Sreenevasan (Chairperson), Andrew Khoo, Arul Prakkash, Arumugam K., Farouk Musa, Liau Kok Fah, Maria Chin Abdullah, Richard Y W Yeoh, Subramaniam Pillay, Toh Kin Woon, Wong Chin Huat, Yeo Yang Poh and Zaid Kamaruddin.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/183015

Bersih vs Himpun: Double standards

Scott Thong 4:54PM Oct 24, 2011

PM Najib Razak is saying that the Bersih 2.0 rally should have been held - all nice and orderly like - in a stadium instead of invading the streets of KL. Just like how the wonderful and cooperative Himpun rally was held in Stadium Shah Alam last Saturday.

Let's recap why Bersih 2.0 was not held in a stadium.

When PM Najib was forced to accept the breadth and depth of public support for Bersih 2.0, he moved quickly to try and wrest control of the situation. Bersih 2.0 was verbally legitimised and even promised the use of a stadium for their rally. They decided on the historic and symbolic Stadium Merdeka which has capacity for 30,000 people.

Abruptly, their request to use the stadium was turned down and Bersih 2.0 was de-legitimised again - despite PM Najib's overtures and promises - with the excuse that the expected 300,000 attendees would be way over Stadium Merdeka's capacity. That would be ten times too many people for the stadium to hold.

Way to troll the entire population of Malaysia! You can almost imagine our IGP's face scrunched up in a a wry smile, going "Problem?"

Outraged at this about-turn, the rally went ahead anyway, bringing its message of clean and fair elections to streets (and worldwide via sympathetic rallies). After everything, Bersih 2.0 claims 50,000 attendees showed up. Meanwhile, the media estimates between 10,000 to 15,000 people - well within the capacity of Stadium Merdeka. And the police mockingly put the number at a pathetic 6,000.

Wherefore then the justification for denying Bersih 2.0 the use of Stadium Mereka? Can a measly 6,000 people not safely gather and chant their slogans as the tear-gassing, chemical-spraying police in full riot gear close in on the stadium?

Now let's look at Himpun.

The full title of the rally itself clues us in to the hoped-for turnout - 'Himpunan Sejuta Umat', one million people.

Yet Himpun was cleared to use Stadium Shah Alam - in record time nonetheless - even though the venue can only accommodate between 70,000 to 100,000 with some squeezing.

Similar to Bersih 2.0's original planned turnout-to-stadium-capacity ratio, Himpun would have had ten times too many people for the stadium to hold. But Himpun's planned excess of 900,000 people is a completely different paradigm from Bersih 2.0's mere excess of 280,000!

How can PM Najib and the authorities justify and handwave away the blatant double standards shown here? The hypocrisy is insulting enough, but expecting us to swallow it is doubly insulting!

(Don't get me started on the narrow, factional purpose of the Himpun rally - protesting 'apostates from Islam', which carries worrying echoes of the official plus mob persecution of Christian Copts in Egypt which is often triggered by rumours of converts leaving Islam.)

And just for the record, only a paltry 4,000 attendees actually showed up for Himpun. Can we take that as a resounding Malaysian TAK NAK!!! to religiously divisive politics?

So in this Bizarro World, fringe gatherings with disruptive aims are to be commended and legitimised, while broadly-appealing rallies with noble goals are actually lawbreaking riots bordering on rebellion and civil war.

Finally, I'm going to risk making readers fed up with US/Malaysia political comparisons - but US politics offers us key lessons about what might be up with our local politics.

For a few weeks now, Occupy Wall Street and its related protests have been touting their narrow, factional demands which basically amounts to ‘end capitalism for fairness’ but which as a practical matter translates to ‘people who work hard all day should give free stuff to slackers like us’ - complete with plenty of vulgarity, violence, crassness, lawbreaking, hundreds of arrests, and even the occasional defecating on police cars.

However, the media has been coddling the protests with carefully edited coverage, focusing only on the few individuals who seem the least abnormal, ridiculous and unreasonable. The ABC, CBS and NBC networks gave them 33 full stories or interview segments in just the first 11 days of October 2011.

Meanwhile, the massive nationwide Tea Party protests against wasteful government spending - comprising hundreds of rallies, each with thousands of very normal, job-holding attendees - were given only 13 total stories by ABC, CBS and NBC in all of 2009.

Even then, they are usually depicted as hateful, potentially violent and radically extreme - despite the total lack of observational evidence and about zero total arrests. They even pick up their own trash, instead of pooping on the street!

So in this Bizarro World, fringe gatherings with disruptive aims are to be commended and legitimised, while broadly-appealing rallies with noble goals are actually lawbreaking riots bordering on rebellion and civil war.

Wait, didn't I just use that whole paragraph earlier?

You see, it all depends on who is favoured by certain political parties and their crony mainstream media. And who they oppose as a threat to their precious status quo of power and control.

Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/179535

Himpun and the politics of religious polarisation

Written by Maclean Patrick, Malaysia Chronicle

The silence of the Najib establishment in the face of the Himpunan Sejuta Umat (Himpun), or Gathering of a Million Faithful, organised by various right-wing groups such as Perkasa with the backing of both Umno and PAS Youth could raise religious tensions.

Coming hot on the heels of a much-criticised decision by the Selangor Sultan over the alleged proselytization of Muslims by Christians at the Damansara Utama Methodist Church, the rally will do little to abate the anger seething amongst Christians although they may keep their feelings under control.

Politicians behind the scene

Many political watchers have accused Prime Minister Najib Razak and his Umno party of hatching the plot to rally Muslmis in Selangor behind them ahead of general elections widely expected early next year. It is aimed to wrest Selangor from the Pakatan Rakyat state government and nothing much to do with religion.

It is also telling of Najib's style of governance and the questionable sincerity of his 1Malaysia plans to unify the races. His is a government that says “1Malaysia” on one hand yet, given the chance would allow the politics of religious polarisation.

Sadder still is that Muslims in Malaysia are led into a state of fear that the “sovereignty of Islam” would be challenged and could be removed. This in itself speaks volumes about the results and continual push by the BN to keep the Muslims in this country tucked away under the shell of ignorance and fear.

There is no other country in the world that has federally constituted legislation that protects its Muslims majority. Only in Malaysia, by law, a Malay is deemed a Muslim by birth and thus accorded Bumiputera or special rights and economic privileges. Parallel to this, the courts make it almost impossible for a Muslim to convert or to change their religion. By law and legislation, the Muslim is afforded protection that is non-existent for the practitioners of other religions.

So, why the need to rally against the Christians? Muslims are already so protected by law and legslation. And why must it be only Christians? Do not other faiths have in place a system to convert new believers into their fold? And can alleged proselytising really undermine the “sovereignty of Islam” in Malaysia as emoted by the organisers of Himpun?

Festering insecurity for evil reasons

The answers are actually already known by most Muslims themselves because racial and religious politicking are nothing new in Malaysia. Helped by Umno's right-wing NGOs and mainstream media like the Utusan newspaper, the idea is to constantly remind Malays that Christians are the enemy of their faith.

Divide and rule remains the Umno order of the day despite Najib's cosmetic efforts to show that all is hunky-dory with Malaysians of all colours and creed under his 1Malaysia, which sadly by now is clearly a bogus platform.

Perhaps they don't realize it, but it also seems rather sad that Himpun and Utusan are ready to underate the faith of Muslims in Malaysia. Does Himpun and Utusan truly think that Muslims are easily turned off from their faith?

This is hard to fathom when you take into consideration that the level of Islamic study incorporated into the education system in Malaysia. The average Malay child is exposed to the Islamic teachings from day one of education until they graduate from a local higher learning institution. Plus, being the majority religious group in Malaysia; peer pressure alone will keep the sheep within the fold.

Is Himpun also saying that all these past efforts to educate and enlighten the Muslim majority have been failing? That all governmental funded mechanisms to help and assist the Muslims in Malaysia can be so easily undermined by Christian organisations that live on personal donations and well-wishers?

The real questions remain untouched

Truth be told, the presence of Christianity has been around since the Portugese landed in Melaka in 1511. So why the sudden rush to demonise Christians in this day and age?

Moderate Malaysians from all religions should not be fooled by such efforts like Himpun which seek to pit Muslims against Christians. There is nothing to win and yet so much to lose.

If Himpun is thinking of galvanising the Muslims in this country, then should not Himpun work towards ratifying the social ills still prevalent in Malaysia's Muslim society? What long-lasting effect or remedy can a short-lived noisy rally bring?

Can a million Muslims rallying in Stadium Shah Alam be galvanised to help the growing number of poor, marginalised, uneducated and the widows or single mothers in Malaysia?

Can a million Muslim turn to each other, and while protecting the “sovereignty of Islam” also show the “magnanimous nature of Islam”?

Or is Malaysia destined to be forever divided along religious lines - unable to find peace and harmony? It is sad to contemplate these issues, especially when as Malaysians, we are called on to give our “Kepercayaan kepada Tuhan” or Faith in God.

Source: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=21345:himpun-and-the-politics-of-religious-polarisation&Itemid=2

Race quotas, politics led to falling UM standards, says World Bank study

By Leslie Lau
Executive Editor

October 17, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 17 — A World Bank publication has found that standards at Universiti Malaya have fallen and the institution has been kept at a disadvantage because of race-based admission quotas and political interference in university management.

In contrast, Singapore’s decision to prioritise research, keeping English as the medium of instruction and a merit-based admissions policy have all contributed to the success of the National University of Singapore’s success, according to “The Road to Academic Excellence,” which studies what contributes to a world-class research university.

The study also noted that Malaysian secondary school students are not well prepared for tertiary education.

It points out that the Malaysian education system promotes rote learning, conformity and uniformity rather than fresh and creative thinking.

The study is led by two scholars — Philip Altbach and Jamil Salmi — while various chapters see contributions from various academics.

Salmi, a Moroccan education economist attached to the World Bank, also notes that “disturbing political developments, from the burning of churches to the whipping of a woman for drinking beer in public,” also cast a shadow on Malaysia’s “image as an open and tolerant society.”

The comparisons between UM and NUS is contained in a chapter entitled “The National University of Singapore and the University of Malaya: Common Roots and Different Paths.”

The chapter is authored by Hena Mukherjee, a former Universiti Malaya department head with a doctorate in education from Harvard University, and Poh Kam Wong, an NUS Business School professor.

According to the study, “at an early stage, the Singapore government realised the universities’ role in sustaining economic growth.

“In contrast, after 1970, UM’s institutional goals reflected the New Economic Policy, an affirmative action plan for ethnic Malays and indigenous groups, put in place in the wake of disastrous 1969 ethnic riots that took the lives of hundreds of people on both sides of the racial divide.,” the study found.

The authors said that apart from the student quota system, the NEP translated into more scholarships to Bumiputeras, special programmes to facilitate their entry into higher education institutions, and the use of the Malay language in place of English in the entire education system by 1983.

“In UM and in government, the policy impact spiralled upward so that Bumiputera staff members, over time, secured almost all senior management, administrative, and academic positions.

“As NUS kept pace with the demands of a growing economy that sought to become competitive internationally, with English continuing as the language of instruction and research, UM began to focus inward as proficiency in English declined in favour of the national language — Bahasa Malaysia — and the New Economic Policy’s social goals took precedence.”

The study noted however that there has been widespread recognition that the implementation of affirmative action policies in Malaysia has hurt the higher education system, sapping Malaysia’s economic competitiveness and driving some (mainly Chinese and Indians) to more meritocratic countries, such as Singapore.

In the broader study, the lead authors found that research was an important element in the making of a world-class university, as well as top-grade talent.

“We’re both convinced that serious research universities are important in almost all societies,” Altbach, who is the director of the Center for International Higher Education at Boston College, told the New York Times last week in an interview.

Said Altbach: “Independence, luck, persistence, some kind of strategic vision, adequate resources — usually, but not always, public resources — good governance structures, good leadership, the ability to attract good students and so on. But we have found that the quality of the faculty is really crucial.”

Salmi, who co-ordinates the World Bank’s activities related to higher education, told the same newspaper of their new 390-page study, which will be released later this month, that their advice is like that supposedly given for a rabbit stew recipe: “First, catch your rabbit.” Only in this case the advice would be: “First, catch your faculty.”

“The difference between a good university and great university comes down to talent.”

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/race-quotas-politics-led-to-falling-um-standards-says-world-bank-study/

史蒂夫·乔布斯走了 Steve Jobs has gone

To the Apple Board of Directors and the Apple Community:

I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.

I hereby resign as CEO of Apple. I would like to serve, if the Board sees fit, as Chairman of the Board, director and Apple employee.

As far as my successor goes, I strongly recommend that we execute our succession plan and name Tim Cook as CEO of Apple.

I believe Apple’s brightest and most innovative days are ahead of it. And I look forward to watching and contributing to its success in a new role.

I have made some of the best friends of my life at Apple, and I thank you all for the many years of being able to work alongside you.

致蘋果董事會及全體員工：

我總是說，如果有那麼一天，當我無法再盡到身為蘋果執行長，應有的職責與期待時，我會是第一個讓各位知道的人。何其不幸，這天已到來。

於此，我辭去蘋果執行長的職務。如果董事會覺得合適，我願意擔任董事會主席、董事以及一個蘋果的員工。

有關於我的繼承人問題，我強烈建議讓我們照既定的繼承計畫走，由堤姆．寇克（Tim Cock）來繼任蘋果的執行長。

我深信蘋果最光明、最有創新的日子還在前頭。我期盼能扮演個新的角色，來為此貢獻一己之力，並見到它的成功。

我在蘋果結交到一些此生裡最要好的朋友。我要謝謝你們，讓我在這些年裡，能肩並肩地與你們一起工作。

史蒂夫

蘋果執行長史蒂夫．賈伯斯（Steve Jobs）在2011年8月24日，向蘋果遞交辭呈。據悉，董事會已經確定 Tim Cook 的任命案和賈伯斯轉任董事會主席一職。為避免過大震盪，蘋果已在消息公佈前，股票暫停盤後交易。簡短的公開信中，賈伯斯並未詳明辭職原由，僅祝福蘋果未來日子將會更光明、創新，在新的領導團隊的帶領下更加成功卓越。蘋果則是在旋即的聲明稿中感謝賈柏斯在位期間的領導才能。

史提夫·保羅·賈伯斯（Steve Paul Jobs) 生於 1955年2月24日，是蘋果公司剛卸任的首席執行官及創辦人之一，同時也是前Pixar動畫公司的董事長及執行長（Pixar已在2006年被迪士尼收購）。賈伯斯還是迪士尼公司的董事會成員和最大個人股東。

賈伯斯被認為是電腦業界與娛樂業界的標誌性人物，同時人們也把他視作麥金塔電腦、iPod、iTunes商店、iPhone等知名數位產品的締造者。2007年，史提夫·賈伯斯被《財富》雜誌評為了年度最強有力的商人。

賈伯斯小時候被人收養，在加州的Homestead High School畢業後就讀俄勒岡州波特蘭里德學院，只唸一學期就因為家庭的經濟原因而休學，但他仍在學校裡旁聽書法課等課程，也因為對書法美術的素養使他對電腦軟體字形美學處理特別重視，讓蘋果電腦日後吸引了許多美術設計工作者來使用。

1974年曾在雅達利任技術員，以賺的錢往印度靈修。1976年，二十一歲的賈伯斯與二十六歲的斯蒂夫·沃茲尼亞克在自家的車房裡成立了蘋果公司。他們製造了世界上首台個人電腦，並稱為Apple I，其售價是$666.66，然而依蘋果電腦前執行長約翰.史考力的看法，賈伯斯並不算有科技研發能力。

1983年，蘋果公司的業務越做越大，賈伯斯便開始尋找一名出色的執行長管理公司。他找上了百事可樂公司的約翰·史考力，對他說：「你是想賣一輩子糖水呢，還是改變整個世界？」史考力隨後欣然前往蘋果公司，出任CEO。

1984年，首台麥金塔電腦推出，蘋果公司打出電視廣告《1984》，廣告模仿佐治·奧維爾的著作《一九八四》，引起很大反響。

1985年，電腦業界普遍蕭條，史考力認為賈伯斯已成為公司問題的來源，史考利在其自傳"蘋果戰爭"中指出賈伯斯並不算有技術研發的能力，並把賈伯斯趕出了蘋果公司。

離開蘋果後，賈伯斯創立了NeXT電腦公司，並發展出NeXT電腦及NeXTSTEP作業系統。就像Lisa一樣，NeXT擁有最先進的技術，但是不能成為最流行的電腦。

1996年陷入財政困難的蘋果電腦以四億美元收購了NeXT電腦公司，同時賈伯斯也回到了蘋果電腦。

1997年，當Gil Amelio離開公司後，他重掌蘋果電腦的大權。在同年推出iMac，創新的外殼彩色透明設計在美國和日本大賣，使蘋果電腦度過財政危機。

並在之後推出深受大眾歡迎的iBook，Mac mini，Mac OS X作業系統，iPod，Apple TV和iTunes音樂商店等一系列廣受市場好評的產品，賈伯斯並親自為iPod的網路銷售音樂版權和反對的歌手洽談，使iPod能合法下載許多音樂。

對於賈伯斯的個人生活，由於賈伯斯個人十分重視私隱，以致至今世人依舊沒有太多相關資料可考，只知道他是佛教徒，在2004年，賈伯斯曾接受外科手術移除身上的胰臟腫瘤。

2007年6月29日，蘋果公司推出自有設計的iPhone行動電話，使用iOS系統核心，使公司的股票大幅上揚。

在 2008年6月11日的WWDC中，蘋果公司發佈新一代iPhone—iPhone 3G，首度支援 3G功能。

2009年6月19日，蘋果公司發表第三代產品iPhone 3Gs。

近年，賈伯斯出席公開場合時顯得異常消廋，大眾擔心他癌症復發而令公司的股價下跌之際，他也沒有對自己的健康發言，只在2008年九月的Let's Rock發佈會中，以一句字幕「那些關於我死亡的報導內容，是太過誇張了」（Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated）帶過。

2009年1月18日，賈伯斯給每位員工發了一封信，聲稱自己的健康狀況遠比想像的糟糕，需要暫時離開公司治療，並相約「夏天再見」。訊息一出，蘋果的股價當天便下跌將近10%。

2009年4月，賈伯斯在田納西州孟菲斯的衛理公會大學醫院移植研究所（Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute）接受了肝臟移植，恢復狀況良好。

2010年6月8日發布第四代產品iPhone 4，每次皆引起市場上極大的轟動和銷售熱潮。除iPhone系列之外，2010年1月27日，賈伯斯再次為蘋果迷帶來驚喜，於發表會上正式公布了首款使用iOS系統的iPad平板電腦，更為平板電腦市場帶來全新局面。

但在2011年1月17日 ，蘋果公司的每位員工再次收到其請假郵件，仍然是由於健康問題，這次並沒有註明其回歸蘋果的日期。這是七年來，他第三度因健康因素向公司請假。2011年8月24日 ，他終於累了，甘心放下了手中的棒子，將它交給別人承傳。然而，他帶領下的蘋果所創造的銷售奇蹟，卻已在歷史上留下不朽的傳奇，在來日供後人傳說。

賈伯斯的生涯極大地影響了矽谷風險創業的傳奇，他將美學至上的設計理念在全世界推廣開來。他對簡約及便利設計的推崇為他贏得了許多忠實追隨者。

賈伯斯與沃茲尼亞克共同使個人電腦在1970年代末至1980年代初流行開來，他也是第一個看到滑鼠的商業潛力的人。賈伯斯在1985年蘋果高層權力鬥爭中離開蘋果並成立了NeXT公司，瞄準專業市場。1997年，蘋果收購NeXT，賈伯斯回到蘋果接任首席執行官。蘋果在歷盡滄桑後又回鍋的賈伯斯帶領下，脫胎換骨成為電腦產業界的極為成功領導者。

這段人生經驗由一個生下來就被送給人領養，在三十歲就登上人生顛峰，竟被自己創立的公司開除，還能回去再創事業奇蹟，卻又被診斷出罹患絕症，仍為公司利益而堅守崗位至最後一刻，這麼個人生起伏變幻莫測的人的口中，所講出的人生哲理，絕非那一帆風順的對手比爾蓋茲所能體會說出的。底下是段值得一聽的經典演說，值得回味深思…

蘋果前執行長賈伯斯 (Steve Jobs)，在2005年
對史丹佛應屆畢業生所發表的演講

今天，很榮幸來到各位從世界上最好的學校之一畢業的畢業典禮上。我從來沒從大學畢業過，說實話，這是我離大學畢業最近的一刻。

今天，我只說三個故事，不談大道理，三個故事就好。

第一個故事，是關於人生中的點點滴滴如何串連在一起。

我在里德學院（Reed College）待了六個月就辦休學了。 到我退學前，一共休學了十八個月。那麼，我為什麼休學？（聽眾笑）這得從我出生前講起。

我的親生母親當時是個研究生，年輕未婚媽媽，她決定讓別人收養我。她強烈覺得應該讓有大學畢業的人收養我，所以我出生時，她就準備讓我被一對律師夫婦收養。 但是這對夫妻到了最後一刻反悔了，他們想收養女孩。所以在等待收養名單上的一對夫妻，我的養父母，在一天半夜裡接到一通電話， 問他們「有一名意外出生的男孩，你們要認養他嗎？」而他們的回答是「當然要」。

後來，我的生母發現，我現在的媽媽從來沒有大學畢業， 我現在的爸爸則連高中畢業也沒有。 她拒絕在認養文件上做最後簽字。直到幾個月後，我的養父母保證將來一定會讓我上大學，她的態度才軟化。

十七年後，我上大學了。但是當時我無知地選了一所學費幾乎跟史丹佛一樣貴的大學（聽眾笑），我那工人階級的父母將所有積蓄都花在我的學費上。六個月後，我看不出唸這個書的價值何在。那時候，我不知道這輩子要幹什麼，也不知道唸大學能對我有什麼幫助，只知道我為了唸這個書，花光了我父母這輩子的所有積蓄。所以，我決定休學，相信船到橋頭自然直。

當時這個決定看來相當可怕，可是現在看來，那是我這輩子做過最好的決定之一。（聽眾笑） 當我休學之後，我再也不用上我沒興趣的必修課，把時間拿去聽那些我有興趣的課。這一點也不浪漫。

我沒有宿舍，所以我睡在友人家裡的地板上，靠著回收可樂空罐的退費五分錢買吃的。每個星期天晚上得走七哩的路，繞過大半個鎮 去印度教的 Hare Krishna 神廟吃頓好料，我喜歡 Hare Krishna 神廟的好料。就這樣追隨我的好奇與直覺，大部分我所投入過的事務， 後來看來都成了無比珍貴的經歷（And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on ）。

舉個例來說。當時里德學院有著大概是全國最好的書寫教育。校園內的每一張海報上，每個抽屜的標籤上，都是美麗的手寫字。因為我休學了，可以不照正常選課程序來，所以我跑去上書寫課。 我學了serif 與sanserif 字體，學到在不同字母組合間變更字間距，學到活字印刷偉大的地方。

書寫的美好、歷史感與藝術感是科學所無法掌握的，我覺得這很迷人。

我沒預期過學這些東西能在我生活中起些什麼實際作用，不過十年後，當我在設計第一台麥金塔時，我想起了當時所學的東西，所以把這些東西都設計進了麥金塔裡，這是第一台能印刷出漂亮東西的電腦。

如果我沒沉溺於那樣一門課裡，麥金塔可能就不會有多重字體跟等比例間距字體了。

又因為 Windows抄襲了麥金塔的使用方式（聽眾鼓掌大笑）。因此，如果當年我沒有休學，沒有去上那門書寫課，大概所有的個人電腦都不會有這些東西，印不出現在我們看到的漂亮的字來了。

當然，當我還在大學裡時，不可能把這些點點滴滴預先串連在一起，但在十年後的今天回顧，一切就顯得非常清楚。

我再說一次，你無法預先把點點滴滴串連起來；只有在未來回顧時， 你才會明白那些點點滴滴是如何串在一起的（you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards ）。

所以你得相信，眼前你經歷的種種，將來多少會連結在一起。你得信任某個東西，直覺也好， 命運也好，生命也好，或者業力。 這種作法從來沒讓我失望，我的人生因此變得完全不同。（ Jobs停下來喝水）

我的第二個故事，是有關愛與失去。

我很幸運－年輕時就發現自己愛做什麼事。我二十歲時，跟 Steve Wozniak 在我爸媽的車庫裡開始了蘋果電腦的事業。我們拚命工作，蘋果電腦在十年間從一間車庫裡的兩個小夥子擴展成了一家員工超過四千人、市價二十億美金的公司。在那事件之前一年推出了我們最棒的作品－麥金塔電腦（ Macintosh），那時我才剛邁入三十歲；然後，我被解僱了。

我怎麼會被自己創辦的公司給解僱了？（聽眾笑）

嗯，當蘋果電腦成長後，我請了一個我以為在經營公司上很有才幹的傢伙來，他在頭幾年也確實幹得不錯。可是我們對未來的願景不同，最後只好分道揚鑣，董事會站在他那邊，就這樣在我 30歲的時候，公開把我給解僱了。

我失去了整個生活的重心，我的人生就這樣被摧毀。

有幾個月，我不知道要做些什麼。我覺得我令企業界的前輩們失望－我把他們交給我的接力棒弄丟了。我見了創辦 HP的 David Packard跟創辦Intel的 Bob Noyce，跟他們說很抱歉我把事情給搞砸了。我成了公眾眼中失敗的示範，我甚至想要離開矽谷。

但是漸漸的，我發現，我還是喜愛那些我做過的事情，在蘋果電腦中經歷的那些事絲毫沒有改變我愛做的事。 雖然我被否定了，可是我還是愛做那些事情，所以我決定從頭來過。

當時我沒發現，但現在看來，被蘋果電腦開除，是我所經歷過最好的事情。成功的沉重被從頭來過的輕鬆所取代，每件事情都不那麼確定，讓我自由進入這輩子最有創意的年代。

接下來五年，我開了一家叫做 NeXT 的公司，又開一家叫做 Pixar 的公司，也跟後來的老婆（Laurene）談起了戀愛。

Pixar接著製作了世界上第一部全電腦動畫電影─玩具總動員（Toy Story），現在是世界上最成功的動畫製作公司（聽眾鼓掌大笑）。

然後，蘋果電腦買下了 NeXT，我回到了蘋果，我們在 NeXT發展的技術成了蘋果電腦後來復興的核心部份。我也有了個美妙的家庭。

我很確定，如果當年蘋果電腦沒開除我，就不會發生這些事情。

這帖藥很苦口，可是我想蘋果電腦這個病人需要這帖藥。 有時候，人生會用磚頭打你的頭。不要喪失信心。

我確信我愛我所做的事情，這就是這些年來支持我繼續走下去的唯一理由（I'm convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did）。

你得找出你的最愛，工作上是如此，人生伴侶也是如此。

你的工作將佔掉你人生的一大部分，唯一真正獲得滿足的方法就是做你相信是偉大的工作，而唯一做偉大工作的方法是愛你所做的事（ And the only way to do great work is to love what you do ）。 如果你還沒找到這些事，繼續找，別停頓。盡你全心全力，你知道你一定會找到。而且，如同任何偉大的事業，事情只會隨著時間愈來愈好。所以，在你找到之前，繼續找，別停頓。（聽眾鼓掌， Jobs喝水）

我的第三個故事，是關於死亡。

當我十七歲時，我讀到一則格言，好像是「把每一天都當成生命中的最後一天，你就會輕鬆自在。（ If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right ）」（聽眾笑）

這對我影響深遠， 在過去 33 年裡，我每天早上都會照鏡子，自問：「如果今天是此生最後一日，我今天要做些什麼？」

每當我連續太多天都得到一個「沒事做」的答案時， 我就知道我必須有所改變了。 提醒自己快死了，是我在人生中面臨重大決定時，所用過最重要的方法。

因為幾乎每件事─所有外界期望、所有的名聲、所有對困窘或失敗的恐懼─在面對死亡時，都消失了，只有最真實重要的東西才會留下（ Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything - all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important ）。

提醒自己快死了，是我所知避免掉入畏懼失去的陷阱裡最好的方法。人生不帶來、死不帶去，沒理由不能順心而為。

一年前，我被診斷出癌症。我在早上七點半作斷層掃瞄，在胰臟清楚出現一個腫瘤，我連胰臟是什麼都不知道。醫生告訴我，那幾乎可以確定是一種不治之症，預計我大概活不到三到六個月了。

醫生建議我回家，好好跟親人們聚一聚，這是醫生對臨終病人的標準建議。那代表你得試著在幾個月內把你將來十年想跟小孩講的話講完。那代表你得把每件事情搞定，家人才會儘量輕鬆。那代表你得跟人說再見了。

我整天想著那個診斷結果，那天晚上做了一次切片，從喉嚨伸入一個內視鏡，穿過胃進到腸子，將探針伸進胰臟，取了一些腫瘤細胞出來。我打了鎮靜劑，不醒人事，但是我老婆在場。她後來跟我說，當醫生們用顯微鏡看過那些細胞後，他們都哭了，因為那是非常少見的一種胰臟癌，可以用手術治好。所以我接受了手術，康復了。（聽眾鼓掌）

這是我最接近死亡的時候，我希望那會繼續是未來幾十年內最接近的一次。

經歷此事後，我可以比先前死亡只是純粹想像時，要能更肯定地告訴你們下面這些：沒有人想死。即使那些想上天堂的人，也想活著上天堂。 （聽眾笑）

但是死亡是我們共同的終點，沒有人逃得過。這是註定的，因為死亡很可能就是生命中最棒的發明，是生命交替的媒介，送走老人們，給新生代開出道路。

現在你們是新生代，但是不久的將來，你們也會逐漸變老，被送出人生的舞台。抱歉講得這麼戲劇化，但是這是真的。

你們的時間有限，所以不要浪費時間活在別人的生活裡。不要被教條所侷限─盲從教條就是活在別人思考結果裡。不要讓別人的意見淹沒了你內在的心聲。最重要的，擁有追隨自己內心與直覺的勇氣，你的內心與直覺多少已經知道你真正想要成為什麼樣的人（have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become），任何其他事物都是次要的。（聽眾鼓掌）

在我年輕時，有本神奇的雜誌叫做 《Whole Earth Catalog》， 當年這可是我們的經典讀物。那是位住在離這不遠的 Menlo Park的Stewart Brand發行的，他把雜誌辦得很有詩意。

那是 1960年代末期，個人電腦跟桌上出版還沒出現，所有內容都是打字機、剪刀跟拍立得相機做出來的。雜誌內容有點像印在紙上的平面 Google，在Google 出現之前35年就有了。這本雜誌很理想主義，充滿新奇工具與偉大的見解。

Stewart 跟他的團隊出版了好幾期的《Whole Earth Catalog》， 然後很自然的，最後出了停刊號。當時是 1970 年代中期，我正是你們現在這個年齡的時候。在停刊號的封底，有張清晨鄉間小路的照片，那種你四處搭便車冒險旅行時會經過的鄉間小路。在照片下印了行小字：

求知若飢，虛心若愚（Stay Hungry , Stay Foolish）。

那是他們親筆寫下的告別訊息，我總是以此自許。 當你們畢業，展開新生活，我也以此祝福你們。

求知若飢，虛心若愚（Stay Hungry , Stay Foolish）。

非常謝謝大家。

(人都有放下與道珍重的一天，重要的是要活得精彩//)