| Six questions to Dr M over Merdeka denial Posted: 12 Sep 2011 12:31 PM PDT (Harakah Daily) - Dr Mahathir Mohamad's remark backing a statement by pro-UMNO academic Dr Zainal Kling that Malaya had never been colonised has prompted Johor PAS Youth chief Suhaizan Kaiat to pose six questions to the former strongman.Suhaizan said Dr Mahathir's comments only confirmed the fact that the British then was more powerful than the Sultans before August 31, 1957. "Johor PAS Youth representing the Malaysian youth want clarification from Dr Mahathir and other academicians to these questions," he added. The six questions to Dr Mahathir are: 1. Who was the government prior to August 31, 1957? The Sultan or the British? 2. To whom people in Malaya during this period were told to be loyal to? 3. What is your perception about Tok Janggut, who killed the police which also comprised of Malay Muslims, when he attacked government interests in Kota Bharu in 1915? 4. How about Malay Muslim officers who fought with their lives protecting the government of that time? 5. Was there government propaganda before 31 August 1957 to depict those who fought against the government of that time as having betrayed the Sultans? 6. Is it wrong to regard UMNO as the 'golden child' as they had not been subjected to any ban by the government during the 1948 emergency, when other groups were banned? READ MORE HERE. |
| PM hopes ‘world’s best medical curriculum’ will halt brain drain Posted: 12 Sep 2011 12:26 PM PDT By Martin Cavarlho, The Star SERDANG: It is hoped the newly-opened Perdana University, a collaboration with two renowned international medical universities, will prevent a brain drain of top medical graduates. "I hope the chance to study the best medical curriculum in the world will encourage more of our country's top graduates to stay at home," said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. Perdana University is a joint effort with the Johns Hopkins University and the Royal College of Surgeons. It will be the first teaching medical school for the country. He said the collaboration with the world renowned US and Irish medical universities would help establish the university as a world-class education research healthcare hub. "This new university, a far-sighted collaboration between the Government's Public-Private Unit and the corporate sector, is something of a landmark for Malaysia," Najib said when officiating the university yesterday. He also announced that the Government would provide a significant number of scholarships to Malaysians selected to pursue their medical training at the university. The university saw the first intake of 30 medical students yesterday from Johns Hopkins, with another 75 students from the Royal College of Surgeons. Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was installed as the university's first Chancellor. Later, at a press conference, the university's chief executive Datuk Dr R. Mohanadas said the Public Service Department would provide scholarships to 50% of local students selected to study at the university. "Some 90% of students will be locals," he said. The RM2.5bil university with its 600-bed hospital will be fully operational by 2014 and have 1,000 students. |
| ‘Don’t compromise on Sabah’s history’ Posted: 12 Sep 2011 12:19 PM PDT (FMT) - SIPITANG: Sabahans have been urged not to compromise on the representation and the teaching of history, especially in regards to facts concerning Sabah. According to opposition Sabah Progressive Peoples Party (SAPP) the 'creative' representation of history had denied people their 'rightful' place. "Understanding history is never a futile exercise or a waste of time. Those who deny their history, deny their future and who are we to deny our children from their own future…," said SAPP deputy Amde Sidik "Over-stretching creative history has denied others of their place in history and took their sensitivities for granted. "And this can lead to discrimination and disenfranchisement of the identity, tradition, and culture and undermine the system of values in the segments of societies. "As the result, instead of forging unity, it has created cleavages amongst the people," he told a Hari Raya gathering here recently," he said. Sabahans were not told Amde was responding to recent headlines in Sabah in relation to the formation of Malaysia. According to him, the decision to make 1957 as the starting point of Malaysia anniversary was never agreed upon by past leaders. "If such a decision was made, then the people of Sabah must be duly informed and such decision should be made a public record. "The controversy over the Malaysia anniversary reflects the cause of divergence between the Borneo states and Malaya. "Is Malaysia 48 years old or 54 years old?" he questioned. He said Malaysia did not exist in 1957 when the Federation of Malaya achieved its independence from the British. "The government-controlled mass media blatantly claim that Malaysia is 54-years-old but to the people from the Borneo states Malaysia is only 48-years-old. "It shows Malaya is insensitive towards the feelings of the people in the Borneo states. |
| Pakatan in final lap of Selangor seat talks Posted: 12 Sep 2011 12:12 PM PDT 
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT KUALA LUMPUR: Pakatan Rakyat is close to finalising its allocation of Selangor seats among component parties in preparation for the coming general election, according to DAP publicity chief Tony Pua. "All smooth, barring three or four seats possibly being rotated, but that's optional," he said on the ongoing negotiations. Pua is a member of Pakatan's seat allocation committee. The "three or four seats" that he spoke about are those that Pakatan lost in the 2008 general election. He said Pakatan might maintain the 2008 arrangement for these seats or allow swaps among the component parties. However, a PKR source said swaps of other seats might also be allowed although the negotiations are guided by the principle that a party should keep the seats it won in the last election. This was confirmed by DAP's Lau Weng San, the state assemblyman for Kampung Tunku. Lau also told FMT that "five to six" seats remained on the negotiating table. "But the seat talks in Selangor are way milder compared to other states," he said, probably referring to Johor, Pahang, Sarawak and Perak. A Pakatan official described negotiations in the four states as "frustrating". Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has been candid about his do-or-die intention to recapture Selangor for Barisan Nasional. He is BN's liaison chief for the state, which is Malaysia's most developed. READ MORE HERE. |
| Collusion And Price Fixing? Posted: 12 Sep 2011 12:00 PM PDT By Tony Pua Recently the local telecommunications companies incurred the wrath of Malaysians by attempting to pass on the services tax to the prepaid users. The service tax which was increased by the Government from 5% to 6% this year was absorbed by these companies since 1998. While the backlash from the public, and pressure from political parties have resulted in a temporary reprieve for the prepaid users, pending further consultations with the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), the real issue at hand is the blatant and coordinated attempt by the telecommunication companies to raise prices concurrently, contemptuous of the competitive spirit. Last Thursday, the companies said in a joint statement that purchases of prepaid reloads and prepaid starter/SIM packs would be charged a six percent service tax, effective Sept 15. While the telecommunication providers had every right to decide as to whether to absorb or pass on the service tax to consumers, the fact that the statement was issued jointly meant these companies – Maxis, Digi, Celcom and U-Mobile were colluding to increasing the prices of their services concurrently, to increase the profits for all parties, without fear of any of the companies keeping lower prices to eat into the customer base of the others. The Competition Act 2010 states that "the object of the Act is to promote economic development by protecting the process of competition, and thereby protecting the interest of consumers". The Bill specifically bans anti-competitive agreements including price fixing, import cartel, bid rigging, territorial allocation, limiting production, market sharing. The anti-competitive agreements will be subject to financial penalties of up to 10 per cent of the worldwide turnover of the enterprise over the period during which the infringement occurred. There is no question that the joint statement and attempt by the four telecommunication companies to raise prices by the same percentage concurrently is illegal because they are colluding to form a cartel for the purposes of price-fixing. While the Act has been passed in Parliament and gazette in June 2010, due to an 18 month grace period, it will only take full effect from 1 February 2012 onwards. However, regardless of the grace period, the Government, particularly, the Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs must take a stern position and warn the telecommunication companies in no uncertain terms that their anti-competitive behavior will not be tolerated. The Government must act to prove that the Competition Act will have teeth to protect the ordinary consumers and not be trampled upon at will by the Malaysian corporate giants. |
| Stop feigning ignorance over prepaid phone tax, PAS tells Najib Posted: 12 Sep 2011 11:54 AM PDT 
(The Malaysian Insider) - KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 13 — PAS has told Datuk Seri Najib Razak to stop pleading ignorance over the six per cent service tax imposed on prepaid mobile users, saying the telcos were just implementing the Budget 2011 tabled last year. The service tax of five per cent was imposed since 1998 to all mobile phone service providers but Najib, who is Finance Minister, raised the tax to six per cent in the Budget proposals for this year. "The telcos only implemented the budget presented by Najib for 2011. When they start to implement it, Najib blames the telcos, to portray himself as a caring leader ahead of the general election," said Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, who heads PAS's Research Centre. The telcos had been absorbing the tax to grow the mobile phone service which now has nearly 28 million subscribers but agreed to pass on the tax effective September 15. However, the companies have decided to defer the tax again following a public outcry and a government request. Najib had urged the companies to review the decision, which he said had nothing to do with the government. PAS's vice-president Mahfuz Omar, who leads anti-price hike movement Protes BN, said the telcos were only shifting the burden of the government-imposed tax to consumers. He said not only the Telcos should stop charging consumers, the government must also abolish the tax. READ MORE HERE. |
| Top court says Lingam video RCI findings ‘cannot be reviewed’ Posted: 12 Sep 2011 11:38 AM PDT (The Malaysian Insider) - PUTRAJAYA, Sept 13 — The Federal Court ruled today that the findings of the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) into the controversial V.K. Lingam video clip cannot be reviewed as the commissioners merely made findings and it was not a decision. Lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam wanted the Court of Appeal to review the RCI's findings that he had committed criminal misbehaviour which, he said, was a grave attack on his reputation, and that he had been adversely affected. The senior lawyer argued that although he had not been prosecuted, his reputation had been gravely tarnished and injured, and that it was his fundamental right under the Federal Constitution to safeguard his reputation. Justice Raus Sharif ruled that Lingam and two former chief justices were not adversely affected by the findings of the commission. Sitting with Raus, who is Court of Appeal president, were Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, who chaired the three-man panel, and Federal Court judge Justice Abdull Hamid Embong. On February 7, then-Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, leading a three-man panel of the Federal Court, unanimously ruled that the question of law posed by the commission for determination of the Federal Court was a novel one and of public interest. He said the commission had met the requirements of section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act and granted leave to the commission to appeal on one question of law, that is on whether its (commission) findings under section 3 of the Commission of Enquiry Act 1950 were reviewable by way of judicial review. The other members of the panel were Zulkefli and Abdull Embong. On August 24 last year, the appellate court, in a 2-1 majority decision, allowed the appeal brought by Lingam and former Chief Justices Tun Eusoff Chin and Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim to set aside the High Court's refusal to grant leave for their applications for judicial review to quash the commission's findings. READ MORE HERE. |
| WIKILEAKS: PROMINENT HUMAN RIGHTS LAWYER FACES DEATH THREAT Posted: 12 Sep 2011 01:00 AM PDT 
Zainur Zakaria, former Bar Council President and current President of Lawyers in Defense of Islam (a new NGO created in July 2006), asked the approximately 10,000 audience members, "Are we willing to allow non-Muslims and those who are not well versed in Islam to interpret our religion for us?" The audience members replied "Never!" Clearly audible at that point is at least one audience member who shouted "Kill them!" THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin 
Summary 1. (C) Prominent Muslim lawyer and human rights activist Malik Imtiaz has become the target of a death threat printed on a leaflet and distributed via email beginning in mid-August. On August 24 Imtiaz privately told us he believes the death threat was orchestrated by several newly established Muslim NGOs that intend to silence him due to his leading role in the Lina Joy apostasy case (ref A) and his participation as a panel member at recent public fora meant to defend constitutional protection of non-Muslims' religious freedom. Both Muslim and non-Muslim leaders have condemned the death threat against Imtiaz, even as opposition MPs lament the lack of a response by Malaysia's ruling coalition. The Prime Minister's policy of stopping public discussion of controversial religious freedom issues will not resolve matters. End Summary. Religious Tensions Culminate in Death Threat 2. (SBU) The death threat against Imtiaz came to light after the Muslim Youth Movement (ABIM) exposed the threatening leaflet to the press on August 19. The President of ABIM, Muhammad Yusri, denounced the Malaysian language leaflet, saying, "Differing views on Islam must be resolved through Islamic morals and ethics and not by force." The leaflet contains the words "Wanted: Dead" in large typeface above a photograph of Imtiaz. Beneath the photo and Imtiaz' full name, the leaflet text reads: "This is the face of the traitor lawyer against Islam who is supporting the apostasy case of Lina Joy. Spread this to our brothers so that they recognize this traitor. If he is found dead on the roadside, let him be. Do not help!" 3. (SBU) As a prominent human rights lawyer, President of the Human Rights Society of Malaysia (HAKAM), and protem Secretary of the Malaysian Civil Liberties Society, Imtiaz has long been at the forefront of defending human rights and religious freedom in Malaysia. Most recently, he represented the Bar Council during Federal Court arguments in the Lina Joy apostasy case. Imtiaz supports Joy's efforts to legally apostatize from the Muslim faith. The Federal Court is expected to rule at any time in that case. The case will likely determine the degree to which Shari'a courts have authority over apostasy applications (they have virtually always declined such applications), setting a clear precedent for future cases and symbolically hitting at the core constitutional issue of the definition of ethnic Malays as Muslims. Imtiaz also served as a panel member at recent public forums organized by "Article 11," a group of 13 local NGOs that support enforcement of constitutional protections that guarantee religious freedom for non-Muslims. 4. (C) Imtiaz told us that he believes several newly established Muslim activist groups orchestrated the death threat, but he did not provide us with specific information to support his statements. He told us that he takes the threat seriously, but remained "undeterred" in his efforts related to religious freedom. Mosques Used to "Defend Islam" Against Apostasy 5. (C) While Imtiaz has faced the opprobrium of many Muslims for his outspoken stances on religious freedom issues, recent criticism by some Muslim leaders has become much more pointed and personal. We recently viewed video footage taken on July 23 at the Federal Territories Mosque in Kuala Lumpur. The video contains strong criticism of Imtiaz by several Muslim speakers who attacked Imtiaz' ethnicity (he is a child of Pakistani immigrants to Malaysia) and accused him and other Article 11 leaders of being ignorant on Islamic issues. Zainur Zakaria, former Bar Council President and current President of Lawyers in Defense of Islam (a new NGO created in July 2006), asked the approximately 10,000 audience members, "Are we willing to allow non-Muslims and those who are not well versed in Islam to interpret our religion for us?" The audience members replied "Never!" Clearly audible at that point is at least one audience member who shouted "Kill them!" Later at the event, well-known lawyer Kamar Ainah concluded her speech by saying, "I'm concerned about the current government. We cannot depend on them. We need to continue our struggle ourselves to protect and defend our religion." Imtiaz told us other mosques were also used during July and August to spread similar messages intended to motivate audience members to "defend Islam." 6. (C) At these mosque-based events in Kuala Lumpur, organizers handed out two pamphlets to tens of thousands of Muslim faithful that urged them to support their faith. One pamphlet, entitled "Islam Humiliated; Muslims Challenged," claimed that the Bar Council supported apostasy among Muslims. It described Koranic and Hadith traditions that claim those who renounce Islam must be executed, and it urged all of Malaysia's Muslims to sign a petition in defense of Islamic values and principles. As of August 22, according to PEMBELA (translated as "Defenders;" another recently created Muslim NGO), the pamphlet distributors had collected 500,050 signatures on the petition. The second pamphlet, entitled "Efforts to Bring Down the Dignity of Islam and Threaten the Identity of the (Malay) Race," focused on the potential impact of the Lina Joy case and called on all Muslims "to defend the honor of Islam." Silence from the Governing Coalition 7. (C) While the death threat against Imtiaz was immediately criticized by many Muslim and non-Muslim leaders, we are not aware of senior public GOM condemnation of the threat and we do not know if the GOM has taken action behind the scenes. During debate in parliament, opposition leader Lim Kit Siang expressed his "grave disappointment" at the ruling National Front's silence on the issue. He described the situation as "most ominous for Malaysia." Ivy Josiah, President of the Women's Action Organization and an organizer of Article 11 fora, in commenting on the GOM's silence concerning the death threat, described GOM officials as "cowards," and asked, "How can they remain silent on something like this?" 8. (C) Comment: The death threat against Imtiaz followed a series of emotional clashes in recent months that pitted self-described "defenders of Islam" against "defenders of the constitution." The two groups represent significant portions of Malaysia's population that have found little common ground on religious issues. The PM's recent calls to stop public discussion of these issues may temporarily dampen tensions, but a policy of stifling debate will not make such fundamental differences go away. With local observers pointing to widening gaps between the views of Malaysia's Muslim and non-Muslim populations, the Malaysian Government will need to exhibit stronger leadership in order to safeguard religious freedom and tolerance, and to reject clearly any calls for religiously-motivated violence such as the threats against Imtiaz. SHEAR (August 2006)
|
| Verdict On Ahmad Sarbaini's Death Should Be Accidental - MACC Posted: 11 Sep 2011 10:31 PM PDT 
(Bernama) -- Accidental death. That should be the verdict of the inquest into the death of Selangor Customs assistant director Ahmad Sarbaini Mohamed, said Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah. Representing the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) in the inquest, he said there was not an iota of evidence to suggest the death was due to homicide.
Neither was there was third-party involvement, he said, as alleged by counsel for the family, Awtar Singh.
Pointing out to the DNA analysis, Muhammad Shafee said it indicated there was no third party involvement in Ahmad Sarbaini's death.
"The absence of DNA evidence connecting any MACC officer to the death, and the absence of defensive wounds on the deceased, clearly indicate that no MACC officer was criminally concerned with regard to the death.
"We, therefore, conclude that the verdict should be accidental death," he added.
In a 112-page written submission to coroner Aizatul Akmal Maharani, who heard the inquest, Muhammad Shafee said there was also not a shred of proof that Ahmad Sarbaini was physically abused or mistreated during the recording of his subsequent statement by MACC officers on April 4, or on the day of his death on April 6, this year.
He said there was ample evidence to show that Ahmad Sarbaini had, on his own volition, got out of the pantry window on the third floor of the MACC building.
These included the forensic pathology evidence that indicated the condition of the pantry did not suggest there was a struggle, as well as the evidence which indicated that all injuries sustained by the deceased was consistent with a fall from height, said Muhammad Shafee.
He said Ahmad Sarbaini died due to severe head injuries and positional asphyxia as concluded by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Hospital's forensic pathologist Associate Professor Dr Faridah Mohd Noor and Dr Shahrom Abdul Wahid, via their reports and evidence during the inquest proceedings.
Muhammad Shafee said, Ahmad Sarbaini had died from a fall from the lower ledge of the third floor window of the pantry, adding that the customs official's body was found on the first floor of the MACC building, Wilayah Persekutuan, Jalan Cochrane.
"The evidence had placed the deceased outside that window and there is evidence tending to show that he had tried to jump to the roof situated on the right, but he was off-balance. He slipped and fell to his death," he said.
He said, the absence of marks indicating a struggle in the pantry and defensive wounds on the deceased showed he was not forced out of the third floor of the pantry window.
Muhammad Shafee also noted the MACC had no reason to be angry or frustrated with the fact that the deceased had intended to change his statement on April 6, this year.
"This is due to the fact the deceased would not have been able to change his statement as stated by MACC investigating officer Abdul Ghani Ali during the meeting that was chaired by MACC Assistant Commissioner Mohamad Fauzi Husin on that day (April 6).
"Awtar (Ahmad Sarbaini's family lawyer) and even Raja Petra Kamarudin (a blogger) via his blog, shared the same sentiment that the MACC was fuming mad when the deceased had intended to change or retract his statement," he said.
Muhammad Shafee said Abdul Ghani, in his statement, had said a letter of representation needed to be written to the MACC or himself, if someone wanted to change or retract his statement.
Meanwhile, Awtar in his 19-page written submission said, there was an element of foul play by the MACC, which caused Ahmad Sarbaini's death.
"Maybe, the MACC had no intention to cause the injuiry to the deceased or to kill him, but there is an element of negligence in this case which caused the death of Ahmad Sarbaini," he said.
He said the investigation into Ahmad Sarbaini's death was not fully equipped because there were many unanswered questions, including why the deceased fell out of the window.
He said the evidence presented clearly showed the deceased did not try to kill himself, or was murdered by someone or died by accident.
"There is no reason for the deceased to climb out of the window...as a visitor, he could leave the MACC building anytime," added Awtar.
The coroner will make a decision on Sept 26.
Today, both parties met Aizatul for further clarification on their submissions on Aug 25.
The submissions were made available to the media today. |
| NKRA : a closer look at the big numbers by a simple man Posted: 11 Sep 2011 10:11 PM PDT The Prime Minister has announced 8 new investment projects worth RM1.4 billion under six National Key Economics Areas (NKRA) covering agriculture, education, aerospace, wholesale, retail and manufacturing. On first impression, the big zany numbers look impressive so let's take a closer look. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ETP: PM announces RM1.43bil in investments ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (source: extracted from page 2 of the Sun morning edition 8th September) The first item, palm oil, where it was reported in the Sun as "development of downstream sector of palm oil industry, including a world-class research and development centre:" In short, someone is going to invest RM706million into down-stream, i.e. post plantation activities of palm oil industry, like manufacturing, distribution, branding and marketing. The big words actually did not explain exactly what will cost RM706 million and how exactly additional GNI of RM1.15 billion can be created – is it via new products and new markets, what and how the multiplier effect will generate the stipulated GNI Impact etc? A big number must have many components and from the Sun report, I do not see a single clear cut explanation. R & D itself is exploratory in nature and estimating accurately revenue arising from successful R & D activities that can be translated into viable commercial production and sales is extremely tricky (without even factoring in competition from other products such as soya bean and peanut oil) so I would seriously question how the "expected gross national income" of RM1.15 billion is a creditable statement of optimism and of course, vote pulling. Besides, the GNI projection covered a period up to 8 years away. I would be interested to see what the BN administration have forecasted for the next 8 years, details of which, voters can assess if the forecast are valid assumptions, or just big hyped up numbers which basis can be challenged. Why would the BN administration want to burn another RM400million (equivalent to the original budget of the new Istana Negara) and add another 650 civil servants onto an already bloated civil service, and over the next 3 years, to buy 1,410 TV sets, employing an average 2.17 staff per TV to broadcast health messages? At R400million a pop, each TV on average will cost us RM238,687.94. We already have RTM which is free-to-air and certainly have bigger reach than 1,410 TV sets of RM238K each in 168 locations. Just produce more programmes and broadcast through its controlled media (and replacing the air time set aside for propaganda with proper rakyat-friendly heath programmes). We tax payers certainly can make better use with RM400 million, like patching up the horrendous roads in Wangsa Maju or build 8,000 units of affordable homes at RM50,000 a unit for example. And we have not examine which company is going to supply the TV set via direct negotiation or otherwise. Strand Aerospace Malaysia Sdn Bhd Of all the projects, this sound most promising – 6,000 Malaysian engineers to be trained in a joint venture company set up by Malaysian entrepreneurs and a British aerospace expert Anthony Bedborough, reach GNI impact of RM3.5 billion by 2020. However, I wonder if this is a private sector initiative or it is a BN administration driven effort? Is SAM Sdn Bhd a GLC hence the Prime Minister can claim "lagi satu projek Barisan Nasional" or is it just a private sector investment? One consistent trend in Najib administration is the confusion whether an investment project is really a BN administration project or a private sector going on anyway. For example, Najib presented investments by oil giant Shell as if it's BN administration thingy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- At the same time, Najib said Shell Malaysia will also be investing RM1.5 billion in multiple projects to upgrade, expand or build facilities in upstream, midstream and downstream activities across Malaysia. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- While he is so good at playing the role of Shell Malaysia's press officer, how come, for consistency sake, he did not announce the multi million investment in Kuantan by Lynas which was granted a 12 year pioneer status (as disclosed by Lynas themselves) when the maximum tax exemption period for promoted activities of national strategic importance is only 10 years? Or the multi million contract awarded to Ahmad Zaki,Kejuruteraan Kenari and Maya Maju consisting of RM400 million original allocation and R400 million overrun? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The new Istana Negara in Jalan Duta will now cost more than RM800 million, and not RM400 million as announced by the government in 2006. Deputy Works Minister Datuk Yong Khoon Seng said the cost includes the construction of a new RM130 million flyover leading to the palace in Jalan Duta, and upgrading works on Jalan Changkat Semantan costing RM32.5 million. He added that the flyover project and the road upgrading works were awarded to Ahmad Zaki Resources and Kejuruteraan Kenari respectively through direct negotiation. The Istana Negara complex itself will cost around RM650 million and the project was awarded to Maya Maju, also through direct negotiation. The palace will be completed by February next year. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- As for the projected GNI of RM3.5 billion anticipated in 9 years time, how much revenue the SAM Sdn Bhd need to earn to hit the target? Since it averages about RM2 to RM4 million ringgit a year (reading the report below), SAM Sdn Bhd has a big gap to catch, making me wonder if they can actually hit the required number and I would be most interested to know of their business plan to accomplish this. |
| Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #82 Posted: 11 Sep 2011 10:07 PM PDT 
M. Bakri Musa My late sister had a home "mortgage" with an Islamic bank that supposedly charged no interest. But when I compare the actual "costs" of her mortgage and calculated the imputed interest rate, hers was at least two hundred basis points above that offered by conventional banks. Worse, when interest rates rose, her payments went up with them and there was no limit to the increase. Chapter 9: Islam in Malay Life Reform in Islam Educating Ulamas on Modern Economics By educating Muslims generally and the ulama in particular on such modern and useful concepts of economics, and replacing such loaded terms as interest and insurance with the morally neutral terms as rewards on savings and risk sharing, we would channel the natural propensity for Malays to save even more. This in turn would encourage other productivity-enhancing economic activities.
Western financial institutions have done a remarkably efficient job in contributing to the economy. It is difficult for a country to advance unless it has a well developed and sound banking system. Western financial institutions have done an equally credible job of democratizing financial services. When I started my practice over two decades ago, I could not get a line of credit, as that was available only for major corporations. Thus I had to borrow the whole lump sum right away and began paying interest on funds I did not need immediately. Today lines of credit are common even for ordinary retail customers. Similarly, new entities like money market and mutual funds enable average consumers to participate in more productive investments that were previously reserved for rich clients. Average Americans, thanks to such innovative financial instruments, can now invest their funds in foreign companies and other ventures besides the traditional stocks and bonds through the convenience of their unit trust and mutual funds. Modern banks are by no means perfect. In times of crises, as documented by the Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz, banks can behave just as irrationally. Indeed the common wisdom that banks willingly lend money when you do not need it, and then quickly withdraw it when you really need the funds, is not without foundation. As an ancient Malay saying would have it, it is akin to lending someone an umbrella, but when it rains take it back! Banks are also not averse to shirking their community responsibilities. In the past it was common for bank to come to a community only to collect the deposits, and then invest the funds elsewhere. Today in America, with the Community Reinvestment Act, banks are required to invest a percentage of their deposits within the community. Banks have also been known to "redline" neighborhoods, and discriminating against poor and minority borrowers. Again with civil lawsuits and better auditing, banks are doing less of that now. The rigid rules governing loan-loss provisions and the strict definition and enforcement of non-performing loans (NPLs) that are internationally accepted may be harsh. Indeed Malaysian leaders severely criticized the IMF for insisting that Asian banks use the widely accepted "non-activity-for-three-months" rule for NPLs while Malaysia has been using the more lax (kinder?) six-month rule. When banks classify loans as "non performing," it means more than just calling in the loans and making the necessary "loan loss" provisions as mandated by law. It means that factories and companies are being shuttered and workers laid off. There are significant human and social costs associated. When Enron, the giant electricity company, was forced into bankruptcy, thousands of its workers were stranded and its hometown Houston was thrown into a tailspin. Cruel as that may seem, consider the alternative of keeping such companies alive. For one, its creditors and banks would have to continue to pour their precious depositors' money to support the ailing company. Indeed had this continued, Enron would not only have driven itself into the ground but also would have taken along other healthy companies. Thus while we may sympathize with Enron's fate, we should also be considering the fate of the depositors who put their hard-earned cash into Enron's banks. It is better that one company fails rather than a major bank. With the former only that company's shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders are affected, but when a major bank fails, the ripple would be felt throughout the economy. Had Bank Bumiputra followed international guidelines and been aggressive with its delinquent borrowers in the very beginning, it would not have folded, taking with it billions in taxpayers' precious funds and even more importantly, the people's (especially Malays') confidence in the system. Bank Bumiputra's failure did all that and then some. It did untold damage to the Malay psyche by reinforcing ugly stereotypes about our talent (or lack of it) for commerce. To reinforce my main points, yes, there are weaknesses in the present Western banking system. It is being continuously improved and strengthened. The present complex set of internationally-accepted banking rules and regulations have been fine-tuned over decades; Third World regulators ignore them only at their own peril. My biggest concern is that because of its novel business arrangements, these Islamic banks cannot be adequately scrutinized by present banking regulations. The purported advantage, if not prime selling point, is that Islamic banks are not lending out their depositors' funds, rather the customers and bank have a "profit and loss" partnership arrangement. This is ingenious if not specious at best. First, such "partnerships" are so lopsided that they cannot be fair to the customer. If a particular venture were to lose money, who is to check the bank's accounting? Second, if the bank were to fail, who has first claim on the assets? The customer, who are theoretically part owner of the asset, or the shareholders or owners of the bank? Clearly there is a potential for a serious conflict of interest that has yet to be resolved. I consider myself a sophisticated consumer of financial services yet I find it difficult to evaluate and compare the costs and risks of the various products and services offered by Islamic banks. Hence I have not used them. My late sister had a home "mortgage" with an Islamic bank that supposedly charged no interest. But when I compare the actual "costs" of her mortgage and calculated the imputed interest rate, hers was at least two hundred basis points above that offered by conventional banks. Worse, when interest rates rose, her payments went up with them and there was no limit to the increase. America has variable mortgage rates too, but those loans have caps to protect consumers. No such protections exist with Islamic banks. The end result is that Islamic banks are taking advantage of their customers. No wonder there is a headlong rush by Western banks to enter the Islamic market. They have successfully transferred all the risks to the customers while raking in all the rewards! A rip off, even if done in the name of Islam, is still a rip off. Sadly, many consumers in Malaysia and other Muslim countries are woefully uninformed in economic and business matters and are easily swayed by the Islamic label. In the final analysis credit, which is the flip side of lending, is like any other modern instrument. Used properly and it would bring untold benefits to individuals as well as society; abused and it will exact a stiff price. To a skillful surgeon, a scalpel is a lifesaving tool; to an idiot, a killing kit. To Muhamamd Yunus, the founder of Grameen Bank and who has done so much to uplift the lives of millions of Bangladeshi peasants, credit is an effective instrument to reduce poverty. To him, access to credit is basic human rights. Nations are like individuals. If they borrow millions to build palatial mansions for their leaders and fancy headquarters for their civil servants, it is the equivalent of my earlier example of borrowing money to buy a Mercedes just to show off. But if nations borrow to invest in their schools and infrastructures, then it is like my buying my own taxi. I fear that the current obsession with whether certain forms of "returns on investments" (interests) are halal or haram is counterproductive. They discourage Muslims from productively managing their idle funds. Savings and borrowings (or credit) are vital ingredients for economic development. No country can progress unless its people save (capital formation) and credit readily available to its entrepreneurs and producers. Credit made possible the spanking new North-South freeway and the new Kuala Lumpur International Airport. Credit enables Americans to have the highest standard of living and helps push Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea into the First World. At the same time, credit (or more accurately, excessive and imprudent borrowings) was the downfall of Argentina and hosts of Third World countries. Through practical experience economists and bankers have come up with useful guidelines on the prudent use of credit. The priority should be to educate the masses on these guidelines so they can become better informed and therefore safer and more prudent users of credits. Today I have more debt than I ever had but I do not feel overwhelmed or threatened. For one I have put my credit to productive use by buying appreciable and revenue-producing assets, and not to finance my vacations or daughter's wedding (the equivalent of buying taxis instead of limousines). Two, my debt payments are comfortable relative to my income and other assets. Should my income drop I would of course have to dispose some of those debts, but since I have used them to buy productive or at least appreciating assets, I do hope to come out ahead. Muslim theologians and economists should quit quibbling over what some ancient Arabic texts may or may not mean in the context of the 21st Century, but instead educate the ummah on the prudent and productive use of credit. Perhaps they can find in their study of those same ancient texts something to support the contention that there are indeed qualitative differences between productive and consumptive loans. But before they can find those theological justifications, these scholars must first understand and be convinced that there are indeed real and significant differences between the two and that they are not merely involved in semantic gymnastics. It is difficult to find or discern something if one does not know what one is looking for. Even if we do not find that theological basis, we still must train Muslims to use credit wisely. To revert to my earlier analogy of the knife, the objective is to train Muslims to use that instrument to good purpose like sculpturing and surgery, and not to use it for evil deeds like killing. Muslims must stop this endless puerile argument on whether the knife is intrinsically a halal or haram implement. Many Muslim are sincerely trying to lead a pious life and are susceptible to the Islamic cachet. They implicitly trust everything that has an Islamic label and those who proclaim their Islamic credentials and trust in Allah. Thus they readily suspend their critical faculties when evaluating Islamic products and services. We should teach our fellow Muslims not to do that. We should use President Reagan's notorious phrase to express his opinion of the Russians – trust but verify – into its comparable Muslim version. Yes, trust in Allah, but we must verify everyone else, even if they swear by the Almighty! As an aside, in content as well as sequence, this chapter should rightly be a subsection of the previous chapter on culture. But because of its length and unity of thought, I have made it into a separate chapter. After examining culture generally and of Islam in some depth, I will now examine in the next chapter the role of the other social institutions in Malaysia, primarily the judicial system and the laws. Next: Chapter 10: Freedom, Justice, and the Law |
| Aidilfitri Malaysia Open House at Permatang Pauh Posted: 11 Sep 2011 10:01 PM PDT Malaysians Must Know The Truth These pictures show that the people who stormed UMNO/BN Aidilfitri Open House at Permatang Pauh, in Penang yesterday where a crowd of about 20,000 people attended were possible since they were mostly brought in from outside by UMNO/BN (it was reported more than 60 buses were hired) to impress the Malaysian public that the support for BN is becoming strong. But the people were induced by free food and goodies. This is how UMNO/BN work to show a big turn-out. You CAN'T FOOL THE RAKYAT ANYMORE. TIME FOR CHANGE is here and it is anticipated that after GE13, a NEW FEDERAL GOVERNMENT will be formed - NO LONGER UMNO/BN will form that government. |
| I'll support the party that upholds this ideology Posted: 11 Sep 2011 09:58 PM PDT By J I've lived away from Malaysia for the past 20 years (slightly more than one-third of my life) and came home about a year ago. Many people ask me, "What were you thinking?", to which I had no specific answer. Except this. Malaysia is a great place, with plenty of potential. If you kept your head down, couldn't care less and led your life, you could lead a peaceable and fulfilling existence. But I work in the corporate world. I can live with the stupidity of politicians. I can live with the racism and discrimination. I can live with the scaremongering and xenophobia. I can live with the narrow-mindedness. What REALLY gets to me are the gross inefficiencies in our infrastructure, the policies and actions that got us there and the way money and resources are unthinkingly squandered. Simple things. How they build a road intersection in Cyberjaya then have to dig it up again to lay cabling for traffic lights. How they build magnificent buildings in Putrajaya (I am STILL impressed everytime I drive through), but don't give a thought to maintaining them or providing adequate parking facilities. How employees in government departments spend whole days engaged in online gaming (probably pirated games installed on their government-funded computers, how'd you like that, Microsoft?). Anyway, I was a head prefect in primary school (my primary education was in Malaysia). Shocking, I tell you. The only non-Malay to ever hold that position since the government took over all the Christian Brothers' Schools. But every Monday, I'd get up on stage at the end of the perhimpunan, raise my right hand and say these words. I haven't heard them much in the last 21 years. Not even in the last year since I've come home. But I think these words encompass the spirit of our nation and the ideology we should all aspire to. Oh, I know it was probably written for some ulterior political motive, but that doesn't change their simplicity and beauty. This is what the malaysia.gov website has to say about them: Malaysia's national ideology, the Rukunegara was formulated with the purpose to serve as a guideline in the country's nation-building efforts. The Rukunegara was proclaimed on August 31, 1970 by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong IV. And here it is (translated to English): The RUKUNEGARA "Our Nation, Malaysia is dedicated to: Achieving a greater unity for all her people; maintaining a democratic way of life; creating a just society in which the wealth of the nation shall be equitably distributed; ensuring a liberal approach to her rich and diverse cultural tradition, and building a progressive society which shall be oriented to modern science and technology. "We, the people of Malaysia, pledge our united efforts to attain these ends, guided by these principles: "Belief in God Loyalty to King and Country Upholding the Constitution Sovereignty of the Law, and Good Behaviour and Morality"
Back to basics, baby. I'll vote for the party that upholds this ideology.
|
| MCLM RARA roadshows Posted: 11 Sep 2011 08:15 PM PDT First stop is at KLSCAH in KL on 19th September 2011, 7.00 - 11.00pm.
|
| Not cheating, just bending the rules Posted: 11 Sep 2011 07:40 PM PDT 
The truth is, Rosli was targeted simply because he knew too much about Umno's plundering of MAS. So, last month, the de facto Minister for Law, Nazri Aziz, asked MAS to sack Rosli as the company's lawyer because Rosli had refused to withdraw the cases against Tajuddin. MAS has now appointed Dato' Hafarizam Harun, Umno's lawyer, who will facilitate the Global Settlement with Tajudin. NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin Datuk Dr Wan Ismail, Dr Wan Azizah's father, who used to work for ex-Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to manage his psy-war (which was when I got to know him and when I received my 'training') once told me this: Dr Mahathir is a doctor and a doctor knows that when a patient feels pain in one part of his/her body and you can't seem to cure it, you just create a bigger pain in another part of his/her body. Then the patient will focus on the bigger pain and will forget about what originally ailed him/her. We both had a good laugh and I responded: that means if you see a doctor about a stomach ache, he/she just takes a hammer and whacks you on the head and the bigger pain on your head will make you forget about your stomach ache. Of course, in the medical world this will not quite work. But in psy-war it can. For example, if the country is going down the drain and people start feeling the pain of the high cost of living, all you need to do is to raise issues like: the Christians are trying to convert Muslims to Christianity, the Chinese are trying to take over the country and reduce the Malays to second-class citizens, Malaysia was never colonised by Britain, PAS supports Communism, Anwar Ibrahim can't keep his dick in his pants, etc. Then people will forget about their economic pain and will start debating all these 'hot issues', which is not going to help put more money in their pockets. The fact that it is more affordable to live in England than in Malaysia will be totally forgotten. Yes, while we debate all these unproductive issues, many things can be quietly done in the background. They can quietly jack up the cost of the Penang Bridge from the original budget of RM1 billion to RM4.8 billion. They can quietly award the multi-billion Ringgit contract for the double track railway to Singapore to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's golf buddy, Tan Kay Hock. They can quietly, yet again, put their fingers in the Malaysian Airlines (MAS) pie and take a second bite of the cherry. Yes, even the Umno Bloggers are angry about the latest scam involving MAS. They already scammed it once, which cost the taxpayers RM9 billion. Now they are doing it again. And while they do that, we argue about whether the British were our colonial masters or only our protectors. 
By the way, while on the subject of MAS, do you recall lawyer Rosli Dahlan who acted for MAS in suing Tajuddin Ramli? He also acted for Dato Johari Baharom, the then Deputy Minister of Home Security, Dato Ramli Yusuff, the Director of the Commercial Crimes Investigations Dept (CCID) PDRM, plus a few other CCID officers in the loan-sharking syndicate case involving Goh Cheng Poh @ Tengku Goh. For some strange reason known only to him, AG Gani Patail refused to help the CCID to prepare their affidavits. So the task was given to Rosli who acted on behalf of the CCID. This made the AG mad as hell. Tengku Goh was the IGP's underworld business partner in the loan-sharking, prostitution, gambling and drugs syndicate. And the AG and IGP have an arrangement -- you cover my backside and I cover your backside. And Rosli was messing things up by acting for the CCID. That was when the MACC went to Rosli's office, assaulted him, dragged him from his office in handcuffs, and detained him overnight in the MACC underground cell in MACC's HQ in Putrajaya. The following day, on the eve of Hari Raya of 2007, they paraded him in handcuffs along the Jalan Duta Court corridors to be charged. Rosli has since sued Utusan Malaysia, the MACC, and its rogue officers for RM50 million, accusing them of a conspiracy to fix him up. That will be an interesting case to follow when it finally comes to court. Only in Malaysia do the crooks get away scot-free while the whistle blower gets charged. And even when the courts acquit you, the ordeal will not end there. That is, if you are not AG Gani Patail's friend, of course. That was what happened on 20 December 2010 when Rosli was acquitted by the court and AG Gan Patail directed the MACC to swiftly appeal on the very same day (see the Notice of Appeal below). After filing that Notice of Appeal, the DPPs in the AG's Chambers assigned to handle the appeal suddenly realised that there is no basis for an appeal. So they decided to sleep on it -- hoping that, in time, AG Gani Patail would forget about it or that AG Gani would retire early. It seems Malaysia Today's recent revelations about AG Gani Patail's corrupt exploits with Dato' Vincent Lye of Ho Hup Berhad has had a backlash on Rosli. AG Gani Patail's anger has reached an extent of paranoia that he starts seeing shadows in every corner. Like the Malay saying, "anjing takut dengan bayang bayang sendiri", Gani starts suspecting everyone whom he has fixed up before as having a hand in the problems he is facing on the Ho Hup corruption allegations. Already, Robert Phang is accused of being in RPK's 'teammate' for publicly asking Gani Patail to step down. Malaysia Today's Deep Throat in the AG Chambers and the courts told of how AG Gani went ballistic when he discovered that the appeal against Rosli is now out of time. Not about to be outdone, AG Gani has now directed the MACC to resurrect the case against Rosli by asking the court to grant MACC an extension of time to revive the appeal (see the Motion to revive the Appeal below). If you still cannot see the double standards in the criminal justice system in Malaysia, then consider this -- when Razak Baginda was acquitted of murdering Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu, AG Gani Patail did not see the urgency to immediately appeal against that acquittal. Instead, AG Gani Patail took pains to explain that he respected the court's finding of fact and would not appeal. So, Razak took the first flight out to London and he has remained a free man until now. But not so for Rosli. And what was Rosli's crime? Did he commit murder, rape, robbery, and embezzlement of billions of ringgit of company's money -- like what Tajudin did to MAS? Did he receive bribes in the form of house renovations and lightings -- like what AG Gani received from Vincent Lye of Ho Hup? What has Rosli done that AG Gani is determined to revive an already dead appeal against him? The truth is, Rosli was targeted simply because he knew too much about Umno's plundering of MAS. So, last month, the de facto Minister for Law, Nazri Aziz, asked MAS to sack Rosli as the company's lawyer because Rosli had refused to withdraw the cases against Tajuddin. MAS has now appointed Dato' Hafarizam Harun, Umno's lawyer, who will facilitate the Global Settlement with Tajudin. You see, Umno needs to bury this case before GE 13 is announced, which may be very soon. And one way of doing that is to sack Rosli from acting for MAS and any of the other GLCs. The MACC has done good job in making him lose that clientele. And, as punishment for his stubbornness in acting for Dato' Ramli, who had to be eliminated from PDRM, AG Gani will just keep Rosli busy with his own criminal case and will just keep on appealing, as that will hurt Rosli financially. A very simple but effective game plan because the government does not pay cost for criminal prosecution, regardless that it is a fixed-up case. So you see, while we debate whether the Christians are trying to convert Muslims to Christianity, whether the Chinese are trying to take over the country and reduce the Malays to second-class citizens, whether Malaysia was ever colonised by Britain, whether PAS supports Communism, whether Anwar Ibrahim can't keep his dick in his pants, etc., those who walk in the corridors of power are quietly pulling off their scams. As I said, they create a bigger pain to take your mind of another pain. And Malaysia Today's job is to keep repeating it and keep reminding you -- how tiring it may be to keep repeating the same thing -- so that you will not, as Dr Mahathir said: Melayu mudah lupa. 
|
| Mat Zain Ibrahim's open letter to the IGP Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:44 PM PDT 
Selain daripada diri saya sendiri, saya mendapat maklum terdapat sekurang-kurangnya dua lagi pihak yang pernah menemui Perdana Menteri, YAB Dato Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak (PM Najib), bertujuan menyarankan supaya sesuatu tindakan diambil terhadap Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan. Ini memandangkan salahlaku jenayah yang telah mereka lakukan, adalah sangat ketara dan telah membebankan Negara, selain daripada memusnahkan kepercayaan Rakyat terhadap Institusi-Institusi Kerajaan. Mat Zain bin Ibrahim, matzainibrahim@gmail.com Kepada, YDH Tan Sri Ismail bin Haji Omar, IG, Ketua Polis Negara, Polis Di-Raja Malaysia, iho@rmp.gov.my 12hb.September 2011, Assalamualaikum wbt. KENYATAAN TERTUDUH-BENARKAH ANWAR DIANIAYA 1. Beberapa pihak telah memberikan pendapat berkaitan tindakan Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim (Anwar) membuat kenyataan pembelaan diri dalam perbicaraan kes Sodomy II dari kandang tertuduh pada 22.08.2011 yang lalu. Setiap seorang termasuk saya,adalah berhak keatas pendapat masing-masing. 2. Membuat kenyataan dari kandang tertuduh( Kenyataan Tertuduh) adalah salah satu dari tiga opsyen yang dibenarkan olih undang-undang kepada seorang Tertuduh. Olih yang demikian, tidak timbul sama ada Anwar telah melakukan suatu kesalahan dari sudut undang-undang atau sebaliknya. Beliau pasti telah diberi nasihat berkaitan konsekuen atau faedahnya memilih opsyen tersebut. 3. Pada pendapat saya, perkara yang sepatutnya dititikberatkan ialah samada ada keseluruhan kandungan Kenyataan Tertuduh itu adalah benar atau terdapat diantaranya, penegasan yang direka atau palsu. Kedapatan Anwar turut membuat dakwaan salahlaku jenayah yang spesifik, terhadap beberapa individu yang dinamakan dengan jelas. Apa pun opsyen yang dipilih, beliau telah mengemukakan kenyataan tersebut dihadapan seorang Hakim dalam suatu prosiding terbuka. Anwar tetap tertakluk kepada pendakwaan jenayah, sekiranya beliau dibuktikan telah membuat kenyataan yang direka atau palsu. 4. Dalam mengulas isu ini,saya memilih untuk menumpukan perhatian kepada beberapa perenggan Kenyataan Tertuduh seperti berikut:- 4.1. Dakwaan spesifik terhadap Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail(Gani Patail),Tan Sri Musa Hassan (Musa Hassan) dan Datuk Mohd. Yusof Zainal Abiden (Yusof) dalam peristiwa tahun 1998. Khususnya berkaitan mereka atau memberi keterangan palsu serta dakwaan "cover-up" dalam penyiasatan melibatkan Anwar. Termasuk tetapi tidak terhad kepada insiden mata-lebam. 4.2. Dakwaan berkaitan keterangan Forensik dan DNA. 4.3. Dakwaan keterlibatan dan salahguna kuasa mantan Perdana Menteri dalam penyiasatan melibatkan Anwar. 5. Saya mendapati hampir keseluruhan Kenyataan Tertuduh itu adalah merupakan "kenyataan ulangan untuk menyegarkan ingatan".Dakwaan-dakwaan yang Anwar lontarkan terhadap mantan Perdana Menteri Y.A.Bhg. Tun Mahathir Mohamed, Gani Patail, Musa Hassan dan beberapa yang lain, termasuk terhadap Jabatan Peguam Negara dan Polis, bukanlah perkara baru.Beliau pernah membuat kenyataan secara rasmi pada 3.3.1999 ketika prosiding Suruhanjaya Di-Raja siasatan insiden mata-lebam diadakan.Bagaimanapun dakwaan-dakwaan berkenaan tidak dicabar olih mana-mana pihak, walaupun daripada Gani Patail atau Musa Hassan sendiri. 5.1. Selanjutnya,dakwaan salahlaku jenayah secara lebih spesifik terhadap Gani Patail,Musa Hassan dan Yusof telah beliau kemukakan kepada Mahkamah dalam beberapa afidavit yang telah difailkan sejak 2008 ketika perbicaraan masih diperingkat Mahkamah Sesyen lagi. 5.2. Selain afidavit, Anwar juga telah membuat beberapa laporan Polis terhadap Gani Patail,Musa Hassan serta beberapa Timbalan Pendakwa Raya.Laporan-laporan berkenaan kesemuanya berkisar kepada dakwaan mereka keterangan atau membuat afidavit palsu. 6. Olih hal yang demikian, isu beliau membuat Kenyataan Tertuduh sedemikian, sebagai helah untuk mengelakkan diri daripada disoal balas olih Pasukan Pendakwaan, pada pendapat saya tidak tepat untuk dipersoalkan. 6.1. Malahan,Pasukan Pendakwaan atau sesiapa juga yang telah didakwa dalam afidavit atau laporan Polis berkenaan, bolih membuat aduan terhadap Anwar jika terbukti beliau telah mengikrarkan afidavit atau membuat laporan Polis palsu.Bagaimanapun sejak 1998 lagi, Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan tidak mengambil tindakan sedemikian. 7. Peraturan Mahkamah Tinggi berkaitan penegasan dalam sesuatu afidavit adalah jelas. Banyak case laws yang bolih dijadikan teladan. Antaranya dalam kes Sunrise Sdn.Bhd. vs First People (M) Sdn.Bhd & Anor [1996] 3 MLJ 533.Hakikatnya telah diterima olih Mahkamah bahawa, mana-mana penegasan mustahak dalam afidavit yang tidak dijawab atau dicabar hendaklah dianggap sebagai telah diakui kenyataan yang benar. 7.1. Contoh semasa yang terbaik ialah; dalam kes bunuh Altantuya Shaariibuu, bilamana Hakim telah membebaskan seorang tertuduh Abdul Razak Baginda tanpa dipanggil membela diri, semata-mata bersandarkan afidavit Razak yang tidak dicabar olih Pendakwa Raya. GANI PATAIL DAN MUSA HASSAN 8. Berbalik kepada dakwaan-dakwaan spesifik terhadap beberapa individu dalam Kenyataan Tertuduh tersebut, kesimpulan saya adalah seperti berikut; 8.1. Dakwaan bahawa Gani Patail pada 26.10.1998 telah mengarahkan seorang Dr. Abdul Rahman Yusof (Dr. Rahman) untuk menyediakan satu laporan Forensik palsu berkaitan kecederaan yang Anwar alami dalam insiden mata lebam itu adalah betul. Pemalsuan ini telah disusuli dengan 2 lagi pemalsuan olih Dr. Rahman yang dikatakan telah diarahkan sendiri olih Allahyarham Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, Peguam Negara ketika itu, dalam bulan Disember 1998. 8.2. Dakwaan bahawa Musa Hassan telah bersubahat dengan memberi kemudahan kepada Gani Patail dan Dr.Rahman menyempurnakan pemalsuan-pemalsuan tersebut diatas juga adalah betul. 8.3. Fakta bahawa 2 (dua) daripada 3 (tiga) laporan forensic palsu tersebut telah dikemukakan dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya Di-Raja insiden mata-lebam yang bersidang diantara 22.2.1999 hingga 4.3.1999, juga adalah betul. 9. Apapun keadaannya, keujudan 3 laporan forensik olih Dr.Rahman itu sendiri, merupakan keterangan yang kukuh bagi membuktikan berlakunya perbuatan mereka keterangan palsu terhadap Anwar.Saya menekankan bahawa keterangan ini adalah lebih konklusif daripada keterangan DNA. YUSOF 10. Dakwaan bahawa Yusof mengetahui keujudan ketiga-tiga laporan palsu tersebut dan penggunaanya dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya diatas, dalam sifat beliau sebagai wakil Peguam Negara sepanjang prosiding berkenaan, adalah berasas dan dipercayai betul. 10.1. Yusof sewajarnya mengistiharkan kepada Mahkamah, sama ada posisi beliau sebagai Ketua Pasukan Pendakwaan kes Sodomi II berada dalam konflik dengan posisi beliau sebagai wakil Peguam Negara dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya mata-lebam. Situasi ini timbul, memandangkan isu Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan memalsukan keterangan dan menggunakannya dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya itu telah dibangkitkan sejak 1.7.2008.Ini disusuli pula dengan dakwaan menerusi afidavit-afidavit dalam pembicaraan Sodomi II. Yusof sendiri turut ditohmahkan sebagai telah menyembunyikan keterangan salahlaku jenayah Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan. 10.2. Hakikatnya tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa Yusof adalah seorang saksi yang mustahak kepada dakwaan salahlaku jenayah terhadap Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan yang telah dilaporkan olih Anwar pada 1.7.2008 itu, manakala pada masa yang sama juga, Yusof adalah Ketua Pasukan Pendakwaan dalam perbicaraan Sodomy II terhadap Anwar. 10.3. Yusof hanya perlu untuk mengesahkan sama ada benar atau tidak ujud 3 laporan forensic yang disediakan olih Dr. Rahman diatas arahan Gani Patail dan Peguam Negara dalam penyiasatan insiden mata-lebam itu. Yang lainnya adalah untuk Mahkamah memutuskan. KETERANGAN FORENSIK DAN DNA 11. Dakwaan menerusi afidavit menyatakan Musa Hassan dan SAC Datuk Mohamad Rodwan Yusof (Rodwan) cuba mengambil tanpa kebenaran ("mencuri") sample darah Anwar, daripada simpanan / kawalan seorang Dr.Zahari Noor pada 15.10.1998 untuk kegunaan ujian DNA adalah dipercayai betul. Dr.Zahari sendiri telah memberikan keterangan kearah demikian pada 30.12.1998 ketika perbicaraan Anwar dalam kes salahguna kuasa dihadapan Hakim Dato Augustine Paul (mendiang). 11.1. Setidak-tidaknya, Musa Hassan masih terhutang kepada rakyat jelata, untuk menjelaskan apakah keterangan yang beliau ada ketika memberi taklimat kepada Tun Mahathir ,sehinggakan mantan Perdana Menteri itu begitu yakin untuk mempercayai Anwar terlibat dengan aktibiti seks luar nikah dan homosexsual. Manakala beberapa bulan selepas itu pula, Musa Hassan terdesak untuk mengumpulkan keterangan lanjut berkaitan DNA, sehingga terpaksa mencuri sample darah tersebut.Walhal pada ketika itu, Anwar telahpun dituduh di-Mahkamah dan sedang menunggu tarikh perbicaraan. Sepatutnya proses pengumpulan keterangan asas telah selesai. 11.2. Musa Hassan juga patut jelaskan samada tindakan "mencuri" sample darah sebelum perbicaraan kes dimulakan itu, adalah dalam pengetahuan dan direstui olih Tun Mahathir atau sebaliknya. Ataupun tindakan itu adalah diatas inisiatif beliau sendiri semata-mata untuk menjustifikasikan taklimat meyakinkan yang beliau beri kepada Tun Mahathir beberapa bulan sebelum itu. 11.2.1.Fakta bahawa Musa Hassan telah menemui Dr. Zahari berkaitan sample darah Anwar untuk tujuan DNA pada 15.10.1998 itu sahaja, sudah memadai untuk membuat kesimpulan bahawa Musa Hassan TIDAK mempunyai keterangan yang lengkap ketika mentaklimatkan Tun Mahathir berkaitan Anwar beberapa lama sebelum itu. 11.2.2.Sila rujuk laporan lengkap dalam "surat tertutup" saya bertarikh 27.12.2010 dialamatkan kepada Tan Sri KPN, Solicitor General dan YAB Perdana Menteri berkaitan pemalsuan DNA ini. DAKWAAN KETERLIBATAN TUN MAHATHIR 12. Menerusi Kenyataan Tertuduh dan afidavit-afidavit yang Anwar telah failkan sebelumnya,beliau telah mendakwa pada tahun 1998 Tun Mahathir telah menyalahgunakan kuasa beliau dalam memberi tekanan keatas Jabatan Kehakiman, Peguam Negara dan Polis sehingga mendapatkan beliau (Anwar) disabitkan dengan kesalahan yang beliau tidak pernah lakukan dan dijatuhkan hukuman penjara berjumlah 15 tahun. 12.1. Saya menegaskan bahawa Anwar TIDAK mempunyai keterangan untuk mengaitkan Tun Mahathir dengan tindakan Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dalam perbuatan merekacipta atau memberi keterangan palsu terhadap beliau (Anwar). 12.2. Sebaliknya, saya wajar menyatakan bahawa mengikut rekod rasmi dan apa yang tercatit diatas kertas dalam fail siasatan Polis, Tun Mahathir yang telah memberi nasihat dan amaran keras supaya tidak ada sebarang "cover-up" dilakukan dalam penyiasatan kes-kes melibatkan Anwar. 12.3. Nasihat dan amaran Tun Mahathir sedemikian itu telah saya rakamkan dalam diari penyiasatan kes mata-lebam pada 8.10.1998 setelah saya menemui beliau di-Jabatan Perdana Menteri yang dipanggil memberi taklimat kemajuan siasatan Polis dalam kes tersebut. 12.4. Nasihat dan arahan tersebut telah disampaikan kepada pucuk pimpinan tertinggi PDRM pada hari yang sama dan kepada Gani Patail dua hari kemudian.Laporan secara bertulis menerusi kertas siasatan kes, disampaikan kepada Gani Patail pada 15.10.1998 yang diakui penerimaannya secara rasmi. 13. Olih yang demikian,berdasarkan keterangan yang ada,saya menegaskan, segala penipuan dan pemalsuan keatas Anwar telah dilakukan olih Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dengan kehendak mereka sendiri untuk faedah masing-masing,melainkan mereka berdua bolih membuktikan terdapat ada pihak ketiga yang terlibat. MENGENAI SABITAN SALAH DAN HUKUMAN PENJARA 15 TAHUN 14. Sejak 1998 lagi, Anwar secara konsisten mengekalkan pengakuan tidak bersalah sambil mendakwa, bahawa pertuduhan-pertuduhan salahguna kuasa dan liwat yang dikenakan terhadapnya adalah pertuduhan palsu dan berniat jahat dan suatu konspirasi nekad, untuk memusnahkan kerjaya poliktiknya. Beliau turut mendakwa bahawa sabitan salah dan hukuman penjara 15 tahun yang dijatuhkan keatas diri beliau adalah suatu penganiayaan pihak Pemerintah keatas diri dan keluarga beliau. 15. Berdasarkan kepada keterangan dokumentari dan peristiwa-peistiwa penipuan dan pemalsuan yang dilakukan keatas diri beliau, yang bolih dan mampu dibuktikan, maka saya menyatakan bahawa dakwaan Anwar sedemikian itu adalah berasas dan mempunyai meritnya yang tersendiri. 15.1. Perbuatan "mencuri" sample darah Anwar untuk tujuan DNA olih Musa Hassan dan Rodwan telah dilakukan pada 15.10.1998. Manakala pemalsuan keterangan Forensic olih Dr.Rahman pula dilakukan pada 26.10.1998. Kedua-dua peristiwa yang berlaku, adalah diatas arahan dan atau/penyeliaan Gani Patail yang disempurnakan sebagai persediaan untuk keterangan tersebut digunakan terhadap Anwar, sebelum perbicaraan kes salahguna kuasa terhadap beliau dimulakan pada 2.11.1998. 15.2. Tanpa perlu mengulangi secara detail peristiwa diatas,saya menyatakan bahawa kedua-dua kejadian tersebut adalah antara beberapa keterangan kukuh untuk membuktikan keujudan niat jahat (mala fide) dan sikap bias Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dalam penyiasatan dan pendakwaan kes ini. 15.3. Walaupun Hakim mendiang Dato Augustine Paul menolak (expunged) keterangan DNA akibat penjelasan yang menimbulkan kecurigaan daripada Ahli Kimia Encik Lim Kong Boon, tidak bermakna bahawa perbuatan "mencuri" sample darah bagi tujuan DNA dan mereka keterangan palsu dalam perkara ini, terbatal sama sekali. Malah ianya mengukuhkan lagi dakwaan-dakwaan bahawa sample darah yang dicuri dari kawalan Dr.Zahari itu telah ditanam (planted) diatas "tilam masyhor" yang diusung turun-naik Mahkamah ketika perbicaraan. 15.4. Perbuatan Musa Hassan memberi keterangan palsu ("perjury") dalam perbicaraan kes salahguna kuasa terhadap Anwar, tiba-tiba terbongkar, apabila keterangan beliau berikan sendiri sebagai saksi PW75 dalam perbicaraan Kes Pendakwa Raya vs Ramli Yusuff di-Mahkamah Sesyen Kota Kinabalu, dibandingkan dengan keterangan yang beliau berikan dalam kes salahguna kuasa terhadap Anwar tahun 1998. Seorang Ahli Parlimen telah membuat laporan Polis terhadap Musa Hassan kerana melakukan kesalahan "perjury" ini dalam bulan Mac 2010, tetapi penyiasatannya disenyapkan begitu sahaja. Analogi 16 Jika Musa Hassan dan Rodwan tidak pernah menemui Dr.Zahari berkaitan sample darah Anwar seperti yang dinyatakan diatas, maka Dr. Zahari Noor tidak akan memberikan keterangan sedemikian dalam perbicaraan kes salahguna kuasa terhadap Anwar dalam bulan Disember 1998. Rodwan juga tidak akan menyebut perkara DNA ini tanpa sebab dalam percakapan yang dirakamkan darinya pada 1.10.1998. 16.1. Jika Musa Hassan sememangnya seorang yang jujur, termasuk apabila memberi keterangan bersumpah,maka Hakim Supang Lian dari Mahkamah Sesyen Kota Kinabalu, tidak akan melabelkan beliau sebagai seorang saksi yang tidak bolih dipercayai, dan kesaksiannya juga ditolak. Walhal beliau adalah seorang Ketua Polis Negara dan memakai pakaian seragam lengkap ketika memberikan keterangan tersebut. Pendek kata Hakim Supang Lian tidak akan membuat komen sedemikian melainkan beliau mempunyai keterangan yang kukuh. 16.2. Jika Musa Hassan tidak ada memberi keterangan palsu ketika perbicaraan kes salahguna kuasa terhadap Anwar, dihadapan Hakim mendiang Dato Augustine Paul dalam tahun 1998, maka tidak akan ujud nota keterangan sedemikian yang bolih dibandingkan pula dengan nota keterangan beliau di-Mahkamah Sesyen Kota Kinabalu sebelas tahun kemudian. 16.3. Jika Musa Hassan tidak pernah memberi kemudahan dan membantu Gani Patail dalam membuat dan mereka keterangan-keterangan palsu dalam penyiasatan insiden mata-lebam tahun 1998, maka saya sendiri tidak akan merakamkan dalam diari penyiasatan saya ketika itu, mengenai peranan dan penglibatan beliau dan Gani Patail dalam salahlaku jenayah ini. Memoirs 17. Jika Musa Hassan telah berjaya meyakinkan Tun Mahathir untuk mempercayai Anwar terlibat dalam aktibiti homosexsual,lantas beliau dipecat dan dikenakan beberapa pertuduhan jenayah sehingga disabitkan kesalahan dan dipenjarakan, maka nota keterangan Musa Hassan berikan dalam perbicaraan salahguna kuasa terhadap Anwar itu sendiri, akhirnya telah membongkarkan segala pemalsuan dan penipuan lampau yang Musa Hassan telah lakukan. 17.1. Begitu juga apa yang berlaku keatas Gani Patail. Sungguhpun beliau berjaya meyakinkan Tun Mahathir dan Jemaah Menteri ketika itu,dengan memperkecilkan hasil penyiasatan Polis terhadap insiden mata-lebam, sehinggakan Jemaah Menteri percaya bahawa PDRM tidak telus dan professional dalam tugas mereka,lantas menubuhkan Suruhanjaya Di-Raja penyiasatan pula. Maka keterangan-keterangan yang terkandung dalam laporan Suruhanjaya itu sendiri,akhirnya telah mengesahkan segala pemalsuan dan penipuan yang Gani Patail telah lakukan. 17.2. Tanpa diduga 13 tahun kemudian,Tun Mahathir telah mengeluarkan memoirs beliau dalam "A Doctor in the House", pada bulan Mac 2011. Secara sengaja atau kebetulan, memoirs Tun dalam membincangkan peristiwa mata-lebam dan dakwaan terhadap Anwar, sebaliknya telah mengukuhkan lagi keterangan salahlaku jenayah terhadap Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan pula. 17.2.1.Jika Tun Mahathir dalam memoirs sendiri telah berterus terang pernah tersalah anggap, bahawa kecederaan mata-lebam yang Anwar alami itu adalah dilakukannya sendiri (self-inflicted), hanya untuk kemudiannya sedar bahawa kecederaan tersebut akibat serangan mantan Ketua Polis Negara,maka Tun juga bolih tersalah anggap mengenai aktibiti homosexsual Anwar. Tun Mahathir tidak bolih mengenepikan kemungkinan beliau telah diperdayakan olih Musa Hassan dengan butir taklimat yang ditokok-tambah atau dimanipulasikan. 17.2.2.Menilai semula penglibatan Musa Hassan dalam peristiwa, yang ramai tidak menyangka beliau sanggup lakukan,iaitu, "mencuri" sample darah untuk tujuan DNA,bersubahat dengan Gani Patail dalam mereka 3 laporan Forensik palsu serta kemudiannya memberi keterangan palsu dalam perbicaraan melibatkan Anwar, yang kesemuanya berlaku selepas beliau memberikan taklimat kepada Tun, maka kemungkinan Tun Mahathir telah diperdayakan menjadi lebih credible. 17.2.3.Saya menyatakan Tun sememangnya serius apabila beliau pada 8.10.1998 mengarahkan menerusi saya supaya tidak ada sebarang "cover-up" dalam penyiasatan kes-kes terhadap Anwar. Bagaimanapun Tun tidak mempunyai kawalan terhadap tingkahlaku Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan. 17.2.4.Tun Mahathir sendiri mengaku telah mengarahkan KPN supaya berhati-hati apabila menangani Anwar. Malah Tun (memberitahu saya ketika menemui beliau) telah meminta supaya Anwar tidak digari apabila ditangkap, jika bolih. Namun, Anwar tetap juga dibelasah olih mantan KPN tersebut sebaik ditangkap ketika kedua belah tangannya masih bergari. Begitu juga keadaannya,walaupun Tun telah mengarahkan supaya tidak ada sebarang "cover-up" terhadap kes-kes melibatkan Anwar, dan arahan tersebut telah saya sampaikan kepada mereka yang berkenaan,secara lisan dan bertulis, namun Tun tidak berupaya untuk menghalang Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan daripada melakukan pemalsuan dan penipuan keatas Anwar dibelakang beliau. 17.2.5.Sekiranya Gani Patail sanggup melibatkan diri melesapkan dokumen yang mengaitkan beliau dengan salahlaku jenayah, sebelum laporan Suruhanjaya Di-Raja mata-lebam dipersembahkan kepada SPB Yang Di-Pertuan Agong, maka apalah manipulasi keatas rakyat biasa kepada beliau. 17.2.6.Dengan berat hati saya menyatakan,bahawa terdapat beberapa kenyataan mustahak Tun dalam Chapter 53 "Doctor in the House", khususnya menyentuh berkaitan siasatan kes mata-lebam dan tindak-tanduk Pendakwa Raya dalam perkara sama, adalah berbeza dengan fakta terkandung dalam fail siasatan rasmi yang dibuat pada 1998. Saya percaya pekara ini bolih berlaku akibat Tun telah diberikan maklumat atau taklimat yang telah dimanipulasikan dan mengelirukan. Kesimpulan Perkara 18. Berdasarkan kepada hujah-hujah yang tersebut diatas yang disokong dengan dokumen-dokumen dan keterangan yang ada dalam milik dan pengetahuan saya sendiri, saya berpendapat bahawa sabitan salah keatas Anwar dalam pertuduhan salahguna kuasa keatas beliau,telah diperolehi olih pihak Pendakwaan melalui jalan penipuan dan pemalsuan yang telah dilakukan dengan niat bersama olih Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan untuk faedah bersama mereka. 18.1. Tidak salah untuk menyatakan hukuman penjara yang Anwar telah lalui adalah penganiayaan terhadap beliau olih mereka berdua. PENUTUP 19. Selain daripada diri saya sendiri, saya mendapat maklum terdapat sekurang-kurangnya dua lagi pihak yang pernah menemui Perdana Menteri, YAB Dato Seri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak (PM Najib), bertujuan menyarankan supaya sesuatu tindakan diambil terhadap Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan. Ini memandangkan salahlaku jenayah yang telah mereka lakukan, adalah sangat ketara dan telah membebankan Negara, selain daripada memusnahkan kepercayaan Rakyat terhadap Institusi-Institusi Kerajaan. Saya mempunyai alasan untuk menyatakan, PM Najib turut sedar bahawa keterangan terhadap Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan adalah jelas dan kukuh. Malahan, tidak ada jalan keluar bagi mereka berdua. Namun begitu, PM Najib nampaknya masih belum bersedia untuk melaksanakan kuasa beliau sebagai Perdana Menteri diatas sesuatu pertimbangan yang hanya beliau ketahui. Mungkin beliau sedang menunggu masa yang sesuai. Saya yakin PM Najib tidak akan timbulkan soal ketiadaan atau kekurangan keterangan terhadap mereka berdua. 20. Sebagai seorang yang terlibat secara langsung menangani isu-isu berkaitan Anwar sejak 1998, serta mempunyai pengalaman bersemuka dan berinteraksi dengan kesemua "pemain-pemain utama" perkara dalam persoalan ini,terutamanya Tun Mahathir sendiri, Gani Patail, Musa Hassan, Anwar Ibrahim, selain daripada Pesuruhjaya-Pesuruhjaya Suruhanjaya Di-Raja siasatan mata-lebam dan juga PM Najib, maka saya mampu menegaskan, bahawa segala pendedahan fakta yang saya buat dalam surat keluaran ini dan juga dalam beberapa banyak Surat Terbuka saya sebelum ini, tidak pernah lari sedikitpun daripada landasan kebenaran. 21. Saya menyimpan hak saya untuk menyambung ulasan mengenai isu ini pada masa yang sesuai, memandangkan perbicaraan kes Sodomi II akan disambung semula pada 19 September 2011, walaupun saya sedar akan risikonya. Sekian, untuk makluman dan tindakan YDH Tan Sri dimana berkaitan mengikut peraturan Undang-Undang sedia ada. Salam sejahtera. Yang benar, Mat Zain Ibrahim |
| Pakatan may lose 9 MP seats if… Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:32 PM PDT An academic says that if there is a 30% swing in Indian votes, the opposition will lose nine seats. But Ong Kian Ming predicts only a 10% shift in votes. (Free Malaysia Today) - Pakatan Rakyat may lose nine Parliament seats if there is a 30% swing in Indian votes for Barisan Nasional, according to academic Ong Kian Ming. Among the seats listed by the USCI lecturer were Lembah Pantai, held by PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar, and Sungai Siput, which is now in the hands of Parti Sosialis Malaysia's Dr Michael Jeyakumar. The other seven seats were Kuala Langat, Merbok, Bruas, Kuala Selangor, Teluk Intan, Hulu Langat and Nibong Tebal. However, Ong predicted that Indian votes would swing by only 10% in the next general election based on the 9% shift in support witnessed for BN during the Hulu Selangor by election. He was speaking at a forum entitled "13th General Election – The battle to win the hearts and minds for the Indian vote" organised by the Malaysian Indian Business Association (Miba) here yesterday. On the same note, Ong said the opposition was more secured in state seats. "Even with a 10% Indian vote swing, BN can't win these seats," he added.
Both sides have failed He also pointed out that both sides of the political divide had failed to put forward the Indian agenda. "There is weak leadership in MIC despite the change in leadership," he said in view of party president G Palanivel not being an elected leader. Palanivel had been appointed acting president after S Samy Vellu stepped down earlier this year after leading the BN component party for three decades. Ong also identified Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak as a factor impeding the implementation of an Indian agenda due to the latter's fear of Malay right-wing groups. As for Pakatan, the academic told his audience of about 120 that the opposition coalition lacked a clear Indian leader. "Within the multiracial DAP and PKR, Indian leaders must compete against other Indians on an unofficial quota," he said, adding that PAS and PKR were more concentrated on winning Malay votes. Apart from Ong, Denison Jayasooria from the Institute of Ethnic Studies, UKM, also spoke during the first session of the day-long forum. A total of six sessions were held on various aspects with regard to the Indian community. Among them were the role of the civil society and the federal government's assistance to the community. Other speakers included former Suhakam commissioner N Siva Subramaniam, Selangor exco Dr Xavier Jayakumar, Subang MP R Sivarasa and Sungai Siput MP Jeyakumar. Notably missing from the list of speakers were MIC representatives but two central working committee members KP Samy and S Manivasagum were present in their personal capacity. READ MORE HERE |
| Elton John backs push for Malaysia, Commonwealth to repeal anti-gay laws Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:22 PM PDT (The Malaysian Insider) - A new international gay rights group wants Commonwealth countries including Malaysia to do away with what it calls "colonial anti-gay laws", and is now receiving support from politicians and celebrities to fight its cause. The UK's Independent newspaper reported the leaders of all three main political parties in Britain as well as top UK music stars Elton John and George Micheal will throw their support behind the movement — called Kaleidoscope which is trying to combat homophobic discrimination in the Commonwealth. It comes after campaigners grew increasingly concerned at how homosexual persecution is being actively encouraged by some Commonwealth states — particularly in Africa. Currently, 38 of the 54 members of the Commonwealth criminalise homosexuality, with penalties in including 20 years imprisonment plus caning in Malaysia. Gays and lesbians' rights are not recognised in Malaysia. The country retains a colonial-era penal code criminalising sodomy. Social attitudes towards the gay community are also shaped by Islam, the official religion in Malaysia. Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is currently facing sodomy charges for the second time in his life. He was charged with sodomy and corruption in 1998 after he was sacked from the Cabinet, and was later convicted and jailed for both offences. In a diplomatic note to Washington DC that was leaked by whistleblower site Wikileaks through the Malaysia Today website, US Ambassador James R. Keith had said a recent Cabinet member and some of Datuk Seri Najib Razak's senior aides would have found themselves under investigation for homosexual "behaviour" if the government were on a morals campaign". READ MORE HERE |
| MAS-Air Asia deal revisited Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:07 PM PDT 
SAKMONGKOL AK47 We hear of disturbing news that 15,000 MAS workers want the MAS-AA deal stopped. They have threatened to not vote BN in the coming GE. Is this the proverbial spanner thrown or does it suggest that the MAS-AA deal was indeed opaque and shady? I asked the Oracle of Syed Putra- can the MAS-AA deal be stopped? And what do you think of the deal?
It's difficult for anyone not to impute some massive insider trading in the deal. Just like the recent purchase of E&O by Sime Darby just after a central figure in E&O increased his shares. But the authorities appear to be neutered when it comes to the rich powerful and the connected. A few months ago, the same person increased his shares ahead of the announcement involving Kencana and Sapura Crest Petroleum. Now I hear, there are rumors saying that the PDA (Petroleum Development Act) is going to be amended that will effectively turned Sapura- Kencana into a second PETRONAS. It will acquire the same monopolistic rights over energy resources. PETRONAS our national oil company will have to share the industry cake with somebody.
These bastards at the top seem to have an insatiable lust when it comes to greed. It's the same with MAS. MAS is an exalted brand name. It's a crime to dilute the brand name and take the lazy man's way out by cannibalizing it and making money in that process. Khazanah buys back shares from Singaporeans not on account of good business sense but on account of national pride. Yet it doesn't seem to have the same patriotic sentiments when it comes to diluting and divesting MAS shares even to AAsia.
Hey- I like your analogy of the modern Hamman cutting his teeth both in Pharaoh's and Moses's business.
To answer your question as to whether the deal can be revoked- I will have to say yes.
Yes it can - depending on the will and resolve of the PM. That's a very tall order, suggested the Oracle. The will and resolve of the PM depends on his understanding of the problem, what he wants to do and the significance he attaches to a strategic asset such as MAS. If the PM's thinking over these elements are fluid and ephemeral ( for want of less brutish terms) then the opaque and shady deals involving MAS and Air Asia will move on to its conclusion.
So I read with interest when Nazir Razak pompously declared stop the shady and opaque deals or suffer the consequences. I thought he was referring to the deal in which CIMB played, in his own words, a mere matchmaker for Air Asia and Khazanah.
Khazanah forces MAS to lose its manhood by parting away with a substantial portion of its equity in return for a lower number of shares but which are more valuable in Air Asia. Before the deal, the shares of Air Asia were traded on the high side, but after the deal was announced, the shares of Air Asia plummeted. It would almost appear that before the deal, the shares of Air Asia were artificially pushed up to allow its owners to part away with a smaller portion of their shares.
Maybe, it would have been better to wait for the shares of Air Asia to go lower and swap shares. In that way, Kahzanah would have acquired a bigger portion of Air Asia and through that action, improved our national pride. If they had done that, then maybe, its talk about pride contains some credibility. If not shut the F**k up about national pride.
Meanwhile, we are happy to note that the banker who has once said that the NEP has been bastardized and the ladder by which he has reached the top should now be thrown away is a workaholic coming to his office on Sundays and sometimes, as the guards below will tell you, coming at 2 am in the morning. I told the guard-
I can do better- if I am paid RM 1.2 million a month, I will even sleep in the office.
With all the deals done by Khazanah and other GLCs are accomplished with stealth, opaqueness and even shady, what's the conclusion? Did we hear of any AGM preceding the MAS-AA deal? What happens to the minority interests?
The conclusion is: The country's economy is in unsafe hands. A few private individuals will make mountains of money whereas the problems of MAS will escalate. READ MORE HERE |
| The Federation of Malaya Independence Act 1957 Posted: 11 Sep 2011 04:59 PM PDT Any such agreement as aforesaid may make provision for the termination of Her Majesty's sovereignty and jurisdiction in respect of the said Settlements, and of all other Her power and jurisdiction in and in respect of the Malay States or the Federation as a whole, and the revocation or modification of all or any of the provisions of the Federation of Malaya Agreement, 1948, and of any other agreements in force between Her Majesty and the Rulers of the Malay States. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin 
|
| Parameswara is a certified Singaporean Keling (not a joke) Posted: 11 Sep 2011 04:39 PM PDT By John Doe I love it when Malaysians discuss History. I love it even more when half-past-six people start brandishing their "historical prowess". Since we are all on the bandwagon of rewriting accurate Histories of Malaya, let's start by asking the most pertinent question of all. Who exactly is Parameswara? Ironically, Parameswara does NOT even exist in Sejarah Melayu, which is repeatedly touted to be "The most accurate" Document detailing Malayan History. I repeat. Parameswara does NOT even appear once in Sejarah Melayu. Who then discovered Malacca? Apparently, it was a Singaporean named Raja Secander Shah (Persian Name) who did. And he actually founded Malacca in Muar, in a place called Biawak-Busuk. (bear with me, and read it for yourself later in the link of the complete Sejarah Melayu HERE from the National Library of Singapore) (http://sgebooks.nl.sg/details/020000016.html in case the hyperlink does not work) I'll simplify the genealogy of Secander Shah in the Visual Below. 
It is interesting to note that the above genealogy list, is a direct copy-paste from Sejarah Melayu does NOT correlate nor resemble your children's present History textbooks. It is now clear why UMNO does not want anyone reading Sejarah Melayu. Sejarah Melayu is clearly anti-UMNO. I look forward to UMNO banning Sejarah Melayu soon. MBRAS, watch out ! Go lock your doors, or you might suddenly strangle yourself, and your dead body decide to jump out of the 14th floor window. Notice, that Raja Secander Shah, and his son, and his son's son NEVER converted to Islam. It was actually his great-grandson, Raja Kichil Besar, who converted because, he had a dream about Nabi Muhammad, and woke up in a pool of sweat, and noticed that his penis had the appearance of being circumcised!! Not kidding. (Go read it on page 90) I'll be kind enough NOT to speculate how this actually happened. Anyway, Raja Kichil Besar then had his name changed to Sultan Muhammad Shah. It is interesting to note that Sultan Muhammad Shah married his uncle's daughter (no name of daughter provided in Sejarah Melayu), and had two male sons, Raja Macat, and Raja Kichil Mambang. His other two known wives were also respectively from the "Land of Kling", and the other, from the Land of Racan. I am proposing that Racan is actually Arakan (formerly known as Rakhine), situated in West Burma. They are Rohingya, and are half Burmese-Bangladeshi. They have been around well before 1500BC. I don't care what your Malaysian school textbooks tell you, and I certainly couldn't care less what your tuition teachers tell you. This is all coming directly from Sejarah Melayu. If your child's school does not like what you are reading now, then too bad. They should either shut up, or shut down. Alternatively, parents, please send your children to a real school instead. Let's get a little into who Raja Secander Shah actually was. To begin with, he was the son of Paduka Sri Maharaja, who was a child-murderer. I repeat, Raja Secander, the father of the founder-of-Malacca's father was a CHILD MURDERER!! And if one were to take the effort to read from pages 83-85, will fully know that this Evil King killed this boy because the child had a high IQ, aka smart, aka clever. In fact, this boy was much smarter than the King, and therefore, the following verbatim sentence is so chilling: "Then the Maha-raja returned, and all the great men represented to him, " Sire, if this boy, though so young, possesses such an uncommon understanding, what will he do when he grows up. It will be best for us to kill him." " Very well, let us kill him," said the raja. He was accordingly put to death, but the guilt of his blood lay upon the country." ( Sejarah Melayu page 85 ) The reward for this smart boy, whom, using his intelligence to save his country, was death instead. A trait which UMNO has sadly decided to assume, assimilate and adopt. I dare anyone who can claim that this is an interpetational error !! Les Majeste? Sure, someone go arrest Tun Sri Lanang then. He's already been dead for close to four hundred years now. Raja Secander is written to be a descendant of the Greek, Alexander the Great (Iskandar Zulkarnain). In fact, it is repeated over and over in Sejarah Melayu. As if for reinforcement, Sejarah Melayu spends the first 5 pages of Sejarah Melayu detailing the lineage, and yet, every name seems to be of Indian Origin. This is even more telling when on page pg 30 "...It was now noised all over the world, that the descendant of Raja Secander Zulkarneini, of the race of Hindostan, had descended on the mountain Sagantang Maha Mini, and was now in the land of ...." The 17th Century author of Sejarah Melayu obviously had no idea who Alexander the Great was. How can he confuse a Greek with an Hindustani? Let me also, at this point interject that he is also writing about Alexander the Great, who is of the year 340BC; you do the math. In fact, it is repeated over and over and over again in Sejarah Melayu that the Malaccan Sultanate are descendants of Iskandar Zulkarnain, and that the neighbour Kings wanted to see/ meet the Malaccan Kings ONLY BECAUSE they are supposed to be descendants of Iskandar Zulkarnain. How does one spell "wishful thinking"? It is also interesting to note that on page 30:
"..." there is no greater prince than the raja of China, nor of more noble extraction, whom she could get for her husband, nor is there any country greater than the land of China." So, for some obscure reason, every King in this region wanted to marry a Chinese, as evidenced in Sejarah Melayu, such as on page 32:
"...the noble Chinese who had married Tunjong-bui, was made raja of the upper country of Palembang, and had the command of all the Chinese in Palembang. The present Rajas of Palembang are all descended of this (Chinese) family..." And again, on pg 34: "...When he (Raja of Majapahit) arrived at Tanjong-pura, he paid his respects to Sangsapurba, who received him graciously, and gave him (Raja of Majapahit) in marriage his daughter, Chandra Devi, the younger sister of the princess of China. After his marriage, he returned to Majapahit; and it is from this marriage that (all) the rajas of Majapahit are descended..." I have a serious question here. Is the younger sister of a princess not also a princess herself? Why the need for a double-descriptive? Also, why does she carry an Indian name? Perhaps Hang Li-po is also a "younger sister of the Princess". Does "younger sister of the Princess" really mean a handmaiden, aka servant or slave? As mentioned before, no Ming Emperor's family name is Hang. Every single Ming Emperor's last name is Tzu (pronounced as Chu), hence, her name should have been Tzu Li-po. Next, comes the revered position of the (in the writer's own words) "Kling", as evidenced on page 45:
"..THERE was a raja of the land of Kling, named Adi Bernilam Raja Mudeliar, who was descended of Raja Suran. He was raja of the city of Bija Nagara, and had a son named Jambuga Rama Mudeliar, who succeeded to the throne on the death of his father. He had a daughter named Nila Panchadi, of celebrated beauty, and of the pg 46 most excellent qualities. How many were the rajas who preferred their suit to her! but her father refused to give her in marriage to them, as not being of her own race. At last the fame of her beauty and qualities reached Singhapura, and Sri Tri-buana sent Maha Indra B'hupala to solicit her hand for his son, Raja Kichil Besar. pg 47 When they reached Singhapura, Sri Tri-buana was waiting their arrival at Tanjong Barus, and returned with them to Singhapura. There he celebrated the nup- tials of his son with the Kling princess, and for three months the previous festivi- ties continued, and when a fortunate period arrived, the Prince Raja Kichil Besar was united to the Princess Nila Panchadi..." What then can we deduce from the above? That Sri Tri-buana looked Kling enough for Raja Adi Bernilam Raja Mudeliar to allow his daughter to marry. Thus, resulting in the marriage of two very Kling-looking people, and the beautiful start of the Malaccan Empire. We also know, that both husband and wife, were descended from the very same Raja Suran, and hence, declared as the same "Kling Race". (Unlike the flexi-multiple-race constitutional-Malay today) We also now know from Sejarah Melayu, that the Raja Secander Shah founded Malacca, and that he had Greek Blood, Indonesian Blood, Chinese Blood, and Hindustani and/or Kling blood. He alone is "Truly Asia". For very obvious reasons, he was now "certified" to be of the SAME "KLING" blood, and thus, qualified to marry the Kling King, Adi Bernilam Raja Mudeliar's daughter. Together they had many Kling children, and are the ancestors of the Malayan Sultanate. Please remember that I am ONLY extracting from Sejarah Melayu, and have even provided you with the appropriate page number by which you can cross-check it for yourself. Next, her name is Hong Li-Po, and NOT Hang Li Poh. (Hang) Li Poh, and (Hang) Di Poh were Chinese Males in Sejarah Melayu. Do NOT get them confused. Also, for the record, that RACIST email claiming that Hang Tuah's DNA is Chinese (which has been circulating for years now) is COMPLETELY UNTRUE ! I simply cannot remember how many tens of times I've refutted this. There is no such organization as The Federal Association of Archaeology & Research of Michigan, USA. That piece was written by a racist idiot, and NOT by a researcher. As such, I won't waste any more time on it. On the same note, there were nine Hang's in Sejarah Melayu. They are listed verbatim on page 161:
"...Hang Jabut, Hang Casturi, Hang Lakir, Hang Lakiu, Hang Ali, Hang Secander, Hang Haran, Hang Husain, Hang Tuah..." and no, neither William Hung nor Samo Hung are their cousins. Also, for the record, Hang Tuah killed Hang Casturi for chopping up one of the (Muslim) King's concubine from her head till her stomach, and NOT Hang Jebat in Sejarah Melayu. Ironically, it was the many scheming concubines of the founder of Malacca (Raja Secander Shah) which caused him to be attacked by Jowo, and his subsequent need to flee Singapore. (read page 86) "..He had a daughter of exquisite beauty, of whom the raja was deeply enamoured, but the rest of the raja's mistresses concerted against her, and accused her of infidelity. Raja Secander Shah was grievously enraged, and ordered her to be impaled at Ujong Pasar..." How true is Sejarah Melayu? Can we believe it to be Gospel Truth? Sure, if you can also believe in the throwing of bus-sized rocks across rivers by Badang (like Obelix and his Menhirs), and the riding of a Seahorse named Sambrani which can also fly in the sky. (reminds me of Aquaman) The opening passages of Sejarah Melayu details how Raja Suran came all the way from "Tanah Keling" to invade Malaya, only to find that it was already fully inhabited by Siamese speaking people. The "famous" Kota Gelanggi is on page 10. Page 11 tells how Siamese Troops battled with the Kling Troops, and so on. On page 13, Raja Suran shot an arrow into Raja Chulan's heart, thus killing him. This Raja Suran took four wives from Malaya alone, with Raja Chulan's daughter, Putri Onang-kiu being the last wife recorded. Read again, Raja Chulan had Siamese Troops. Was Raja Chulan a Thai? Anyone still doubting that Malaya belonged to the Thai's now? Maybe Yingluck can liberate Malaya from UMNO?? Remember what i wrote about Hang Jebat being either a Thai or a Sri Lankan? Can you decide now with all this new evidence streaming in? What I also find ironic in Sejarah Melayu (or any old text, for that matter), is that everyone was always of "Great Beauty", as if no fugly people existed on this planet. A character of interest is this Tun Perpatih Tulos, who supplied his daughters as wives for Raja Secander Shah (page 85), as well as his 3 grandsons of Raja Secander, Radin Bagus, Raja Tengah, and Radin Anum. (see chart above) This means that their grandmother is also their sister-in-law. This is simply amazing !! Add to that, Raja Kichil Besar married to his mother's sister's daughter. In other words, Raja Kichil Besar's great-grandmother is also his mother-in-law's sister. Or, his great-great-grandfather is also his Father-in-Law, and is also his employee, the Bendahara. WOW !! This is getting truly complex now !! Talk about massive in-breeding !! On a light note, I'll introduce you all to a song, sung by Ray Stevens titled "I'm my own Grandpa" on this youtube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYlJH81dSiw Needless to say, Tun Perpatih Tulos is also a descendant of the same Kling Raja Suran who invaded the already populated Malaya, well before Raja Secander Shah's grandpa was born. It was exactly that period that Malaya was known as "Barr Siam". Yes, Malaya belonged to the Thai's before Raja Secander Shah's time. If all of the above confuses you, just remember that Parameswara was NEVER mentioned in Sejarah Melayu. And if anyone insists that Parameswara is indeed Raja Secander Shah (Persian name), then ask for proof of conversion to Islam in Sejarah Melayu. For the record, the Malaccan Sultanate was founded by a certified Keling from Singapore. And because of that, Daulat Keling Singapura !!! Spread this far, spread this wide. Bring it to PTA meetings, and above all, put it into the new Syllabus of Malayan History under the new PR governmen. Oh, and please give a copy to Mahathir. He's the one who inspired this official rewrite. Salam |
| Tulis sejarah negara versi baru - alang-alang berbohong, bohong betul-betul Posted: 11 Sep 2011 04:38 PM PDT 
ASPAN ALIAS Majlis Professor Negara (MPN) telah mengeluarkan kenyataan yang negara kita tidak pernah dijajah oleh mana-mana penjajah dan negara hanya menjadi 'protectorate state' kepada British. Kita baru sahaja merayakan ulang tahun kemerdekaan yang ke-54 pada tanggal 31 Ogos yang lalu, tiba-tiba ada pihak menyatakan secara formal yang Malaya dan Malaysia tidak pernah dijajah. Professor Zainal Keling menyatakan kita hanya sebuah 'protectorate state' bukan tanah jajahan British. Kalau apa yang dinyatakan oleh MPN itu benar maka kerajaan khususnya UMNO mesti secara jelas dan formal membuat kenyataan resmi yang negara kita adalah seperti negara Thailand yang tidak pernah di jajah.
Kerajaan kita mesti membuat kenyataan resmi serta memberikan kefahaman kepada rakyat penaklukan Jepun ke atas negara kita dahulu itu apa dia jika itu bukan penjajahan. Ini merupakan kenyataan yang amat serius dan ianya perlu mendapat respon yang cepat dan jelas terutamanya dari Perdana Menteri kita Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak.
Jika benar negara kita tidak pernah dijajah kerajaan wajar membatalkan cuti umum yang di wartakan kerajaan bagi mengingati ulang tahun kemerdekaan kita. Tugu negara juga wajar diruntuhkan kerana kita tidak pernah berjuang untuk mencapai kemerdekaan.
Cogan kata yang melaungkan ungkapan Merdeka dalam media masa perdana semasa minggu sambutan perayaan ulang tahun kemerdekaan itu harus di buang dan tidak boleh disiarkan lagi.
UMNO lebih-lebih lagi harus membatalkan secara resmi sebagai sebuah parti yang tidak pernah membawa kemerdekaan dari penjajah kerana negara kita tidak pernah dijajah oleh British atau mana-mana kuasa asing dalam sejarah kita.
Kerajaan kita wajar mentauliahkan Professor Zanal bin Keling untuk menulis sejarah baru negara dan kerajaan wajar membatalkan buku teks sejarah yang dibaca oleh kanak-kanak sekolah dan mahasiswa di setiap Universiti dan bermula dengan pelajar di bawah kelolaan Professor Zainal Keling.
Kerajaan wajar hanya mengiktiraf tulisan sejarah oleh Professor Zainal Keling dan biarkan beliau menulis apa-apa sejarah tentang negara kita. Jika itu caranya UMNO dan BN untuk mengekalkan kuasa, buatlah apa yang mereka suka tentang sejarah negara kita.
Jika kita bersetuju untuk menulis sejarah yang baru bagi negara saya mencadangkan juga bahawa UMNO bermula pada tahun 1988 kerana UMNO ini tidak pernah berjuang untuk kemerdekaan negara kerana negara kita tidak pernah dijajah seperti yang dinyatakan oleh Professor Zainal Keling itu.
Bila MPN dan Zainal Keling diberikan mandat untuk menulis sejarah baru negara saya ingin mencadangkan kepada beliau bahawa sebelum Februari 1988 UMNO tidak pernah wujud supaya rakyat yang seperti saya ini tidak dapat berkata-kata apa-apa lagi. READ MORE HERE |
| Freeing the Malays and Muslims from religious mind control Posted: 11 Sep 2011 04:03 PM PDT By Pak Sako, CPI There appears to be a Malay-Islamic Inquisition in Malaysia. It does not involve burnings at the stake. It comes as ostracism at school, the workplace and in the community for failing to comply with rigid parameters. Not wearing a headscarf is frowned upon. Transgenders are institutional pariahs. Religious arrogance and zealotry are norms. Muslim leaders can assuredly rebuff equal partnership on inter-religious discussion panels. The Islamic moral police is free to raid churches and insult the Malay person's dignity and autonomy. Refusal to play along with another community's passion for its customs is condemned as chauvinistic or unconstitutional – the fate of elected representatives in Sarawak who chose the customary suit and tie over expensive uniforms and songkoks for a state assembly opening. Closing the gap with South Korea or Singapore at the top of quality-of-life indicators such as the UN Human Development Index is a minor national concern. We are prouder to have been ranked by the Pew Forum's Government Restriction Index alongside Saudi Arabia and Iran as world champions in constricting religious freedoms and other civil rights. The time has come to face the facts. 'Moderate Malaysia' and 'moderate Islam' are as good as dead. If our interest is to revive moderateness, we do not flog dead hypes. We must address the causes of death. The problem Two pervasive mentalities stand out among the chief culprits. They are racial and religious supremacy. Racial supremacy expects non-Malay citizens to be eternally grateful to the Malay race for granting their forefathers citizenship at Independence. It demands from the non-Malays unquestionable deference to the Malays, their culture and arbitrary declarations of Malay rights or privileges. Religious supremacy is the conviction that the Islamic belief is superior to all other beliefs and that it is the only path to true spirituality. Its adherents must not compromise on officially stipulated Islamic ideas and practices and cannot opt-out of the religion. Non-believers are fodder for conversion. A set of underlying reasons drive these mentalities. Political motives aside, there is a historical fear of disenfranchisement; a concept of entitlement as an exclusive birthright; envy; low self-esteem; a craving for a source of self-pride; a fear of the new or alien; meekness; and narrow-mindedness. Supremacism is sold as the cure-all. But it only adds to the problem. The projection of cultural or religious might becomes a pretext for the powerful to impose conformity and thereby control upon a majority. Behind the false security of religious dogma or ethnic nationalism, it is spiritually and psychologically defeating. It turns what should be a happy bazaar of exchange between cultures into a cautious tightrope walk. It sabotages nation-building, whatever the unifying slogan or initiative devised. Consider how this plays out in Malay-non-Malay relations. The ordinary Malay in Malaysia is kept at a near constant state of anxiety by the tirade about the non-Malays seeking to usurp Malay political and economic rights. The Malays are repeatedly called on to be united in the name of race and religion to fend off this imagined strike. To alleviate his insecurities the Malay is offered: - A political guarantee that national policy will be dictated by the Malays (or Muslims) and economic concessions in the form of government jobs for the unemployable etc. These are promised in exchange for support for certain political parties and obedience to hierarchy;
- Supposed spiritual salvation by thorough religious submission. This is codified in law, taught in religious education, enforced by religious bodies and reinforced by social and peer pressure; and
- Financial incentives such as easy loans and credit for material intoxication by retail therapy and a temporary relative wealth effect vis-Ã -vis the non-Malays.
There is no commensurate effort to unleash the Malay mind and encourage the Malay person to seize the day, excel, question, take charge, propose or dissent. Political leaders and the religious bureaucracy do not favour this; an empowered people puts at stake their political influence and economic privilege. The outcome is a large class of Malays that is averse to thinking, recoils from taking responsibility and content with following instructions. Ennui, the deep weariness and dissatisfaction stemming from mindless satiety and boredom, is a common affliction. It is to this oppressive vacuity that the non-Malays are portrayed as 'threats'. It is also implied that the non-Malay cultures and attitudes can weaken Malay religiosity or morals (see, for example, Jakim's 'Guidelines for Muslims celebrating religious festivals of non-Muslims'). The Malays, for their part, are seen by the non-Malays as being exclusive and hegemonic with their loudspeakers and educational and economic quotas. The result is isolation between the communities, the straining of social ties under the slightest provocation and the successful thwarting of real solidarity between the races. The usual prescription is for the non-Malays to toe the line, to adapt without protest, or— told more gently by a prominent Malay DAP member— to be "responsive" to the Malays' "primordial sentiments of culture and religion". This misguided paradigm must go. READ MORE HERE |
| DAP causing a ‘Riot’ in Serian Posted: 11 Sep 2011 03:20 PM PDT 
By Joseph Tawie, FMT KUCHING: The centre set up by Sarawak DAP in Serian has not only set in motion its determination to wrest the parliamentary seat from the Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP) in the coming general election but also caused ripples among the Bidayuh community as well as in the Barisan Nasional camp. Weekly education programmes are organised by the party to instil political awareness among the Bidayuh community, so that they know their rights as voters as well as their rights and privileges to development, scholarships, business opportunities and so on. With all these activities going on, Michael Manyin, the state assemblyman for Tebedu and state minister as well as Martin Ben, state assemblyman for Kedup, have expressed concern. The two constituencies (Tebedu and Kedup) form the Serian parliamentary constituency. Peter Minos, who is deputy information chief of Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB), accused DAP of being too "ambitious and greedy" in eyeing Bidayuh parliamentary seats. "The urbanites may love DAP but not the Bidayuhs who still need many basic things like treated water, electricity and roads from the BN government," he said. Besides the Serian seat, DAP is also interested in contestesting other Bidayuh majority seats of Mambong and Mas Gading. Riot feeling the heat Five-term Serian MP Richard Riot, who is deputy minister of foreign affairs, is also feeling the heat coming from DAP that he has never missed any weekend to be with his constituents. He has to counter and contain not only the increasing influence of DAP but also appease the growing discontentment of the community against his leadership. His victory in the last election was mainly due to the strong support given by the Bidayuh community which comprises 23,540 voters. But now the community appears to be split, and this is his main concern. And as far as the 3,200 Chinese voters in the constituency are concerned, their votes will go for DAP. Many Bidayuhs question Riot's effectiveness as a MP as there has been no significant development in the Serian constituency over the past 21 years under his leadership and SUPP. Some even suggest that the seat should be contested by PBB, arguing that the state seats of Tebedu and Kedup are now held by PBB representatives. And there are Bidayuhs like Ik Pahon Joyik, president of the influential Dayak Bidayuh National Association (DBNA), who want Riot to step down and give way to a much younger person. They also want other Bidayuh MPs, James Dawos (Mambong) and Tiki Lafe (Mas Gading), to do the same. "We want younger, effective, robust and vibrant MPs," Ik said. 'Don't blame him' According to Riot, Prime Minster Najib Tun Razak knows how serious the problems affecting the community are, so he wants the former to defend the seat for a sixth term. As in any Dayak area, native customary rights (NCR) land is a major issue. Five hundred villagers from 10 villages in Riot's constituency took matters into their hands by burning seven heavy machinery, four lorries and five logging camps after their elected reps and the authorities did not help them. When timber companies continued to encroach into their NCR land and communal forest, the villagers protested and lodged police reports and complaints to Riot and Manyin (state assemblyman for Tebedu). The politicians however accused the villagers of being "anti-development" and claimed that they were instigated by the opposition. READ MORE HERE. |
| We were a British colony: A response to Zainal Kling Posted: 11 Sep 2011 03:14 PM PDT  Colonialism entails the exploitation of the wealth and potential of a nation by another. The scenario is that one nation becomes subjugated by the power and authority of another nation. By the MPN's own admission Malaya's natural resources and financial authority was exploited by the British "in a breach of trust" rendering Malaya's actual political power and capacity effectively impotent. By Ahmad Fuad Rahmat. Harakah Daily Dr. Zainal Kling together with National Professors' Council (MPN), which claims up to 1500 members, recently argued that Malaysia was never colonized by the British. As reported in Malaysiakini and Berita Harian, Their argument in essence reads as follows:  1. Malaya was a British protectorate, not a colony. 2. But the British did have administrative powers in the fields of finance and the exploitation of Malaya's natural resources. 3. Despite this, Zainal (left) still maintains that Malay sovereignty ( kedaulatan Melayu) was still protected. 4. Therefore, what is now Malaysia (with the exception of Malaka and Penang) was never colonized by the British. The problems with Dr. Zainal's argument are as follows: 1. The argument is illogicalColonialism entails the exploitation of the wealth and potential of a nation by another. The scenario is that one nation becomes subjugated by the power and authority of another nation. By the MPN's own admission Malaya's natural resources and financial authority was exploited by the British "in a breach of trust" rendering Malaya's actual political power and capacity effectively impotent. If a nation is exploited in such a manner then in effect that nation's sovereignty was violated. Since this was the case in Malaya, as was presented by the facts already in MPN's reasoning, then Malaya was by definition colonized by the British. At any rate, the remaining question is that if Malaya was merely a British protectorate (' dinaung') then why were the British also exploiting it? 2. Malay sovereignty was not protected under Perjanjian Pangkor. For it gave the British legal mandate to advise and interfere in local affairs
 This has been explicitly admitted in Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) textbooks for decades: that much is even admitted in the Pemuda UMNO website. At any rate, some facts are undisputable: * The perjanjian was written in English. * It was signed on a British boat. * Article 6 of the perjanjian reads as follows: "That the Sultan receives and provides a suitable residence for a British Officer to be called Resident, who shall be accredited to his Court, and whose advice must be asked and acted upon on all questions other than those touching Malay Religion and Custom."(See H.S. Barlow's Swettenham, p. 45) * The collection of taxes was to be overseen and managed by the British Resident. * Due to British pressures and political manoeuvring Sultan Ismail was deposed in place of Sultan Abdullah. 3. They do not understand what sovereignty means Sovereignty in a basic sense means power. In terms of the modern nation state, political sovereignty basically means that the absolute power and control of a nation and its territory rests in the state. Thus, a country is said to be independent because it has ostensibly gained its sovereignty.
 Sovereignty in a basic sense means power. Political sovereignty means that the absolute power and control of a nation and its territory rests in the state. What this means is that the finances and the natural resources of the state is a part of its sovereignty. Dr. Zainal, for some reason, assumes that because the British left the crumbs of Malay culture and religion under the Sultan's rule this ought to mean that kedaulatan Melayu was safeguarded. The British, coming all the way from Europe eyeing our wealth, natural resources and economic potential first and foremost, of course had little concern for how we prayed and conducted our superstitions and cultural practices. The British residents had what mattered more in determining the sovereignty of a nation: its economics and an influence in the political system.
4. The argument assumes that colonialism had to be direct
But colonialism is rarely direct. Just look at the basics of history.
It is the nature of modern European colonialism that the total size of the colonies is much greater than the size of the colonizing nation. This was the case for Britain as much as it was for France, Spain, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and Portugal.
For example: The small nation of Portugal managed to amass the amount of land that covers the size of Brazil. The Dutch did the same in Indonesia, and Spain did the same in the Spanish-speaking Americas. This is to say little of the size and global reach of the British Empire. This applied in all cases of modern European colonialism: much of the globe was overtaken by countries that were small.
 The point is that the colonizing nations could not have maintained their global presence for centuries by military power or direct rule alone. They needed other means to legitimize their presence while being outnumbered in foreign lands and cultures. The methods of securing that presence varied: a common strategy is to convert the colonized into the ideology or religion of the colonizers, typically to convince the colonized that they were inferior. Another typical approach was for the colonizers to work with their agents and partners from among the colonized, either as business partners or co-administrators to help facilitate and expedite the exploitation process.
In other words, colonialism had no problems working with a local ruling class as advisors or bureaucrats, or in Malaysia's case functioning in the guise of being a protector, or serving as "residents". In fact, that only made colonialism more efficient since the colonizers would have direct local partners to protect and legitimize their presence.
Conclusion
In concluding we ought to recall that Dr. Zainal and the MPN's arguments were made in direct response to Mohamad Sabu's recent attempts to broaden the scope of Malaysia's history of anti-colonial struggles.  By concluding that the British were never actual colonizers of Malaysia, he sought to discredit the Malaysians, in particular, the Malaysian left who had made the British – instead of the Communists or to a lesser extent the Japanese - the chief villains in the struggle for Malaysia's independence.
The lesson to be noted here is not just the deeply ideological nature of Dr. Zainal and the MPN's arguments, but the deeply ideological nature of any struggle for decolonization and independence. The left-right distinction that is slowly surfacing in these debates should remind us that independence is more than just about simply removing a foreign conqueror. What the visceral reactions we are seeing clearly highlight is that the struggle is still much about the principles of what a just society ought to be. Some are content with the way Malaysia turned out, while some believe that there are higher possibilities beyond this.
Memory is where freedom really begins. We can only make the right choices for the future based on what we can recall of our past successes and mistakes. In other words, we are only as good (or bad) as what we want to remember and forget.
* The writer is research fellow, Islamic Renaissance Front, Kuala Lumpur.
|
| Mr White, did you lie? Posted: 11 Sep 2011 03:11 PM PDT By Frankie D' Cruz, Malay Mail IN a sea of whining mediocrity comes 'hard truths' — so pure you'd collapse if you snorted it.
More so, if it involved the core of our nation's history.
I am still wobbling in shock over the row that early Malaya was never colonised by the British. It questions our fight for independence. It's a dispute we least need at the moment when the nation is attempting to glue together a multiethnic populace.
A quarrel we can do without unless the source for the uneasiness, the National Council of Professors, can factually substantiate its claims.
So far, its arguments have been shallow and I don't see the learned council presenting a case against colonisation by the British.
The remarks by the scholarly council claiming the British never colonised Malaya was not what history taught us.
The council says the British introduced a system of indirect rule in Malaya which in practical terms could be
translated as — they ran the country.
That would effectively mean we were colonised.
Professor Datuk Dr Zainal Kling, in representing the council, said in a statement recently that Malaya had never been colonised by the British prior to Merdeka and had only been a protectorate of the British Empire.
Zainal also disputed the notion Malaya had been under colonisation for 400 years and that although the British had then governed the country, it had remained sovereign under the Malay rulers.
Malaya, he said, was only under colonisation during the Malayan Union era between 1946 and 1948 and during the Japanese occupation.
Only three Malayan States were colonised, namely Singapore, Malacca and Penang. The rest were protected States, he said. If that was the case, I should have failed History at all levels of education. And the history of Malaysia, hardwired into my memory bank, has to be deleted.
But I am not about do that because history has it that the Pangkor Treaty of 1874 paved the way for the expansion of British influence in Malaya.
The British concluded treaties with some Malay States, installing "residents" who advised the Sultans and held power in everything except to do with Malay religion and customs.
Whether you call it a true colony or protectorates, the fact remains we were ruled by the British.
Stubbornly pushing for unnecessary change in history will drive us to a national identity disaster.
Therefore, it would be illadvised to pursue the plan by Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin for the history syllabus for schools to be revised following supposed new findings of the nation's past. Such an exercise would be flawed.
Just ask the British. See if Britain agrees that the British Empire never covered the whole of Malaya.
Imagine a nation where the elders and the younger generation have different takes about the British in Malaya and our fight for independence.
Clearly, the stand by the council of professors has far-reaching social and academic implications that can affect national unity and raise questions about celebrating Merdeka every Aug 31 since 1957.
Foot-in-mouth, evidently, kicks both ways. Changing the historical course of a nation arbitrarily creates uncertainty among its people who have long held in high esteem the efforts of freedom fighters to free our nation from white rule.
Malaysia must not be seen as willing to blur its identity. Malaysians must refrain from shredding legacy at every turn.
Maybe, just maybe, Mr White, the Brit, took us all for a ride! |
| Toying with history again in Malaysia Posted: 11 Sep 2011 03:04 PM PDT 
By Farish A Noor via The Malaysian Insider SEPT 12 — In all honesty, I really have many other things to do than waste my time commenting on what has to be one of the most inane and counter-productive debates in Malaysian politics today. Yet as the tide of silliness gains strength all around us, I feel it necessary to add my two-sen's worth to this debate before I get back to my real work which happens to be teaching and research, so here it goes... It appears that some academics in Malaysia now claim that Malaya (as it was then called) was never colonised by the British after all — or at least that the Malay kingdoms were never colonies in the fullest sense of the word, but rather protectorates. This is, literally, correct and it has to be said that the legal-political status of these states was precisely that: protectorates rather than colonies. But we need to raise some crucial questions at this point in order to flesh out the debate a little further, and try to understand how and why such an arrangement came about in the first place. Firstly, it ought to be noted that the use of the term "protectorate" rather than "colony" offered (then, in the 19th century) a fig-leaf of respectability to what can only be described as a mad scramble for power and domination by the British who were not satisfied with the acquisition of their outright colonies in Penang, Dindings, Malacca and Singapore. By the 1870s, members of the British mercantile community in the colonies were demanding more British intervention into the Malay kingdoms so that the British could have direct access to the tin ore and fertile land for rubber and palm oil production. Simply put, Penang, Malacca and Singapore were too small for their own capital investment and market concerns, and they wished to have more control over resources in the Malay kingdoms. To this end, the so-called "Forward Movement" policy was devised to facilitate British colonial intervention into the Malay lands. By the time the British — through means both fair and foul — gained control over the kingdoms of Perak, Selangor, Negri Sembilan and Pahang, they instituted new treaties that placed the Malay Rulers at a tremendous disadvantage. It has to be remembered that before this the Malay kingdoms were independent sovereign states in their own right, and each kingdom was in fact its own country with its own government, economy, courts of law, etc. All of this was eroded by the British whose mode of indirect rule meant the introduction of the office of the colonial Resident, whose role and status was that of the de facto administrator of the states; and the Malay Rulers were coerced (often at the point of a gun or cannon) to concede control to the British in matters political and economic. With the arrival of the British in Pahang and the installation of a Resident (John Pickersgill Rodger[1]) at the court in Pekan in 1888, Pahang was "opened up" to the outside world — though the only foreign capital that was henceforth welcomed in the state was British, and not other European capital. British ships began to dock at the ports of Pahang and a bi-weekly ferry service was introduced that brought with it a regular mail service as well. British commercial investments were initially focused on gold and tin mining — both of which required the mapping of the territory as well as the importation of manual labour. Coming just a year after the British had installed Sultan Idris Shah as the new British-backed Ruler of Perak (after having defeated Sultan Abdullah and sent him into exile), the turn of events in Pahang in 1888 signalled that Sultan Ahmad Shah's days as the Ruler of Pahang were effectively over. As in the Pangkor Treaty that was signed by Sultan Abdullah of Perak with the British, the 1888 treaty between Pahang and the British meant that henceforth Sultan Ahmad al-Mu'azzam Shah would be forced to accept the presence of a colonial Resident appointed to the court of Pekan, and Pahang's affairs would come under the auspices of the colonial office based in Singapore. Pahang was forced to open itself up to foreign capital and to accept the currency of the Straits Settlements as well, according to the terms of the Pahang treaty — which also stipulated that henceforth the Sultan of Pahang was not even allowed to enter into diplomatic relations with any other state without prior approval from the British government The terms of the 1888 treaty between Pahang and the British made it abundantly clear that the latter were about to gain command over the territory and economy of the former. Act 1 of the treaty bound Pahang to the other British states, compelling it to come to their defence when requested to do so. Act 2 of the treaty stated that "His Highness the Raja of Pahang undertakes if requested by the government of the Straits Settlements to co-operate in making arrangements for facilitating trade and transit communication overland through the state of Pahang with the state of Johore and other neighbouring states", while Act 3 stated that "if the government of the Straits Settlements shall at any time desire to appoint a British officer as Agent to live within the state of Pahang having functions similar to those of a Consular Officer, His Highness the Raja will be prepared to provide free of cost a suitable site within his territory whereon a residence may be erected for occupation by such officer". Act 4 stipulated that the currency of the Straits Settlements will be in use in Pahang, and that henceforth the mint of Pahang would not be allowed to produce coinage and other currency without following the limitations set by the government of the Straits Settlements, while Act 5 noted that "the Governor of the Straits Settlements will at all times to the utmost of his power take whatever steps necessary to protect the government and territory of Pahang from external hostile attacks", and in so doing demanded the same co-operation from the Ruler of Pahang. Crucially, Act 6 of the treaty made it clear that "the Raja of Pahang undertakes on his part that he will not, without the knowledge and consent of Her Majesty's government, negotiate any treaty or enter into any engagement with any foreign state", or "interfere in the politics of administration of any native state". The same Act further added that "it is further agreed that if occasion should arise for political correspondence between His Highness the Raja and any foreign state, such correspondence shall be conducted through Her Majesty's government, to whom His Highness makes over the guidance and control of his foreign relations". Act 6 thus effectively robbed Sultan Ahmad and any of the future Rulers of Pahang of the right to engage in any diplomatic relations with any other Malay or European kingdom. [Re:Treaties and Other Papers connected with the Native states of the Malay Peninsula,Government Printing House, Singapore, 1888. pp. 42-55.] The terms of the Pahang Treaty of 1888 and the Pangkor Treaty of 1874 were more or less the same, and they implied that henceforth the Malay Rulers of Pahang, Perak and the other Malay protectorates would be under the coercive "advice" of the British Resident who was in turn backed by British arms and military power. So while the Malay Rulers were allowed to keep their flags and banners, the real power — political and economic — was robbed of them by the British. Now tell me, how is this any different from outright colonialism? Or are we to give lip service to British colonial propaganda that claimed that this sort of intervention was done "for the good of the natives" and to bring development for the Malays? I am baffled by the recent turn of events in Malaysia where all sorts of characters are now claiming that this charade of colonial intervention was something less than outright colonisation. To aid them in their memory (some of them are close to retirement I think, or should have retired a long time ago.), I end with a quote from Tun Dr Mahathir's "The Malay Dilemma" (1969/1970) where Mahathir describes the reality of colonial governmentality then: "Practically all the import-export houses were British or at least European. These firms were protected by the (colonial) government without any need for legislation. The exclusive European clubs all over the country were the places where these protective laws were made and implemented ... "This protectionism was equally comprehensive on the export side. Markets in rubber and tin for example were established by these firms in their own countries, and the markets were not open to any local (Asian) firms. "... As if government protection was not enough, the British controlled the whole of the banking business, especially the portion of it that was concerned with the financing of the import-export sector. ... "... Contracts with supplies were almost exclusively through the (British) Crown agents. Local supplies, even when needed, were by contract with British firms. British officials and businessmen formed a close-knit community usually presided over by a local British Adviser or Resident." (from: Mahathir Mohamad, "The Malay Dilemma", 1970, pp. 48-49) To our esteemed dons and doyens of the ivory towers who claim that British Malaya was never truly a colonial construct, I would serious advise a trip to the library, or even a conversation with Tun Dr Mahathir to sort out some of the lingering doubts about the past of the country. Malaysia's youth may be confused enough today; the least that we — teachers — can and ought to do is to help clarify their understanding a little further; rather than muddy the already murky waters of the past with revisionist obfuscation even further. Notes: [1] John Pickersgill Rodget was the first Resident appointed to Pahang in October 1888. (Gopinath, 1996, pg. 103) * Dr Farish A. Noor is a Senior Fellow at the Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. |
| Ng Yen Yen Joins The Bandwagon Posted: 11 Sep 2011 03:00 PM PDT By Capt. Iskandar Dzulkarnain One cannot fail to realize that since Lim Guan Eng became the Chief Minister of Penang, he has become the butt of criticism from political leaders in the BN camp. He happens to be the only Chief Minister in the country that no one can resist taking a pot shot at. Is it because of his quiet, unassuming looks, or his soft-spoken voice or his perceived meekness, or that he looks like the nice guy next door that looks easy to bully? How come when Koh Tsu Koon was Chief Minister we never heard of BN going after him, even though his administration was mired with controversies? And just after Independent MP and ex-Gerakan Tan Tee Beng had done his filial duty, Tourism Minister Ng Yen Yen has joined in the merry bandwagon of criticizers. As a Penangite, I find it grossly unfair that our CM has to go through all this political wrangling, which I am sure will make him deviate from his focus of running the state. With the level of accusations leveled at Lim Guan Eng, it sort of make him look like the biggest political blunderer or clown in the nation's history. But he is not. For a Chief Minister, he is well respected, and happens to be the only unselfish, corrupt free and no nonsense Minister in the present government. Almost every other politician fades in his presence. What made Yen Yen chose Guan Eng out of countless others? She should be directing her criticism at the gross hanky panky going on in BN governed states instead of dipping her nose in Opposition ruled states. If she is out of ideas, on who to direct her precious criticism at, I am sure the Rakyat can send her a gigantic list of grouses that has irked the people. How come she does not direct her criticism at the Perak MB or give a statement on the Kuantan Lynas project? Hasn't she come to her senses that the public, whether pro BN or Opposition is now very wary at anyone taking pot shots at the Penang Chief Minister? Yes anyone, who goes after Lim Guan Eng now, is automatically seen as a politician devoid of ideas, a political opportunist sucking up to their immediate bosses. They are also termed as cowards who are blind to the many outstanding issues plaguing the country today, and looking for a cheap excuse to sweep these issues under the carpet! The Chief Minister doesn't look like a goat, so please do not try to 'scape' him! His legendary sacrifice for the sake of a Malay girl in need is still whispered in the rural areas and the hinterlands. The Ministry of Tourism had expressed shock over the failure of the RM5 million car park project at the foot of Penang Hill to start operation and has demanded an explanation from the Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng. What is so shocking about a miserable car park that is 3 months overdue, because of its inability to get a CF (certificate of fitness)? Is it his fault that a CF cannot be issued due to technicalities and poor workmanship? Are we going to allow a carpark to operate without a CF? It was reported earlier, that the PDC, in charge of managing the project which was funded by the Federal Government, has fallen short of the state government's competency, accountability and transparency (CAT) philosophy by failing to satisfactorily explain why the much-needed car park had failed to obtain the Certificate of Fitness (CF) from the Penang Island Municipal Council (MPPP). She accused Lim, who is the state assemblyman for Air Putih, for his failure to ensure that the project was smoothly run for the sake of the people in his constituency. So how does Yen Yen want Guan Eng to comply? Does she want Guan eng to stop his duties as Chief Minister and be at the site to supervise the workmanship and to ensure that the project meets the CF regulations in time? Yen Yen should stop being so hypocritical. If she is truly serious about the welfare of Penang, she would have a field day in the last decade criticizing Koh Tsu Koon and the BN government for all the failed projects existing just outside her doorstep, than to delve on a minor car park. Does she expect Penangites to be impressed by her latest actions and endear themselves to her? Does she expect the public to support her fight and cheer her on? Penangites will think a hundred times at the danger to park their cars in a car park without a valid CF. The expensive Face Book fracas, coupled with the highly criticized million ringgit pavilion constructed in China, and other corrupt allegations involving family members has hardly subsided and she is coming out with issues of her own. She should seriously concentrate her energies on the MCA and clean up her backyard. Reputedly to be the nation's second largest political party once, today the MCA is a former shadow of itself. The people are wondering whether she is directing her anger at the DAP for overtaking the MCA? She criticized that the car park was supposed to be completed in December last year but it was delayed until the end of March this year. Isn't it normal in this country, that a project is delayed for 3 months? Has she tried to make a study of all the projects in this country to see how many are delayed for more than 3 months before criticizing the DAP administration. At least the DAP gets to rule a state. What can MCA boast of after 54 years operating like a mad-hatter in this country? However, Ng, who is also the state MCA chairman has urged Lim to stop pointing fingers at any party and start to find a solution to the problem, while she did not realize that she is at the same time pointing her fingers at him. The car park is part of the ministry's RM73 million Penang Hill funicular train upgrading project which includes changing the rail tracks, having two Swiss-made air-conditioned coaches and construction of the base station. And for the rest of the future 'political critique wannabes,' please leave Guan Eng alone, unless anyone has any genuine issues concerning Penang's CAT administration or a personal bone to pick with the CM. Go and pick a fight with someone your own size like the Gerakan. DAP is simply too big for you, and you cannot fit into their shoes, at least not for a thousand years. |
| Al-Qaida merely a bump on the long road of Islam in Southeast Asia Posted: 11 Sep 2011 02:54 PM PDT By Jonathan Manthorpe, Vancouver Sun Malaysia has seen a steady increase in Islamic conservatism that started with the overthrow of the shah in Iran in 1979 and the establishment of an Islamic republic. But this movement accelerated in the 1990s in part because the Malaysian government allowed and sometimes encouraged male students to attend the radical Wahhabist religious schools, madrassas, in Pakistan which are funded by Saudi Arabia and which have produced not only the Taliban, but many of the terrorist recruits in Southeast Asia. In Southeast Asia the era of Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida has been a blip in a long history of often tense and sometimes violent relations between Muslims and their neighbours. But there is no monolithic, region-wide picture of Islam in the region. The cultural, political and economic implications vary widely from country to country. And despite the tensions that have grated for, in some cases, a hundred years or more, they are in general a manageable fact of life. The region contains the world's most populous Muslim country, Indonesia, where 86 per cent of the 245 million people are followers of Islam. Although Indonesia has been the scene of some of the worst al-Qaida-related terrorist attacks in the region in the last decade, the people in general follow moderate brands of Islam. Those attacks were mounted by the al-Qaida-linked Jemaah Islamiyyah (JI), which had staged bombings of the Jakarta Stock Exchange and of Christian churches in Java, Sumatra and Riau well before the 2001 attacks by al-Qaida on New York and Washington. JI's most serious terrorist action in the last decade was the October 2002 bomb attacks on tourist bars on the resort island of Bali which killed 202 people. The Bali outrage was followed by attacks on the Australian Embassy in Jakarta and on the Marriott and Ritz-Carlton business and tourist hotels. But Indonesian security forces have been very successful in decapitating JI in a campaign which is thought to have seen about 700 alleged terrorists killed or detained. There is an irony, however, that the coming of democracy in the late 1990s has produced in Indonesia a generation of politicians who proclaim a slightly more puritanical style of Islam than in the past for fear of being labelled irreligious. There is similar pressure on politicians in neighbouring Malaysia where the 28 million Muslims are mostly ethnic Malays and make up just over half the population. Malaysia has seen a steady increase in Islamic conservatism that started with the overthrow of the shah in Iran in 1979 and the establishment of an Islamic republic. But this movement accelerated in the 1990s in part because the Malaysian government allowed and sometimes encouraged male students to attend the radical Wahhabist religious schools, madrassas, in Pakistan which are funded by Saudi Arabia and which have produced not only the Taliban, but many of the terrorist recruits in Southeast Asia. These radical influences have had a profound effect on politics with the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) becoming a force to be reckoned with, especially in some of the more conservative provinces. Even so, the PAS is a pragmatic Islamic party and is part of the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition with an avowedly secular party and a largely Christian ethnic Chinese party. Some politicians in predominantly Buddhist neighbouring Thailand see the shift to Islamic conservatism in Malaysia having a direct influence on the long-running independence insurgency in Thailand's three southern provinces of Pattani, Yala and Narathiwat. These three provinces, populated by predominantly Muslim ethnic Malays, were formally annexed by Thailand as part of a 1909 treaty with the British colonial rulers in what was then Malaya. There have been movements for independence or autonomy ever since, mostly driven by the well-documented treating of the people of the three provinces as second-class citizens by the Bangkok authorities. But the is no doubt the violence has increased dramatically following al-Qaida's 2001 assault on the United States. Well over 4,000 people have been killed by terrorist attacks on government officials, often school teachers shot by passing motorcyclists, and equally harsh reprisals by the security forces. After much optimistic talk a couple of years ago, the government now concedes violence is increasing and there is no end in sight. The Muslim independence insurgency in the southern Philippines, especially on the island of Mindanao, is even older, going back to the Spanish-American War of 1898. It too has been influenced by the events of 9/11 and taken on a harsher tone. Abu Sayyaf, a group linked to al-Qaida and Indonesia's JI, was founded in the 1990s and has engaged in more purely terrorist attacks than the established voice of local people, the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. But, unlike in Thailand, there are real signs of a settlement in the Philippines and the terrorist groups are clearly withering.
|
| Dr M says British advisers were rulers Posted: 11 Sep 2011 02:48 PM PDT By Shannon Teoh, The Malaysian Insider
SERDANG, Sept 12 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad conceded today that Malaysia was never colonised by the British but insisted that their advisers acted as if they were the rulers instead of the Malay Sultans. The 85-year-old former prime minister said that the British "acted as if we were colonised" in response to the claim by the National Professors' Council (MPN) that Malaya, the precursor to Malaysia, was never colonised by Britain and had merely been a protectorate. "The Sultans decided to invite the British to come and advise them on how to administer the country. We were not conquered in that sense. But the fact remains that when the British were here, they operated as if we were colonised. "In other words, the British did not advice, they gave orders. The English language is such that the adviser rules and the rulers advise," he told reporters after the launch of the Perdana University here. MORE TO COME HERE. |
| Reform vote now as evidence mounts, says DAP leader Posted: 11 Sep 2011 02:44 PM PDT 
By Lisa J Ariffin, The Malaysian Insider PUTRAJAYA, Sept 12 — A DAP leader has asked for immediate electoral reforms as evidence of postal voter irregularities and discrepancies according to him are piling up. Democratic Action Party Socialist Youth (DAPSY) chairman Anthony Loke Siew Fook claimed today the problem is nationwide. "The discrepancies mentioned of spouses registered as postal voters using male IC numbers are not only in Rasah, but I believe all over the country. They happen everywhere," the Rasah MP. He spoke to reporters after submitting the evidence to Election Commission (SPR)chairman, Tan Sri Dato' Seri Abdul Aziz bin Mohd Yusof at SPR headquarters this morning. "We want to question SPR why such things happen. Before SPR justifies any registered voter they must first cross-check with JPN if the IC number is valid or not. This clearly shows it's wrong," he added. Loke gave another instance of a woman officer in the army whose registered postal voter spouse was also a female. "This means there's a lesbian couple in the army," he commented, prompting laughter from the reporters. Loke believes the 100 names submitted today was only the tip of the iceberg and there are many cases as such in other constituencies. "In Lobak within the Seremban parliament, there is one address that has 25 names (of registered voters). This shows there are systematic ways of planting voters by irresponsible parties," he said. "I am disappointed the current SPR allows this to happen," the MP added. Loke also questioned the need of postal votes. READ MORE HERE. |
| Is it really, Professor? Posted: 11 Sep 2011 02:40 PM PDT 
By Art Harun I must admit of being astounded by the claim by Professor Datuk Dr Zainal Kling that Tanah Melayu had never been colonised by the British, save for the period when Malayan Union was introduced. For the record, this is his claim: The good Professor rested his claim as such on the fact that the Pangkor Treaty of 1874 between Raja Abdullah and the British Governor in Singapore did not mention that Perak was to be colonised but was only to be "protected" as a "protectorate" of the British. The Professor went on to say that the only states which were colonised by the British in Tanah Melayu were Singapore, Penang and Melaka. The good Professor may be correct in so far as historical terminologies go. But history is not about terminologies and semantics. True history is about facts and reality. Of course, facts may be looked at from different views, angles and perspective resulting in different interpretations and conclusions. Realities may also be subjected to the same treatment giving rise to the term of "administered reality". With all due respect to the good Professor, the British entry into Tanah Melayu and their subsequent entrenchment in Tanah Melayu's administration leading to at least a de facto colonisation of the whole of the Tanah Melayu peninsula and her surrounding islets cannot be viewed solely from and within the effect of the Pangkor Treaty alone. That would tantamount to an attempt to define the whole cosmos just by looking at the moon alone and nothing else. Let's however begin with the Pangkor Treaty 1874 (as the Professor had relied his thesis on it). For the record, prior to the Pangkor Treaty, the British, through the British East India Company, were already deeply entrenched in Tanah Melayu. It "colonised" Penang in 1786. Penang was later confirmed to be a possession of the British in 1800 by the then Sultan of Kedah. In 1819, Stamford Raffles took it upon himself to bring Singapore into the British fold. Later in 1824, the British and the Dutch, presumably under the mandate of some godlike creatures residing somewhere within the mountains of Scotland, decided among themselves to divide the Malay Archipelago into two, thereby giving away Melaka to the British and Indonesia (Sumatera) to the Dutch. In each of these three little states which the British saw fit to do as it please, they had a Governor who governed for the British. In 1867, these so called "settlements" became the "Crown Colonies" and came directly under the purview of the Colonial Office in London. Meanwhile, in Perak, upon the death of Sultan Ali in 1871, a palace power struggle was brewing. The Raja Muda of Perak was Raja Abdullah. He should have gone on to take the thrones. As events would have it, the Raja Bendahara, Raja Ismail was pronounced as Sultan. Perak was a rich tin producer at that time. The British were itchy to get their greedy hands on Perak. They were waiting for an opportunity. That opportunity presented itself when Raja Abdullah wrote to the Governor of Singapore, Sir Andrew Clarke, spelling out his desire to place Perak under British protection, and "to have a man of sufficient abilities to show (him) a good system of government." The British surely did not need further motivation but to lend their generous helping hands to a Malay ruler in need of course. With that, the Governor very kindly entered into the Pangkor Treaty with Raja Abdullah on 20th January 1874. With that agreement in hand, Raja Abdullah was made Sultan of Perak (although Raja Ismail was earlier appointed Sultan by the Malay palace). Raja Ismail (the then Sultan) of course did not attend the signing of the Pangkor Treaty as he did not recognise the agreement for obvious reason. But faced with the might of the very big and terribly friendly and generous British, Raja Ismail could not do anything other than seeing the throne being taken by Raja Abdullah. Sir W W Birch was appointed, pursuant to the agreement, Perak's 1st British Resident. (It was with considerable irony that Raja Abdullah – later Sultan Abdullah – was later thrown out to the Seychelles for conspiring to murder Birch). Professor Datuk Dr Zainal was correct to say that the Pangkor Treaty did not say Perak was a colony of the British. But surely that does not mean that Perak was not colonised by the British. So what if the British had said Perak was only a "protectorate"? Does it mean anything at all? What if the British had said that Perak was a "paradise where everybody could smoke opium till they laugh and laugh and laugh and they die"? Does that mean Perak was a "paradise where everybody could smoke opium till they laugh and laugh and laugh and they die"? Just because the British had said so? The British, for whatever reason, chiefly because they had wanted to classify their dominions throughout the world for economics and social purposes (and also for qualification for British citizenship) had categorised its "conquests" into three classes, the colonies, the protectorates and the protected states. Semantically of course there are differences between the three. But factually, it does not take a rocket scientist, or a learned bunch of thick-spectacled history professors to know that there were not much of a difference between them. A colony is of course a state which the British had "annexed" or "settled" in. This state was presumed to be a jungle or a barren state where civilisation did not exist. And the very civilised British had of course "discovered" that state, just like Stamford Raffles did Singapore or Francis Light did Penang. A "protectorate" is a state which the civilised and friendly (and generous) British had not annexed or settled in. This is a state where the British came in at the request of the helpless ruler of that state. It is a state where the British came to help or came to administer not through force but through agreements or treatise. Yes. That is a protectorate. A "protected" state on the other hand, is a state which is protected by the British, again at the request of the ruler of that state. However, according to the British, in a protected state, the British did not involve themselves with its governance. Yes. That is the difference between the three classes of the British conquests. Who said so? Well, the British said so. So, if the British said so, it must be correct right? Well, the British also said that Maggie Thatcher had balls. Remember? Relying on semantics – and these semantics were coined and used by none other than the British themselves – the good Professor said according to the Pangkor Treaty, Perak was not colonised. READ MORE HERE |
| Najib mulls scrapping the ISA for polls momentum Posted: 11 Sep 2011 12:16 PM PDT 
By Jahabar Sadiq, The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 12 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak could dismantle the Internal Security Act (ISA) as early as this week as he seeks to get some new momentum ahead of a general election expected within a year. Najib came to power in April 2009 with the promise of reviewing the security law but the prime minister, whose reform credentials are seriously in question after flip flops, is considering going all the way and abolish the law that allows detention without trial. The Malaysian Insider understands there has been some push back from the Home Ministry and right-wing elements within Umno but given that Najib needs to win back middle Malaysia, his advisers think that he needs to make a drastic move. "His choice is limited and the ISA is a low-hanging fruit to harvest," a government source told The Malaysian Insider. "There is resistance to the idea but the PM is convinced that the law is unnecessary as there are other laws to deal with security," he said, referring to the Emergency Ordinance (EO) used recently to detain six Bersih 2.0 activists seeking free and fair elections. The six have been released but face other charges in court related to the Bersih rally that was held on July 9. The Najib administration's handling of the rally has been widely criticised although the police have been singled out as being at fault. "Najib wants to reclaim the centre after taking over the right fringe," another source said. The prime minister has been accused of pandering to the right but he has taken great pains to display his image as a reformer especially in economic matters under the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN). But the ISA review has also been a cornerstone of his return to power. READ MORE HERE. |
| Taib Probe Opens In Germany – Breaking News! Posted: 11 Sep 2011 07:29 AM PDT 
SARAWAK REPORT The Federal Republic of Germany has become the latest country to announce that it is mounting corruption and money laundering investigations into Sarawak's Chief Minister, Abdul Taib Mahmud. The development places serious further international pressure on BN to deal with their corrupted State Minister, who was forced to promise he would soon resign during the recent elections, but now shows no sign of doing so. We can reveal that the decision was confirmed to the Swiss NGO, the Bruno Manser Foundation at the end of last week and that the investigations are already under way. The move follows similar action in May by the Swiss Federation, which in turn finally prompted Malaysia's Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to initiate its own on-going enquiries into Taib, who has blatantly abused his political power in Sarawak to enrich himself over the past 30 years.  The MACC announcement in June, as reported by The Star Trouble for Deutsche Bank !  Deustche Bank HQ – facing tough questions over Taib
The German announcement immediately places an embarrassing spotlight on one of country's most recognised institutions, the global financial giant, Deutsche Bank. Sarawak Report has been reporting on Deutsche Bank's uncomfortable links with the Taib family assets for months and in June the Bruno Manser Foundation (BMF) led an official protest over the Bank's involvement in alleged profits from timber corruption. The NGO has now presented the German Finance Ministry with a dossier revealing further connections between Taib and Germany's largest bank. These latest concerns include the connections involving the multi-million ringgit investment banking operation K & N Kenanga Holdings Bhd, where Deutsche Asia Bank and Cahya Mata Sarawak (CMS), Taib's family company, are together by far the biggest shareholders. A merger in 2001 between K & N Kenanga, then 30% owned by Deutsche Asia Bank and the controversial finance subsidiary of CMS, Sarawak Securities Sdn Bhd, gained the combined company Universal Broker Status from the Securities Commission. Separate questions have also been raised over an unusual bond issue brokered in 2005 by Deutsche Bank AG in Labuan on behalf of the State of Sarawak. The deal raised US$800 million through a private company, SGOS Capital Holdings Sdn Bhd, described as 100% owned by the State Secretary of Sarawak. The 10-year bond is backed by the State of Sarawak. Details of the investigation In an email to BMF (see below) Germany's Finance Ministry has now confirmed that it has authorised the German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority, BaFin, to launch a full enquiry into the connections between the country's leading financial institution and the Taib family. The email's explanation of BaFin's role leaves no doubt that the remit of that enquiry, will include money laundering: READ MORE HERE |
| Zahid Urges Malays To Unite And Support BN In Next Election Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:26 AM PDT 
(Bernama) -- Umno vice- president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has called on the Malays to unite to support Barisan Nasional (BN) candidates in the next general election, particularly those from Umno, to ensure their interests are taken care of. He added that although the position of the Malays and the Malay rulers were enshrined in the constitution, this could change if the opposition won the election.
"We should therefore take steps to unite the Malays under the umbrella of Umno and BN; let's not harp on trivial issues which could undermine the unity which we have built all this while," he said.
As an Umno leader, he said, he and other party leaders were ready to render assistance to Umno and BN at the state level in retaining existing seats and in winning back the seats won by the opposition in the last general election. |
| A message for fellow patriots Posted: 11 Sep 2011 05:17 AM PDT 
by Thomas Seng-Hock Lee The hard time is fast descending upon us. Currently, many of us, especially senior citizens, are living from hand to mouth. After 35 years as a journalist, editor and socio-political analyst, I can't even have a regular income, and have to depend on ad hoc jobs to survive. If I had abandoned my principles, sold my soul to serve the political establishment when I was in the MSM (main stream media), I would not have ended up like this. But I do not regret it at all, as I have kept the faith, preserved my integrity, and can walk tall. "Better a poor man whose walk is blameless than a fool whose lips are perverse." (Proverb 19:1)
The temptation to betray myself and my faith was there, seeing how even those I helped to train and groom as journalists and editors rise fast through political connections. However, thanks to the grace and strength of the Lord Jesus, I resisted the evil and corrupt way to a comfortable and prosperous life and lifestyle. I had stayed true to my principles, conviction, and mission to fight for truth, righteousness, justice, equality, accountability, transparency, and a Malaysian Malaysia. I joined the DAP as as life member in October 1986, and had never wavered from the party struggle all these years. I had never gained any financial benefit from the party, but had actually made much sacrifices by being denied promotions in my career as a journalist, and having employment doors closed to me. But it is worth it all, as I see the day coming when Malaysia will be born again as a just, equal and harmonious nation under the Pakatan Rakyat rule.
Dear friends, despite the hardship, in fact, because of it, we should stand firm in our conviction as patriots to work for a new Malaysia where justice, equality and peaceful co-existence of the races are part and parcel of our life and thoughts. Let us give our utmost support to people like Lim Kit Siang, Karpal Singh, Lim Guan Eng, Nik Aziz, etc., in the Big Battle for Putrajaya, which has already begun and will climax in the impending 13th general election. |
| WIKILEAKS: GOVERNMENT-LINKED COMPANIES: UNRAVELING THE TANGLED WEB Posted: 11 Sep 2011 01:00 AM PDT High tariffs and bureaucratic impediments to importing a car -- including limits on the number of approvals and required signatures from three separate government ministries -- clearly were designed to benefit the government-owned automobile manufacturer Proton. On the other hand, Khazanah, the largest GLIC, recently bought back from Singapore a controlling share in Pantai, the company granted sole authority to issue Malaysian medical clearances for foreign workers. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin
1. (SBU) Summary: The Malaysian government's ability to control market access through its holdings in government-linked companies (GLCs) is an important consideration in our ongoing FTA negotiations. Unraveling the tangled web of government holdings is difficult. Much information is publicly available, but tracing through the linkages between government and commercial entities requires close familiarity with the local market and major players. Even then the results can be controversial, as demonstrated by a recent report that leaked from a local think tank. One of our objectives in the FTA negotiations is for the Malaysian government to compile an annual report on GLCs -- as was done in the U.S.-Singapore FTA. Even knowledgeable Malaysian officials will find this a daunting task, but they could be persuaded that it fits with the government's program for improved GLC performance. End summary. Big Players, Thin Skins 2. (U) According to a Malaysian Government website, Government- Linked Companies (GLCs) -- commercial companies in which the GoM has a direct controlling stake) employ 5 per cent of the national workforce, account for approximately 36 per cent of the market capitalization of the Bursa Malaysia (the local stock exchange), and comprise 54 per cent of the benchmark Kuala Lumpur Composite Index. The Government of Malaysia manages its holdings in the GLCs through seven investment holding companies, or Government-Linked Investment Corporations (GLICs). The GLICs have differing mandates with varying roles and degrees of responsibility with regard to executing Government policies and initiatives, particularly regarding industrial policy and development initiatives. While a number of Malaysia's GLCs have been loss makers for decades, some efforts are being made to improve their accountability and profitability (see reftel). 3. (U) The role of the GLCs in the Malaysian economy is a sensitive matter, as they are inextricably linked with the government's effort to advance the economic standing of Bumiputeras (ethnic Malays). Recently, a respected local think tank produced a report for the government that, i.a., included recommendations on the management of GLCs and their use as agents of the government's socioeconomic policy. The report asserted that through the GLCs, Bumiputeras already hold sufficient corporate shares to have surpassed the government's headline goal of owning 30% of Malaysia's wealth (government statistics say Bumis only own 18.9%). This claim caused such a stir that the president of the think tank publicly repudiated the study. The chief researcher resigned in protest. (Comment: We will report on this controversial study in more detail in a separate message.) One Hand Washes the Other 4. (U) Sometimes the government exerts itself to protect the GLCs, and sometimes it's the GLCs that serve the government. High tariffs and bureaucratic impediments to importing a car -- including limits on the number of approvals and required signatures from three separate government ministries -- clearly were designed to benefit the government-owned automobile manufacturer Proton. On the other hand, Khazanah, the largest GLIC, recently bought back from Singapore a controlling share in Pantai, the company granted sole authority to issue Malaysian medical clearances for foreign workers. One Khazanah employee commented to Econoff that the driving reason for the re-acquisition was not good business but rather, "national pride." There was an understanding that Khazanah would have a majority stake but decision-making would remain in the hands of the company. Through a Glass Darkly 5. (U) The level of publicly available information about Malaysia's seven GLICs varies considerably. Khazanah, the largest GLIC (owned by the Ministry of Finance), publishes its holdings in a flow chart posted on its website, www.khazanah.com.my. Permodalan Nasional Berhad (PNB), a GLIC established specifically to promote the economic advancement of ethnic Malays (Bumiputeras), publishes financial data in its annual report available on its website, www.pnb.com.my. Some of the other GLICs have websites, but offer differing amounts of information on their holdings and strategies. In addition, these figures continually change as fund managers buy and sell on an ongoing basis. 6. (U) Information on the ownership of publicly-traded GLCs can be found in their annual reports. The Malaysian Securities Commission enforces requirements regarding publication of financial data on publicly-traded firms. Most listed companies disclose their top 30 shareholders, listing the percentage ownership of each. Summing up the percentages of shares held by the various GLICs among the top 30 is the first step to determining the share of government control. However, it also is important to note which GLICs are major shareholders, as the different GLICs are charged with different objectives) some more politically driven than others. For example, the Employee Provident Fund (EPF) is charged with investing the retirement savings of Malaysian workers) a responsibility not as politically charged as Permodalan Nasional Berhad's (PNB) mandate to advance the economic interests of ethnic Malays. However, almost all the GLICs have at some point made sales or purchases of corporate shares in support of government objectives. You Can't Know the Players without a Score Card 7. (U) When tallying up GLIC holdings familiarity with the local players, including the multiple layers of subsidiaries of the GLCs, is essential. For example, Cement Industries of Malaysia (CIMA) lists only two GLICs in its top 30 shareholders with a combined holding of about 13%. However, CIMA's top non-GLIC shareholder is UEM World, in which Khazanah holds a controlling interest. UEM World holds nearly 54% of CIMA. At first glance, the government share appears to be 13 per cent, but tracing the linkages among GLIC subsidiaries it becomes clear that CIMA is effectively government controlled. 8. (U) Some other companies provide this information more clearly. For example, Pharmaniaga Berhad, a pharmaceuticals manufacturer, includes in its annual report a list of indirect holdings following its list of direct holdings. The list of the company's top thirty shareholders does not indicate a majority government stake, but the indirect holdings present quite a different picture: non-GLIC shareholder Trinity Saga is held by UEM World, which is controlled by Khazanah. Add up all the pieces and in fact the government has a controlling interest in Pharmaniaga. Without being familiar with the multiple layers of ownership, Trinity Saga's GLIC connections would be easy to miss. 9. (U) Another example is Malaysian Airline System Berhad (MAS), which lists Penerbangan Malaysia Berhad with a 69.34 per cent holding. The government created this company solely to purchase MAS planes and lease them back to the airline. It is wholly owned by Khazanah. Another 11 per cent of MAS is held by the Employees Provident Fund (EPF). The third-largest shareholder is Amanah Raya Nominees. This is a government-managed trust fund for ethnic Malays. 10. (U) Publicly listed companies include the names of their Boards of Directors in their annual reports, often including bios and photos as well. Sometimes the annual report lists Board Members as Independent or Non-Independent as well as Executive or Non-Executive. Again, knowing the local players is essential to determining who has real decision making authority. Islamic Banks behind the Veil 11. (U) Fundamental concepts underlying Islamic finance preclude Islamic banks from publishing lists of their shareholders. All depositors are considered shareholders and banks are reluctant to make available to the public a list of top depositors, complete with the size of their accounts. Khazanah's website reports that Khazanah owns 30% of Bank Muamalat, a local Islamic Bank, but Bank Muamalat's annual report does not list its shareholders. Non-Traded Companies Face Some Disclosure 12. (U) Non-listed companies are not regulated by the Securities Commission, but by the Commission of Companies in Malaysia (CCM). Regulations require non-listed companies to send annual financial statements to the CCM, which will release the information for a nominal fee (currently less than USD 3.00). Most of the larger companies submit financial data regularly; however, enforcement for some smaller companies has been inconsistent. A proposed merger of the SC and the CCM could lead to tighter scrutiny. Two Golden Shares 13. (U) The government retains a Golden Share in two companies, MAS and Telecom Malaysia, dating from the time when these companies were 100 per cent government-owned. The Golden Share effectively gives the Government veto power on Board decisions. Other corporations offer regular shares with one vote per share. We are not aware of any companies besides these two with special voting rights. Untangling the Web 14. (SBU) Comment: In view of the role GLCs play in Malaysia's economy and the government's use of GLCs as policy agents, increasing the transparency of GLIC and GLC activities is an important goal in our FTA negotiations. But compiling the sort of annual report that Singapore is obliged to produce by our FTA with that country will be a major challenge for Malaysian officials. Not only are the relationships between government and commercial entities more complex in Malaysia than they are in Singapore; the political sensitivities are far, far higher. Malaysian officials will find reporting on GLCs a daunting task, but could be persuaded that this would support the government's agenda for improved GLC performance (reftel). End comment. SHEAR (October 2006)
|
| Is This History or His Story? Posted: 10 Sep 2011 09:56 PM PDT 
By Masterwordsmith Many historians would probably not only have turned in their graves, but would have miraculously risen from the dead had they read Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's statement here that said Malaysian history as currently taught in schools was inaccurate. The rationale he gave was that "it failed to provide proper context of the country's fight for independence". Having worked hard to achieve an A1 for my History @ MCE level, I feel deeply shocked that the former PM said:
"Many from the younger generation do not understand history and the origin of the nation, as there were attempts to alter historical facts into fantasy."
What???
Born on 10th July 1925, TDM was Malaysia's longest serving Prime Minister having served 22 years from 1981 to 2003. With a political career that spanned almost 40 years, he never said anything about this, especially since he was Minister of Education from 1974-1978. If he truly has the welfare of the nation and the perspective of the 'younger generation' at heart, why did he keep quiet when he had the political platform to do it then? Why is he making such a serious allegation that puts many into a quandary with regards to their credibility and expertise after EIGHT YEARS of retirement? Did he only JUST see the 'light'? Why now?
Is TDM thus questioning the effectiveness of the Ministry of Education and all the past Ministers of Education including:
TDM himself who was Minister of Education 1974-1978 (Read this)
Y.B. Tan Sri Musa Bin Hitam (1978-1981)
Y.B. Tan Sri Amar Dr.Sulaiman Bin Hj.Daud (1981-1984)
Y.A.B. Dato Seri Abdullah Bin Hj.Ahmad Badawi (1984-1986)
Y.B. Dato' Seri Anwar Bin Ibrahim (1986-1991)
Y.B. Tan Sri Amar Dr.Sulaiman Bin Hj.Daud (1991-1995)
Y.A.B Dato' Sri Mohd. Najib Bin Tun Abdul Razak (1995-1999)
Y.B. Tan Sri Dato' Seri Musa Bin Mohammad (1999-2004)
Y.B. Dato' Sri Hishamuddin bin Tun Hussein (2004-2009)
Y.A.B Tan Sri Dato' Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd Yassin (2009 - kini) (Source: This site)
With his latest outburst, he has practically rewritten history that we have learnt. It is His Story!
Does this mean famous historians, textbook writers, history majors in universities, teaching staff at universities/schools/colleges and higher institutions of learning including students, graduates etc have to UNLEARN everything that they have learnt/written or studied because this 'fantasy' was only highlighted NOW?
And it has taken Dr Mahathir THIRTY-SEVEN YEARS to highlight this 'fantasy' issue.
Who is the one living in a world of 'fantasy' all this while?
READ MORE HERE.
|
| Britain is distorting history Posted: 10 Sep 2011 09:06 PM PDT Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today said Malaysian history as currently taught in schools was inaccurate. National Professors' Council (MPN) has taken the debate further by claiming that Malaya, the precursor to Malaysia, was never colonised by the British Empire and had merely been a protectorate. Last week, Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin said the current History syllabus in schools was in need of review. NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin Dr M: History turning into fantasy Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today said Malaysian history as currently taught in schools was inaccurate, claiming that it failed to provide proper context of the country's fight for independence. "Many from the younger generation do not understand history and the origin of the nation, as there were attempts to alter historical facts into fantasy," the former prime minister was quoted as saying in a Bernama Online report today. The subject of local history became a hot topic after Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia alleged that PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu had said on August 27 that the communists who attacked the Bukit Kepong police station during the pre-Merdeka insurgency were heroes. National Professors' Council (MPN) has taken the debate further by claiming that Malaya, the precursor to Malaysia, was never colonised by the British Empire and had merely been a protectorate. Today, Dr Mahathir urged the government ensure that historical accuracy be given priority over political expedience. "The government needs to focus on what really transpired so that writings on the country's history would not be influenced by current political interests... History is all about what had happened, and we cannot change that... whatever happened in the past, had happened," said Dr Mahathir. Last week, Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin said the current History syllabus in schools was in need of review. ****************************** Malaysia's First Lady, Rosmah Mansor, and the Deputy Prime Minister, Muhyiddin Yassin, are currently in London where it is believed they met the British government to discuss amendments to the British distortion of history. The documents in the National Archives in London talk about the British Colonial government of Malaya and refer to the Colonial Office. This gives the wrong impression that Malaya was a colony of Britain whereas this was not so, says Malaysia. Malaya was never colonised by Britain, argues Malaysia. Britain responded by pointing to the fact that 31st August every year since 1957 is celebrated as Merdeka Day. This proves that Malaya was never Merdeka or independent before 31st August 1957, which means it was a colony of Britain. If Malaysia will abolish the 31st August Merdeka Day celebration, then Britain will consider amending all the documents in the National Archives in London and will delete all references to the Colonial Office in these documents. Furthermore, the First Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, is called Bapa Merdeka. If Malaya was never a colony of Britain then it could not have been granted Merdeka, which means Tunku Abdul Rahman can no longer be called Bapa Merdeka, Britain pointed out. A further problem that will be raised, Britain pointed out, would be whether the Malaysian Constitution would still be valid since it was a Merdeka Constitution. This would also affect the status of the Rulers who have all been reduced to the status of Constitutional Monarchies. Power would have to be given back to the Rulers who would rule as Absolute Monarchies. The First Lady and the Deputy Prime Minister told the media during a press conference that the matter will require further discussion and it may be in the long-term interest of the nation that Malaysia acknowledges that prior to 31st August 1957 it was a British colony after all. The Cabinet will receive the report on Wednesday and it is expected to issue a statement asking Malaysian historians to stop arguing that Malaysia was never colonised by Britain since this raised too many questions involving other issues. 
|
| Dr Mahathir: History Subject in Schools Not Accurate Posted: 10 Sep 2011 07:55 PM PDT (Bernama) - The History subject taught in schools is not very accurate as it lacks background on the struggle for the country's independence. This is the view of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who said the subject was not so accurate because the role of the nation's first prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, fighting for independence was not stated in depth in the subject syllabus. "Many from the younger generation do not understand history and the origin of the nation, as there were attempts to alter historical facts into fantasy. "As a result, the government needs to focus on what really transpired so that writings on the country's history would not be influenced by current political interests. "It is not to review history but to return to what actually happened. History is all about what had happened, and we cannot change that...whatever happened in the past, had happened," he said when commenting on last Friday's statement by Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin that the current history syllabus in schools needed to be reviewed. Mohd Khaled had said the review was imperative, following the discovery of several incomplete and conflicting facts, in lieu of the findings of national philosopher and theologist Tan Sri Prof Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas in his latest book, 'Historical Facts and Fiction.' Dr Mahathir was speaking to reporters after the ground-breaking ceremony of the Centennial Hall of the Sultan Abdul Hamid College here today. The former prime minister said the younger generation considered the fight for independence as a common matter as they were born in a country that was already independent and prosperous. "As such, the younger generation considered it as just a process experienced by many nations. "However, if we were to visit other countries which achieved independence at the same time with us, we would find that they were not as developed as Malaysia," he said. |
| And the facts are... Posted: 10 Sep 2011 07:26 PM PDT Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak says that we must not change historical facts. And one 'historical fact' is that UMNO fought for Merdeka. Well, let us go through this very brief history lesson about the fight for Merdeka and see what happened in the early years and how Merdeka for Malaya was eventually granted. NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin PM: Don't change historical facts Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has reminded the people not to change historical facts or to glorify the communist terrorists. He said the communist terrorists in the past era were certainly cruel and the people were in their grips as their ideology did not favour the people. They were anti-religion and despotic, he said. "That was why we opposed the communists at that time because they were behaving cruelly in this country," he said at the Malaysia Aidilfitri-Merdeka 2011 open house on Sunday. Najib said the communists at that time were different from the present communism because in the past, the communists did not give the people the right to be wealthy. "The present communism is different from the past. Previously, they wanted to control the country and spread the ideology which did not give the people their rights. "We are friendly with communist countries now because they have discarded their old ideology," he said. ******************************************* In 1915, Tan Cheng Lock launched the Straits Chinese British Association (SCBA) and became its first President. In 1923, he was appointed a member of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements. In 1926, Cheng Lock made history by delivering a speech to the Council about the ideals of a territorially and politically united Malaya. Cheng Lock spent the war years in exile in India during WWII. In 1949, together with Tun Leong Yew Koh and Colonel H. S. Lee, he launched the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA). Under Cheng Lock's leadership, MCA engaged with senior Malay leaders from UMNO (which was formed earlier in 1946) such as Datuk Onn Jaafar and Tunku Abdul Rahman. Cheng Lock also joined the All-Malaya Council of Joint Action (AMCJA) and became its Chairman. Many informal meetings were held between Onn Jaafar, Cheng Lock, and E.E.C. Thuraisingham (who represented the Indians), which resulted in the formation of the Communities Liaison Committee (CLC). The CLC became the platform for hammering out proposals and compromises on a number of issues that included citizenship, education, democracy, and in resolving the deadlock on Ketuanan Melayu. It was eventually decided that an 'agreement' would be forged between the Malays and non-Malays. In return for giving up Ketuanan Melayu (the Malays' special position), the Malays would receive assistance from the non-Malays in closing the economic gap between the impoverished and overwhelmingly rural Malays with the substantially better off and urban non-Malays. Thuraisingham later said, "It is true. I and others believed that the backward Malays should be given a better deal. Malays should be assisted to attain parity with non-Malays to forge a united Malayan Nation of equals." In 1946, the British tried to implement the Malayan Union. That was when and the reason why UMNO was formed, to oppose the Malayan Union. That same year, the Malayan Democratic Union (MDU) sponsored a meeting in Singapore to "provide the machinery for the various communities, through their organisations and associations, to reach agreement on all points connected with the future constitution of Malaya, thus avoiding the dangers of separated and self-interested representation." Ahmad Boestamam and Musa Ahmad of the Malay Nationalist Party led the formation of Pusat Tenaga Ra'ayat (PUTERA), which later included the non-Malays to become the PUTERA-AMCJA. PUTERA-AMCJA was the first platform for the fight for Merdeka. In 1947, the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce (ACCC) together with PUTERA-AMCJA supported a nation-wide strike called the All Malaya Hartal with an aim to pressure the British into discussing Merdeka. The Hartal, modelled after the one organised by Gandhi in India, was very successful. UMNO, however, opposed the Hartal and organised counter demonstrations in many parts of Malaya. UMNO was basically pro-British. In 1948, the plan for the Malayan Union was replaced with the Federation of Malaya. The Communist Party of Malaya (CPM), who opposed the Federation and wanted self-rule or Merdeka, decided to launch an armed rebellion. With that ended the PUTERA-AMCJA and the Emergency was declared. The British realised that Merdeka was inevitable. But they refused to talk to the CPM, Malay Nationalist Party, Malayan Democratic Union or PUTERA-AMCJA. The British felt that British interests in Malaya (which contributed to about a third of Britain's economy) would be better protected with an UMNO-led government heading an independent Malaya. One important point to note is that the CPM insurrection was very costly for the British who were almost bankrupted by the war. This made it necessary for them to quickly resolve the issue of Merdeka. In that sense, the CPM helped accelerate Merdeka and it assisted UMNO in its negotiations with the British. Those who opposed UMNO were rounded up and detained by the British. Those, like Mustapha Hussein, who joined UMNO, were spared arrest. Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Razak Hussein, however, were not only not arrested but were allowed to tour the length and breadth of Malaya to speak at ceramahs in their fight for Merdeka. It was clear that the British were assisting UMNO in its fight for Merdeka. Datuk Andika, who died in Kuala Terengganu at the age of 100 a few years ago, was the Assistant District Officer of Dungun around that era. He formed UMNO in Terengganu soon after meeting Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Razak in Kuantan. Datuk Andika told me he was encouraged by the British to join UMNO and his boss, the District Officer, not only gave him leave to campaign for UMNO but he was also given financial support by the British. |
| Hasan stays out of Khalid’s case Posted: 10 Sep 2011 05:59 PM PDT (The Star) - Selangor state exco member Datuk Dr Hasan Ali will not interfere in the Selangor Islamic Council's action against his fellow party member over the issue of preaching in mosques and surau without valid credentials. Hasan, who is a member of the council, said action was taken against Selangor PAS deputy commissioner Khalid Samad after getting enough evidence that the Shah Alam MP had violated the law. Khalid was charged with giving religious talk at a surau in Taman Seri Sementa in Kapar, Klang on Aug 16 without valid credentials from the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais). His case under Section 119 of the Selangor Religious Administration Enactment will be heard in the Klang Syariah Court on Nov 24. However, Hasan pointed out that Khalid did not actually give a sermon as reported but instead gave a ceramah with religious undertones. On the issue of state PAS commissioner Dr Abdul Rani Osman's credentials being revoked, Hasan said he was not directly involved in the matter and only learnt about it from the news. "I was told by Jais that his credentials expired on Aug 28. It was not renewed because there were complaints about his previous ceramah," he said. |
| Malaysia’s Mahathir: 9/11 not work of Muslims Posted: 10 Sep 2011 01:46 PM PDT  By Inquirer.Net KUALA LUMPUR – The long-serving former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad says Arab Muslims are incapable of carrying out the 9/11 attacks on the United States that killed nearly 3,000 people. The ageing firebrand, who was in power in Malaysia at the time of the attacks and stepped down in 2003 after 22 years in power, slammed former US president George W. Bush ahead of the 10-year anniversary Sunday of 9/11. Washington blames the attacks on Al-Qaeda. "Bush lied about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction… If they can lie so as to kill Iraqis, Afghans and American soldiers, it is not unthinkable for Bush & Co. to lie about who was responsible for 9/11," the 86-year-old wrote in his blog Friday. Listing out reasons in line with a conspiracy theory that the US government was behind the attacks, he wrote the Twin Towers in New York "came down nicely upon themselves". "I believe Arab Muslims are angry enough to sacrifice their lives and become suicide bombers. But they or their handlers do not strike me as capable of planning and strategizing such attacks so as to maximize the damage to the enemy," he said. Mahathir, a fierce critic of the West, is known for his anti-Jewish and anti-American statements in Muslim-majority Malaysia. Last year, he said if the US could make the 3D science fiction film Avatar, "they can make anything", adding there was strong evidence that the 9/11 attacks were staged. He has also condemned Bush and then-British prime minister Tony Blair as "child killers" and "war criminals", saying they should be put on trial for the military invasion of Iraq. |
| Religious tensions simmer in Malaysia Posted: 10 Sep 2011 01:43 PM PDT  By Razak Ahmad KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) - A raid on a church by Muslim authorities has raised religious tension in Malaysia and could cost Prime Minister Najib Razak votes in an election set for 2013 but which many expect to come much earlier. The raid has sparked an angry verbal battle between Christians and the majority Muslims, forcing Najib to seek what may be an elusive peace between the ethnic Malays and minorities, both of which believe the government isn't doing enough to safeguard their rights. Conservative Muslims want the government to crack down on what they say is growing boldness by Christians to try to convert Muslims, which is an offence in Malaysia, while ethnic minorities worry their rights are being eroded. Analysts say Najib is caught in a bind and will have to tread extremely carefully to avoid being seen as favouring either side in his efforts to mediate. "Najib is caught between wanting to secure a conservative Malay-Muslim electorate and a political reality where he is losing ground among minorities who are more mobilised and politically aware," said Bridget Welsh, a Malaysia specialist at Singapore Management University. The next general election is not due until 2013 but there is increasing speculation that it could take place by early 2012. Analysts see little chance of the ruling National Front coalition losing the next general election but caution that Najib needs to win a convincing two-thirds majority if he wants to avoid a revolt within his UMNO party, long accustomed to majorities by that margin. Race and religion have always been touchy subjects in a country split between ethnic Malays, Chinese and Indians but analysts say the latest quarrel is coming at a delicate time for Najib, whose popularity has been sliding since May 2010. "The religious discord will cause the ruling coalition to lose some Chinese majority seats while concerns over inflation may allow the opposition to hang on to the rest of their urban and suburban seats," said Ibrahim Suffian, director of the independent opinion polling outfit Merdeka Center. "All this will be on the back of a much strengthened and better-resourced opposition. So in short, it's not going to be easy for Najib." Islamic enforcement officers raided a Methodist church near the capital last month on suspicion that a meeting was being held to evangelise Muslims. The meeting's organisers, a non-governmental organization, denied the allegations and said the gathering was a charity affair. The authorities are still investigating the matter. DAMNED IF I DO, DAMNED IF I DON'T Traditionally, Malaysian leaders have trod a careful line in dealing with religious issues after violent race riots in 1969 redefined the Southeast Asian country's ethnic and economic landscape. Still, race and religion are often the strongest tools for politicians to win support on pledges to distribute economic opportunities along ethnic lines. Ethnic Malays, who are by birth Muslims in Malaysia, make up about 60 percent of the population of 28 million. Ethnic Chinese and Indians, many of whom are Buddhist, Christian and Hindu, account for most of the rest. Last month's church raid is the latest in a series of rows between the Malays and the minority Chinese and Indians. In recent years, a spate of church bombings, the government's seizure of a shipment of bibles, a legal battle by Catholics to use the word "Allah" and complaints of marginalisation by Indians have cast a cloud over the government's attempts to build racial harmony. Racial unity is a cornerstone of Najib's plans but many Malaysians have derided his efforts to create a "1Malaysia" that is not drawn along racial lines. Recently, Najib also extended an olive branch to unhappy Christians by establishing official ties with the Vatican but the gesture has been largely dismissed as no more than a symbolic measure. "In recent times, we have witnessed an increase in incidents where Christians have been singled out and targeted with unjustified accusations and prejudice," the Christian Federation of Malaysia, which represents 90 percent of churches in the country, said in a statement. A survey last month by the Merdeka Center polling outfit found the percentage of respondents agreeing that Malaysians of differing ethnic groups were growing closer to each other had fallen by nearly half to 36 percent compared to 64 percent in 2006. |
| Lip Service Laced with poison Posted: 10 Sep 2011 12:49 PM PDT I believe that once you enter into politics, you should know that the truth always catches up on you, and when you begin to flip-flop, people will hold it against you. By Douglas Tan Ever since I was young, my father has taught me that when you tell lies, it is far more difficult to remain consistent. You have to tell a lie to cover up the original lie, and you also have to remember what the original lie was in the first place. I believe that once you enter into politics, you should know that the truth always catches up on you, and when you begin to flip-flop, people will hold it against you. Right now, consumers across the nation using pre paid mobiles will experience a 6% government tax now charged directly to them. The BN government cried out that the telcos should absorb the cost, but as a government supposedly committed to putting the people first, passing the buck back to the finance ministry agreement places their sincerity to actively manage our cost of living into serious question. During the whole Bersih fiasco, Najib had promised a stadium for the rally to be held, despite the fact that Bersih is an outlawed entity that happened to have an audience with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Without going into the legality of authorising an illegal organisation to have a rally at all, Najib went on to claim that he intended for Shah Alam stadium to be used AFTER the rally had taken place in Kuala Lumpur, defies all logic. If you wanted Bersih to hold the rally at Shah Alam stadium in the first place, would you not have announced this BEFORE the date of the rally? Following Bersih, our Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai, comes out with the absurd statement that Tung Shin Hospital was not hit by tear gas or chemical laced water because he had ''confirmed'' with the hospital board that the said incident did not transpire. The pile of evidence contrary to his statement failed to shake his stand, even to the point where he told reporters not to show him photos or footage to the contrary, as he trusted the board rather than his instincts. When the doctors of Tung Shin came out to condemn his statement, he was left with a red face after being exposed. His promised enquiry never came about with a finding, and he has to live in the humiliation of being called a bare-faced liar for the rest of his political career. Another issue which is still ongoing is to do with the reform of the electoral roll. Our Election Commission is guilty of saying that they are powerless to do anything, whilst their subsequent actions behind the scenes shows clearly that they do. Out of everything they said they could not do, one of their major flip-flops was when they claimed that without parliamentary legislation, they were unable to extend postal voting to Malaysian citizens living abroad. Only a few weeks later, they announced that from the next elections, all Malaysians living overseas shall be able to cast their vote at the respective embassies. The mainstream media screamed this from their front page headlines and there was mumbled praise from several factions. What happened to the requirement for parliamentary reform? How are they suddenly able to take their own initiative to make changes when parliament only reconvenes in October? I believe the members of the public are tired of the constant stream of misinformation being published online, on blogs and in the mainstream media coming from the government and at times the opposition. Right now, the Rakyat are hungry for real leadership. The incompetence and lack of integrity which is exhibited by some of our so-called leaders is beginning to strain the trust of even their staunchest followers. Pakatan would do well to remember this if they ever go into power that saying one thing and doing another would spell doom for their political future. We would all do well to remember the saying "Trust is difficult to gain but easily lost". |
| Student denies praising PM's speech in Australia Posted: 10 Sep 2011 12:45 PM PDT A Malaysian student, who was at a dinner held for Najib Abdul Razak in Perth, has denied praising the premier's speech, as reported by national news agency Bernama. Malaysiakini managed to track down the student through a social networking website, and found that he had already posted a complaint that the report had distorted his words.
When contacted, he expressed surprise over the report, as he had made the comments prior to Najib's speech.
Requesting anonymity as he is a government scholar, the student expressed genuine excitement about meeting the prime minister but did not praise the speech as he had not listened to it yet.
"They totally changed and added stuff that we never said. And the whole thing was done before the speech ... I feel it is rather silly and unnecessary," he said.
"They... put in quotes that we actually did not say and altered our words. We did not say anything bad so I don't see why they needed to do that."
Malaysiakini learnt that the students were asked to write their comments on a piece of paper prior to the speech, which was subsequently used to process the Bernama report.
Asked what the student had really thought of the speech, he described it as it as "formal" and "nothing special".
"It was a formal event, there was nothing special and the speech was pretty much formulated, promoting 1Malaysia. It was the usual speech," he said.
Another of the nine students quoted in the report, when contacted through the social networking website, also confirmed that additions were made to the quotes in a tone that praised the speech, but she declined to elaborate.
The dinner, announced via the Malaysian Students' Council of Australia's Facebook page, was held at the Pan Pacific Hotel in Perth last Saturday.
According to MASCA's Facebook invitation, the dinner was open to students sponsored by the Public Service Department, Mara and Petronas.
Also present at the event was Najib's wife, Rosmah Mansor, and officials from the Malaysian mission. |
| “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity” Posted: 10 Sep 2011 12:42 PM PDT If I hear a Chinese say that he is a Chinese first and a Malaysian second then I will tell him to go back to where he and his ancestors had come from (even if he was from Batu Pahat!). By steadyaku47 I think the above line says a lot about the state of things in Malaysia today. Most of what they say are, for lack of a better word, simply stupid. There is no malice intended towards other races or religion.
Muhyiddin meant no malice towards anyone when he said he is a Malay first and a Malaysian second. He just does not get it. If you believe in 1Malaysia, then common sense will tell you that you are Malaysian first. We Malays expect the Chinese, the Indians, the Dayaks, the Ibans and all other people who call Malaysia home to think the same way. If I hear a Chinese say that he is a Chinese first and a Malaysian second then I will tell him to go back to where he and his ancestors had come from (even if he was from Batu Pahat!). So this Malay Deputy Prime Minister of ours simply does not have the mental capacity to understand where he is coming from. It sound good in his head and he thought it would win him some points with the Malays – that is how idiots think – only for the moment – no capability to understand the damage his words can do.
Pemuda UMNO has a lot of idiots. They seem to hold the license for stupidity or as we say, God broke the mould after he cast Pemuda UMNO! Don't get me started on that Din and that extension of his masculinity – the Keris! Din is in a class of his own. He thinks that having a cousin who is PM allows him that leeway to be an idiot. Well I have news for you Din. You do not have to try or act like an idiot, you are one!
Din left Pemuda in the hands of like minded idiots! The latest episode is too tragic to make light of because of the death of a cameraman ……..but here is the bottom line. This Bumiputra Mamak call Azzeeeeez saw what he thought would be a sure fire way of propelling him up the ladder of UMNO's leaders and he went headlong into something that was way above his head and ended up with a dead cameraman and with egg on his face. How he will be able to extricate himself from this mess is to be seen but in UMNO you can never know.
I told myself that with Mahathir gone that would be the end of his line in UMNO politics because he had ensured his children would have enough money to last many lifetimes – and lo and behold Mukriz is in the cabinet. So you can expect Mukriz and this Azeeez to be up there in the tree tops with the other monkeys of UMNO swinging on the roof tops of PWTC.
Everywhere I turn I see myself surrounded by idiots who happens to be politicians. Maybe I am doing idiots an injustice by putting then together with politicians but can anyone suggest whom else we could lump these politicians with? If you want to deliver our country into the hands of thieves then go vote for most of the current herd of BN politicians.
Let us start with MCA. If there is one thing you can say about the Chinese in MCA it is this – they really believe in what Nietzsche said " That which doesn't kill us makes us stronger." How else do you explain their preoccupation in voting for leaders who routinely f#*k them up? Look at the list of MCA past president post Tun Tan Siew Sin-a veritable list of rogues that could rival PDRM list of Malaysia's most wanted!
We have the spectacle of this TUN who was former President of MCA who is not only bringing ill repute to all the Tuns before and after him, but what is more amazing is his out and out attempts to garner all the wealth he could possible get for himself while President of MCA! Using MCA as his personal jump board for the acquisition of material wealth. His exploits reads like a tale of Bernard Madoff in the US who is already in jail for life (well 150 years is almost life!). Madoff is responsible for USD$65 billion missing from his clients account.
At least Madoff son's were the one who turned him in to the authorities…..…would Liong Sik son do that to him? The problem with Malaysia is that even if ANYBODY wants to turn him in who could they turn to? MACC? MCA? PDRM or even the Prime Minister himself? Huh! Would you expect BN to censure their own?
Inga Dey …before the Indians starts pointing fingers at the Chinese please see how many of those fingers are pointing back at you! All the past MIC President from 1946 to 1979 cannot eclipse what Samy Velu did from 1979 to 2010. By any definition or criteria this Samy wins hands down. The longest serving, the most corrupt, the most petulant prima donna, the most "I will retire when I have made MIC stronger" …..…and the list goes on. In the end it was his own constituency that told him to "GO" just GO, do not pass GO, do not collect $200 just GO! |
| Najib’s warped understanding of extremism Posted: 10 Sep 2011 10:48 AM PDT  By Mariam Mokhtar Can Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak gauge the subtle distinctions (or should I say, 'the glaring differences'?) between extremists and the excrescence of society? In a letter to The Times, UK, Najib thanked the British for helping Ashraf Haziq, the Malaysian student who was caught up in the London riots and set upon by thugs, who then robbed him on the pretext of helping him. Najib said: "Thank you for helping a young Malaysian in his hour of need, and thank you for proving once again, that London is a city where outsiders are welcome but extremists are not". According to the official report by Bernama, Najib described the incident as senseless, callous and brutal which had 'shocked Malaysians to the core'. He said: "Many of us have spent time in your city and have a great affection for it, but this was a side to London that none of us had seen before and we began to wonder if it had changed, if our memories had become tinted with nostalgia, or even if we were mistaken in the first place." He then praised the British for condemning the people who had attacked Ashraf and said: "This wave of anger was followed by a huge outpouring of concern, assistance and support. In an age where some still try to drive wedges between races and religions, the ordinary people of Britain did not hesitate to open their hearts to a young Malaysian Muslim". Najib then compared the attack on Ashraf with the fight against extremism and made reference to the speech which he had made at the 65th session at the UN headquarters in New York in September 2010. In his letter, Najib recalled how he had urged world leaders to fight extremism of all kinds by establishing a global 'Movement of the Moderates' whereby the ordinary people of all races, religions and political persuasions were prepared to stand up to the extremists and defend the values they believed in. He said, "It is those values, an acceptance of others, a strong sense of right and wrong and above all, a rejection of extreme and violent behaviour, that have been defended so vigorously by the people of Britain in recent weeks". Last year at the UN, he had said: "We must urgently reclaim the centre and the moral high ground that has been usurped from us. We must choose negotiations over confrontation. We must choose to work together and not against each other. And we must give this effort utmost priority for time is not on our side." Politics of distraction However, Malaysians will also remember that prior to his speech at the UN, he had lectured us about extremism but his message then, was vague and non-committal. He was afraid to name the extremists in Malaysia and had shown no resolve to punish them either. He was fearful of the political backlash that would ensue if he were to censure the extremists, and he lacked political will to stand behind the people. He said, we must 'defend the values we believe in, we must choose negotiations over confrontation and we should work together, not against each other'. So how does he explain what happened in the run-up to July 9 this year, the day of the Bersih 2.0 rally, when scores of people were arrested, and intimidated? Can Najib explain why thousands of people, who supported true democracy and clean elections, were set upon by the police, on his orders? Doesn't he know that Malaysians have a strong sense of right and wrong and it is Najib's brand of politics, which encompasses the politics of distraction and the politics of division, which is destroying us? In reality, whose definition of 'values' is he trying to defend? He still has not said why he dodged all attempts to negotiate with the Bersih organisers, for an amicable compromise? READ MORE HERE. |
| Taib Backs Off Baram! Posted: 10 Sep 2011 09:47 AM PDT 
By Sarawak Report The climb down over the Baram Dam is very significant and everyone who has stood up in protest should accept credit. Others should take note that legitimate protest works! In the face of the growing outrage at the planned destruction of one of Sarawak's most unspoilt regions and the displacement of tens of thousands of people, even the greedy Chief Minister came to the conclusion that it would be utterly foolhardy to try to fight the upcoming federal election while trying to defend the indefensible. Now the acquisitive old tyrant hopes that he can brush aside all questions on the subject by saying that the project is "on hold"! But don't be fooled However, this is not a time to heave a sigh of relief. For Taib and his diminishing gang this is just a tactical retreat. They had realised that his reckless plans were threatening to break his control over some key seats in the area in the face of the growing strength of the opposition. They calculate that if BN can win the next election then they will have a full five years to come back and push through their plans for SCORE. Baram will be back on the agenda in no time. So, at every point in this election campaign Taib should be asked why the Baram Dam has not been CANCELLED instead of postponed! READ MORE HERE. |
| Umno attacks fuelled by fear of true history, says Mat Sabu Posted: 10 Sep 2011 09:43 AM PDT 
By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal, The Malaysian Insider KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 11 — Umno's attacks on PAS for allegedly backing communists are fuelled by fear their version of history will need to be rewritten once the truth surfaces, Mohamad Sabu charged last night. The PAS deputy president said Umno's smear campaign against him through Utusan Malaysia — by accusing him of supporting communists was aimed at preserving Barisan Nasional's (BN) own version of history and how Malaysia achieved its independence. "They (Umno) are worried that history will need to be rewritten if we push matters further," Mohamad told a ceramah in Gombak near here last night. The PAS leader, popularly known as Mat Sabu, lamented how other leaders who fought for independence were not properly recognised for their efforts, and reiterated his support for Mat Indera, a Malay leader who was part of the infamous attack on Bukit Kepong police station in the 1950s. "When I said Merdeka celebrations, it is always an Umno celebration of Merdeka in Malaysia... if it's not Tunku Abdul Rahman, or Tun Hussein Onn, what about other leaders like Ishak Haji Muhammad (Pak Sako) or Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmi? "When Merdeka comes, it is only Umno leaders who are featured," said the PAS deputy chief. He claimed that Malaysians no longer celebrated Merdeka, and that proof of this was the lack of the display of national flags in homes or vehicles. Mohamad also moved to deny claims of him supporting communism, and stressed that he practiced and embraced Islamic principles and loved his country "very much." "I push for Islamic principles, not support communism. These allegations are not new, our leaders have faced all sorts of allegations before. "I love our country very much," he said. Mohamad reiterated his intention to have a debate on the Bukit Kepong incident with Umno deputy president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, and said that he would not debate the party's youth chief Khairy Jamaludddin because the latter had not attacked him publicly. "Khairy is a good boy, he has the potential to become a future PAS leader...I'm serious. Why should I debate him when the one who has been attacking me is the Umno deputy president," Mohamad said to squeals of laughter from the audience. Utusan had quoted Mohamad on August 27 as saying that the communists who attacked the Bukit Kepong police station during the communist insurgency were heroes. READ MORE HERE. |
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
