Isnin, 26 Disember 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Towards a bankrupt Malaysia?

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 12:12 PM PST

(Aliran) Subramaniam Pillay looks at the worrying rising trend of federal government debt and wonders if Malaysia will go bankrupt. At our current rate of borrowing, it won't take long before we become another Greece.

 

Figure 1: Outstanding debt of the Malaysian federal government - Source: Bank Negara Malaysia

That the budget that was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat on 7 October 2011 was an election budget is very clear. There have been numerous detailed comments on the budget by politicians and analysts (since then). In this article, we are just going to focus on one of the long term issues from the budget. It concerns the increasing debt burden of the federal government.

How big is the government debt?

The accompanying chart shows the federal government's outstanding debt at the end of the successive years. As can be seen, the debt has been increasing since 1970. From the detailed data available form Bank Negara's website, in 1991, it reached a temporary peak of RM99bn and then decreased to RM90bn by 1997. From then, it has been virtually doubling every five years. By the end of 2011, we can expect the figure to reach RM450bn.

In other words, since the Asian crisis of 1998, we have been growing by borrowing heavily. In the 10 years since 1999, our debt has quadrupled. If we continue on this path, by 2020, our national debt will reach RM1.6 trillion. If our population is 40 million then, each Malaysian will have a debt burden of more than RM40000 and this does not include our own personal borrowing. Assuming an interest rate of 5 per cent, paying the interest alone will cost the taxpayers RM80bn per year!

The government has been reassuring us by saying that our debt is manageable. It argues that the debt at the end of 2012 will be only 54 per cent of our GDP, which is relatively low compared to the current crisis nations like Greece and Italy. (GDP is a measure of the total value of all the goods and services produced in a year in the country.) While it may not reach the levels of Greece by 2012, at our current rate of borrowing it won't take long before we become another Greece. Just to put this in perspective, our giant neighbour, Indonesia has a debt of only 23 per cent of GDP! Singapore has no debts.

The federal government debt alone does not tell the full story. Many government-owned enterprises also have borrowings. If these figures are included, then the total debt would be much higher. It is difficult to get the complete data on these borrowings.

Why has the debt been growing so rapidly?

Since the 1998 Asian Financial Crisis, the government expenditure has consistently exceeded its revenue by a considerable margin. For example, in 2011 the spending is estimated to be RM229bn while the revenue will be only RM183bn. So the shortfall of RM46bn has to be met by borrowing.

Of course it is not expected that the government balances its books every year. Prudent economic management requires the government to balance its budget over an entire business cycle. So we can have deficits during bad years and budget surpluses during good years. Since 1998, we have had at least two business cycles; yet every year without fail we have had budget deficits!

This is evidence of fiscal irresponsibility. Here is a government which does not know the meaning of saving for a rainy day. A good example is the situation in the current year.

Table 1 shows that the actual revenue for 2011 is going to be higher than the budgeted figure by RM17.6bn. This is mainly due to the increased income from the rise in oil prices in 2011. The federal government relies heavily on different forms of revenues (corporate tax, petroleum profit tax, royalties, Petronas dividends etc.) that originate from the production and export of oil and gas in Malaysia. The proportion can be 30-40 per cent of the total government revenue. Thus a rise in the world price of oil translates directly into higher income for the government. So essentially, we had a windfall income.

What would a prudent government do with this windfall? It would reduce the planned borrowing. But that's not our BN government's way of financial management. Uncannily, the increase in the actual spending is going to be the same amount of RM17.6bn! When asked about this at one of the post-budget forums, a Treasury official explained that it was mainly due to higher spending on salaries and increased subsidy for petrol and diesel. We can understand the increased subsidy but why the higher salary? Did we just increase the size of the bureaucracy? This is a clear case of a government which has no control on its spending.

Why is the federal government spending more than it earns?

There are a few reasons for this consistent imbalance. A major factor is the large leakage in government spending due to corruption and wasteful spending that has been highlighted by the Auditor General year after year in his annual reports. It has been estimated that we can easily save RM25-30bn without changing any of the deliverables if we can get rid of corruption and cronyism. Transparent practices like open tendering can cut down the cost of much of the procurement and project spending.

In addition, spending can be reduced on military procurements. If a fraction of the money that is saved here can be used to improve the quality of our diplomats in Wisma Putra, we can avert any potential threat to national security. We can also cut down on the excessive use of foreign and local consultants by the government for work that ought to be done by the civil service. Reduction of subsidies to the operators of privatised projects such as the independent power producers and toll road operators will also narrow the deficit.

Another reason for the deficit is the under collection of revenues including income tax and customs duties. Better compliance to and enforcement of existing laws and provisions can increase government revenue. It is common knowledge that many business operators evade paying their full share of income tax by under declaring their true income. Similarly, evasion of customs duties is rampant due to corruption in the Customs department.

What will happen if the debt keeps increasing at the same rate in future?

As the debt gets larger, interest payments will take an increasing share of total government spending. Table 2 shows this clearly.

If the government continues with the trend of the past 13 years, by 2020 we may be spending about 18-25 per cent of the operating budget on interest payments. In fact as the borrowing increases, the government will be forced to pay higher interest rates to borrow more because its credit rating will be downgraded. (For example, in Europe, currently the German government can borrow at around 2 per cent per annum while the Italian government has to pay about 7 per cent for its loans.) So the interest cost will rise exponentially.

This will leave much less money for other social and economic spending. It will also widen income inequality as the government will have to cut spending on many public goods like education, health care and public transport. At the same time, the interest it pays goes mainly to foreigners and the better off segment of the population.

What is even more worrying is that given our large revenue from petroleum-related sources, we should not really be running deficits. It is only a matter of time before we run out of oil and gas and thus become net importers of these two commodities. When that happens, our budget situation may become very critical.

Read more at: http://aliran.com/7537.html

Umno’s politics of self-delusion

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 12:10 PM PST

(FMT) Even the Malays are now fed up and revolted by Umno's lies, deceit and hypocrisy.

We recognised what Umno has been telling us in the recent past – hypocrisy, and we are revolted by it. Umno espoused character and the moral high ground and invoked the name of Allah in their search for causes to justify their existence.

They talked about focus and the need for discipline if they were to win the fight against their "enemies" – failing to understand that they themslves are not disciplined when people are not looking.

And what does Umno do when people are not looking? Steal, plunder and pillage our country's wealth. The Umno general assembly might as well have been a lesson in hypocrisy and the politics of self-delusion.

The delusional hubris that accompanied the past 12 general election victories seems to have afflicted Umno's ability to face reality.

Just reflect on the last four years. The result of the 12th general election was supposed to give Umno a huge wake up call. The opposition gained 82 seats in parliament, wiping out BN's two-thirds majority.

Umno won 35.5% of the popular votes. PAS and PKR won 34.8%. A whisker separated them. The urban Malays are no longer with Umno. Perak, Penang, Kedah and Selangor fell to the opposition.

Without Sabah and Sarawak, BN would not have even obtained a simple majority to form the government.

If anything is to be learned from the 12th general election, it is this: Umno cannot campaign the way it has been doing in the past. They cannot put fear into the minds of the electorates and use the mainstream media to demonise the opposition.

The opposition parties won, not on race-based issues, but on a range of issues that cut across ethnic lines. And yet what do you have in the recent Umno general assembly? It is as if the lessons learnt in the 12th general election no longer have validity. All forgotten in the heat of the general assembly where Umno stalwarts became hypocrites – all of them!

But when Umno talks to Umno it is sincere. Umno talks about their Malay agenda, about their Ketuanan Melayu and about all that it will take to ensure that they are the rulers of this Malay land and about what Umno will do for themselves once they are in government again.

When Umno talks to the Malays, then the hypocrisy begins. Umno tells the Malays that Article 153 of the constitution would allow it to introduce affirmative action policies that would benefits only the Malays.

The May 13 racial riots, bumiputera status, Ketuanan Melayu and Malay supremacy followed suit, all giving Umno license to improve the Malays economic lot. Umno promised much to the Malays but delivered little. Their hypocrisy to the Malays went undetected until much later.

Malays are fed up of Umno's hypocrisy

And then Umno had to talk to their BN partners. Here Umno shared what they must. Each had looting rights to designated ministries. MIC had JKR and MCA had the transport ministry. Other areas where they could plunder and pillage were carved out of their sharing of power in government.

Duplicity and deceit crept in as BN leaders started to carve our their vested interest at the expense of the people. 1Malaysia was the rallying cry of BN while in the backroom, deals were negotiated that saw massive financial scandals such as PKFZ and the IPPs contracts.

There were too many failed utilities and construction projects. There were failures to meet projected completion schedule and massive cost overruns, and in a lot of cases, a complete failure to proceed with the project proper after it started. All these were covered up in the "national interest" and by the cunning use of the ISA and the OSA.

And as Umno's rule needed to be propped up by Sabah and Sarawak, the tentacles of corruption and greed also spread there with the enthusiastic participation of the state government already mired in corruption and self interest – up another notch because they called in their markers after their assist to Umno in the 2008 general election.

Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/12/27/umno%E2%80%99s-politics-of-self-delusion/

 

Shafie’s hand in KDM Malaysia?

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 12:09 PM PST

(FMT) The newly registered KadazanDusun Murut (KDM) Malaysia aims to weaken Musa Aman's strongest partner, Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) and Pairin Kitingan.

By Selvarajah Somiah

If you ask me, the most interesting part of this coming election is the shadow-boxing within the Barisan Nasional in Sabah.

The shadow boxing by certain Umno politicians using Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), a BN component in Sabah, and the Kadazandusun Murut Association Malaysia (KDM Malaysia) may be a precursor to a battle for the 'gaddi' in Kuala Lumpur.

Some Umno leaders in Sabah namely Shafie Apdal is vying for the chief minister's chair– not for today but definitely for tomorrow.

It is a bit silly to accuse Chief Minister Musa Aman for being 'opportunistic' about the alliance with the Gerakan party and for appointing Dr Yee Moh Chai of PBS as the new Deputy Chief Minister.

(Both LDP president VK Liew and his deputy Senator Chin Su Phin have done just that).

To set the record straight, Musa is a fair man and has always has been loyal to Umno and the BN.

Musa has stayed loyal and calm despite being accused of all sorts of things by LDP and his own Umno fellows.

Even those associated with Shafie Apdal are doing the same, hitting him under the belt.

Shafie's hand

And now even the newly registered KDM Malaysia is trying to undermine him.

Despite the disappointment and accusation, never once has Musa lost his cool.

Of course now after the story about Liew's shenanigans with his Rungus staff and the police report in Kota Marudu, things have cooled down.

Liew (who was once disparaging of Musa) is (now) throwing heaps of praises on Musa.

Whatever other adjective you may use of Musa he has proved (that he is) anything but 'opportunistic'.

Given this 10-year history, why is Shafie now eyeing Musa Aman so warily?

The simple answer is that Shafie believes that Umno shall be a real contender for power come the 13th general election.

Musa, Sabah's best CM

Shafie also believes that, in the absence of a towering figure such as Musa, the leadership of the Sabah BN may be up for grabs.

Shafie also knows that he is — Musa apart — probably the most visible face of Umno Sabah.

Shafie thinks he gives the impression that he has got (Umno president) Najib Tun Razak's blessings to replace Musa.

I doubt this very much because Najib has openly acknowledged that Musa is doing a fantastic job in Sabah.

In the ordinary course of events Musa would probably be the clear front-runner.

He is by far the best chief minister Sabah has ever seen. He is articulate, workaholic and has propelled his state ahead of the rest when it comes to development.

He has won every electoral challenge thrown at him — Parliament polls or state assembly polls – since taking over in 2003.

KDM Malaysia, a tool to divide

Now lets look at KDM Malaysia and how Shafie's hidden tentacles have come into play.

John Ambrose is the founder and president of KDM Malaysia and its number one purpose is to get Kadazan Dusun Murut (KDMs) to support Umno.

Its second most important intention is to break the KDMs away from (other BN coalition partner) PBS, Upko and the PBRS.

In other words it is a tool to divide the KDMs.

Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/12/27/shafies-hand-in-kdm-malaysia/

DAP infighting due to polls candidacy and rewards

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 08:37 AM PST

What all this means is that the continuing rivalries between Karpal and Dr Ramasamy; and also Nga and Kulasegaran have become unsolvable and is affecting the party grassroots. Eventually, it will impact on the party's performance in the general election.

By BARADAN KUPPUSAMY, The Star

DAP, which did well in the 2008 general election and was erstwhile the most united and strong component compared to the defection-hit PKR and PAS with its own detractors, is showing signs of fraying at the sides as the next election approaches.

Its adviser Lim Kit Siang tweeted on Saturday, warning party leaders to settle their quarrels among themselves using party channels and not go to mainstream media and fall prey to their manipulation.

But both the mainstream and online media went to town reporting the fallout between leaders in the DAP, which is mainly a competition over who is to contest what seat in the coming general election.

The "warlord-godfather" row between Dr P. Ramasamy and national chairman Karpal Singh was reignited after Karpal's call for Dr Ramasamy, a parachute candidate in 2008, to resign as Penang Deputy Chief Minister II.

In a sign that things have come to a head between the two giants, Karpal announced that Dr Ramasamy's position as Deputy Chief Minister is no longer tenable because he had gone against a directive to shut up over the "warlord-godfather" issue.

Karpal accused Dr Ramasamy of going against the recommendations of a three-man committee that was set up to settle the issue a fortnight ago, by giving an interview to The Star on Thursday alleging a grand design in the party to oust him.

Dr Ramasamy also alleged that party members had bugged him for favours which he had refused, thus incurring their wrath.

Karpal wanted Dr Ramasamy to lodge a report with the MACC and also reveal the members, if there were any.

In Ipoh, former Perak DAP deputy chairman M. Kulasegaran called for a press conference and, while talking about how DAP leaders had to declare their assets, also asked his arch rival Taiping MP Nga Kor Ming, who had defeated him and his camp in the state DAP elections in November last year, to come clean on allegations that a contract for suits for Ipoh councillors was awarded to a company in which his wife is a director.

Kulasegaran said that "business and politics" should not mix.

"One should not make money from politics. In the party's best interest Nga should clear the air over the matter."

It is alleged that the contract was given to the highest bidder just weeks after Pakatan Rakyat took power in Perak but it lost the state a year later through defections.

The company was formed in the first blush of Pakatan leaders taking power and although Nga has threatened to sue, he does not deny that the company, in which his wife is director, got the contract.

He is a subject of some controversy as he had been at loggerheads with not only Kulasegaran but also with Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir for calling him "metallic black" for which he apologised.

He also called Perak "Darul Kartun" and is getting flak for it.

What all this means is that the continuing rivalries between Karpal and Dr Ramasamy; and also Nga and Kulasegaran have become unsolvable and is affecting the party grassroots. Eventually, it will impact on the party's performance in the general election.

In Perak, rivals to Kulasegaran former state assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar supported by his ally Buntong assemblyman S. Sivasubramaniam are already campaigning for Kulasagaran's Ipoh Barat seat.

It is said that Nga had already promised it to Sivakumar and if that is the case, Kulasegaran would have to move out or drop out altogether. Yet another Perak leader, Batu Gajah MP Fong Po Kuan, had been removed from all party functions as a result of a clash with Nga.

It is unclear whether she will be a candidate in Perak.

All this is causing an all-out rivalry in Perak between the Nga faction and the Kulasegaran camp. And as recent history has shown, when the DAP factions fight, they perform poorly in the general election.

In Penang, great stress is showing up between Karpal and Dr Ramasamy with the party grassroots in the state almost entirely supporting Karpal in his war against Dr Ramasamy.

Those ex-MIC and new people who had been attached to Dr Ramasamy after he almost overnight became the Batu Kawan MP, Prai assemblyman and Deputy Chief Minister II in one go, are about the only people in the DAP backing him in his feud with Karpal.

While Dr Ramasamy is weak in the DAP, he enjoys better standing in the Indian community where he is seen as a university professor who took to Opposition politics and made it good in the 2008 polls.

He gets support in the feud from Indian NGOs, ex-Hindraf people and also some ex-Makkal Sakti individuals who lost in the leadership tussle of the party to R. S. Thanenthiran, the current president.

Their feud has ramifications far beyond the squabble over terminology and if Dr Ramasamy is pushed, as Karpal seems to be doing, he might even quit the party, a potential disaster for the DAP with a general election around the corner. At the very least, he might have to give up his Prai state seat and the coveted Deputy Chief Minister's post and just contest the Batu Kawan parliamentary seat.

He has told a close confidant that he is ready to face any eventuality.

The DAP, thought to be the strongest party in the Pakatan, is showing dangerous in-fighting that could impact negatively on its general election performance.

 

For some, the world will end in 2012

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 08:19 AM PST

'Winnable' candidates have much to fear come next year

This is where the end of the world will come  for some of them because what perhaps they do not realise is that in the BN scheme of things, the party chairman already has his evaluation methods to determine the candidates to be fielded. And much of these comes from intelligence reports he is privy to.

By Syed Nadzri, New Straits Times 

SOME people say the world will end in the coming year. There's actually a certain truth in that. Even if the apocalyptic Mayan predictions and Nostradamus prophecy do not occur, it is going to be the end of the world just the same for some people here.

The death knell, one way or the other, will come with the 13th general election, which, as has been widely anticipated and figured out, is most likely to take place next year -- sooner rather than later. So for many, the world will end just before or just after this watershed event.

For one, the "winnable candidate" buzz could just veer off to give the death blow. The obsession with this tag has certainly added a horrendous twist to the molten political landscape that had taken shape after the bruising elections the last time around in 2008.

The fact is that many are anticipating 2012 to be a year of political showdowns. This plus the preoccupation with the winnable candidate formula gives it just the right recipe for the end of the world stuff.

Central to this issue is what, or who, is a winnable candidate? I think this overused expression is as redundant as the grossly irritating "repeat again one more time".

When you field a candidate, of course, he is considered (at least to the party pitting him) a winnable candidate. Who would want to put up a "losable candidate"?

But the tricky and often amusing part about the sweet-sounding term is that it brings forth many hopefuls who regard themselves as winnable on all counts, even if it is only by their own reckoning. And this is where the problem lies, because the world will virtually end for these people if they don't get selected as candidates. Or, in cases where they do, they get beaten.

There was, for instance, this old chap the other day who openly declared without the slightest hesitation.

The veteran said he had based the self-assessment on feedback from people around him and then boldly maintained that "this is not what I say but what the people say". Yeah right. Such smugness from a schmuck.

It is the same person who has been going around undermining some of his counterparts. It is also the same person who has not much to show from running a major sport association he heads. And he wants to be picked as a winnable candidate in politics.

Just watch, he will make all kinds of threats to everyone if he is not picked.

There are many people like him. It is understood that intense lobbying and so many petitions and self-pitching reports have gone out to Barisan Nasional party leaders in the promotion of certain so-called winnable candidates.

According to an aide to a minister, there had been numerous occasions when, during official functions or visits, envelopes and files containing lengthy resumes of certain candidates were willy-nilly passed on to top party leaders in the hope of consideration.

Even personalities linked to non-governmental organisations and  elected representatives who are in the parliamentary independent group are in the list lobbying to be winnable candidates.

This is where the end of the world will come  for some of them because what perhaps they do not realise is that in the BN scheme of things, the party chairman already has his evaluation methods to determine the candidates to be fielded. And much of these comes from intelligence reports he is privy to.

The same goes for prospective candidates from parties on the other side of the fence. The election outcome in 2008 made many sit up, and suddenly, now everyone wants to be a candidate, thinking that he can be a winner.

This explains the internal squabbles afflicting the parties.

Pas and DAP have some of their top leaders engaged in open confrontation which would inevitably affect candidacy. Parti Keadilan Rakyat is losing more disillusioned campaigners.

The odd thing about these parties and their supporters is that when abrasive statements are made from within or by one of their own officials, they are always the same -- the culprit has been paid off to become a turncoat. If it is the other way around and the criticisms come from within BN, the critic is instantly tagged as "a man with principles".

It is a bit like their perception of court cases and the media. Things are only fair if they are to their advantage.

On this note, there is a crucial court decision due soon. This could spell the end of the world as well, one way or the other.



Jangan menyusahkan Najib

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 08:13 AM PST

Malahan Najib mempunyai tanggungjawab cukup berat bagi memulihkan keyakinan rakyat kepada kerajaan BN. Apa yang berlaku dalam pilihan raya umum lalu, seolah-olah satu isyarat jelas kepada BN bahawa rakyat mampu menolak parti berkenaan, biar pun mereka menyedari BN sudah banyak berjasa kepada rakyat dan negara.

Zulkiflee Bakar, The Malaysian Insider

"Saya berpegang teguh pada sumpah yang dilafazkan pada April 2009. Saya percaya, sumpah yang saya angkat itu, mempengaruhi saya bukan sahaja sebagai Perdana Menteri tetapi juga sebagai Pengerusi Barisan Nasional (BN), Presiden Umno dan yang paling penting, sebagai seorang insan yang begitu bangga menjadi rakyat Malaysia."

Itulah yang dicoretkan oleh Datuk Seri Najib Razak dalam blog beliau 1malaysia.com.my baru-baru ini.

Sememangnya tiada siapa pun boleh menafikan, Najib seperti mana kata beliau telah melakukan yang terbaik untuk rakyat semenjak dua tahun setengah memegang jawatan Perdana Menteri.

Perlu diingat Najib menjadi pemimpin nombor satu negara bukanlah dalam situasi yang mudah, beliau melangkah masuk ke Pejabat Perdana Menteri dalam keadaan politik Umno dan BN berada di kedudukan cukup tidak selesa.

Sementara Umno kehilangan kuasa di Kedah, Perak (selama 11 bulan) dan Selangor serta terus gagal menawan Kelantan, BN pula kehilangan majoriti dua pertiga di Parlimen dan terlepas kekuasaan di Pulau Pinang.

Malahan Najib mempunyai tanggungjawab cukup berat bagi memulihkan keyakinan rakyat kepada kerajaan BN. Apa yang berlaku dalam pilihan raya umum lalu, seolah-olah satu isyarat jelas kepada BN bahawa rakyat mampu menolak parti berkenaan, biar pun mereka menyedari BN sudah banyak berjasa kepada rakyat dan negara.

Berikutan itu, siang dan malam, Najib dengan dibantu Timbalannya, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin memerah otak bagi memulihkan keadaan sama ada dari sokongan politik, ekonomi mahupun sosial.

Justeru muncullah satu demi satu langkah transformasi dalam semua bidang bagi membolehkan BN kembali meraih sokongan rakyat. Program Transformasi Politik (PTP), Program Transformasi Kerajaan (GTP) dan Program Transformasi Ekonomi (ETP) dilihat lambang kesungguhan Najib dalam mentadbir negara.

Ini belum lagi mengambil kira bagaimana Najib an Muhyiddin sanggup turun ke bawah bertemu rakyat melalui program "walkabout". Setiap lapisan rakyat ditemui dan pelbagai kaum didekati, masalah mereka didengari serta diselesaikan.

Walaupun menghadapi pelbagai tekanan, tohmahan dan kerenah pembangkang yang semakin ghairah mencari kuasa politik, namun ia tidak mampu menggugat ketekunan Najib.

"Tak kira apa yang dikatakan oleh sesetengah pihak yang tak bertanggungjawab mengenai saya, keluarga saya atau pentadbiran saya, namun apa yang pasti saya telah berusaha pastikan setiap keputusan yang saya ambil sebagai Perdana Menteri adalah yang terbaik mungkin," kata Najib.

Bagaimanapun segala usaha Najib boleh tergugat jika BN dan Umno tidak mencapai kejayaan cemerlang dalam pilihan raya umum atau paling penting mengekalkan kuasa.

Buat masa ini tidak dapat dinafikan keyakinan dan kepercayaan rakyat kepada kepimpinan Najib semakin meningkat dan imej kerajaan BN semakin melonjak.

Namun begitu, ia bergantung sejauh manakah pemimpin Umno dan BN berusaha mengekalkan momentum sokongan berkenaan dengan memastikan ia diterjemahkan dalam bentuk undi.

Bagi pemimpin-pemimpin Umno, mereka tidak boleh lagi bersikap hipokrit dengan mengamalkan politiking sesama sendiri. Mereka sudah berjanji dan melafazkan ikrar taat setia untuk patuh kepada apa juga keputusan pucuk pimpinan mengenai calon.

Siapa sahaja yang akan dipilih sebagai calon melalui kriteria calon boleh menang, maka mereka perlu patuh dan taat serta bekerja bersungguh-sungguh bagi memenangkan calon berkenaan.

Berbanding 2008, Umno dikatakan jauh lebih selesa untuk menghadapi pilihan raya umum kali ini, malahan dilaporkan juga orang Melayu yang sebelum ini menolak Umno sudah kembali kepada parti itu.

Justeru pemimpin-pemimpin Umno di semua peringkat tidak harus menyusahkan Najib dengan mengamalkan budaya cah keting atau tikam belakang sehingga memungkinkan parti itu tewas dalam pilihan raya umum nanti.

Begitu juga dengan mereka yang sudah lama memegang jawatan dan tidak mampu lagi mengalas tanggungjawab tersebut.

Cerminlah diri, apakah benar kita calon boleh menang seperti mana ditetapkan oleh Perdana Menteri, jika tidak berundurlah dengan sukarela, jangan menyusahkan Najib sehingga beliau terpaksa menghantar wakil untuk "majlis pujuk memujuk".

Umno tidak ada masa untuk semua itu, kalau merasakan pemilihan kita hanya akan menyebabkan parti akan kalah maka bersikap terbukalah dengan menyokong calon yang dipilih parti, apa yang penting parti menang.

Bagaimanapun istilah "jangan menyusahkan Najib" ini bukan eksklusif untuk Umno sahaja malahan komponen BN juga perlu mengamalkan sikap yang sama.

Mereka juga tidak terkecuali untuk menyenaraikan calon boleh menang dan tidak boleh beranggapan syarat berkenaan hanya untuk Umno sahaja. Berbanding Umno, tanggungjawab komponen BN terutamanya MCA, MIC dan Gerakan jauh lebih berat.

Mereka perlu menyakinkan pengundi-pengundi bukan Melayu untuk kembali kepada BN dan dalam soal ini mereka harus mempunyai keyakinan yang tinggi untuk menewaskan pembangkang termasuklah di Pulau Pinang.

Janganlah mengamalkan sikap menyerah kalah sebelum berperang terutamanya di Pulau Pinang yang kini dikuasai oleh DAP yang bekerjasama dengan Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) dan PAS.

Komponen BN harus berusaha memberikan penjelasan kepada golongan bukan Melayu mengenai usaha yang telah dan sedang dilaksanakan oleh Najib untuk memberikan kesejahteraan kepada rakyat.

Hakikatnya, rakyat sudah melihat kesan daripada gagasan 1 Malaysia yang menyaksikan kerajaan di bawah kepimpinan Najib berusaha meringankan beban mereka dalam segala segi.

READ MORE HERE

 

Towards a bankrupt Malaysia?

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 08:10 AM PST

Since the 1998 Asian Financial Crisis, government expenditure has consistently exceeded its revenue by a considerable margin. For example, in 2011 the spending is estimated to be RM229 billion while the revenue will be only RM183 billion. So the shortfall of RM46 billion has to be met by borrowing.

Subramaniam Pillay, The Malaysian Insider

That the Budget that was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat on 7 October 2011 was an election budget is very clear. There have been numerous detailed comments on the Budget by politicians and analysts (since then). In this article, we are just going to focus on one of the long term issues from the Budget. It concerns the increasing debt burden of the federal government.

How big is the government debt?

The federal government's outstanding debt has been increasing since 1970. From the detailed data available from Bank Negara's website, in 1991, it reached a temporary peak of RM99 billion and then decreased to RM90 billion by 1997. From then, it has been virtually doubling every five years. By the end of 2011, we can expect the figure to reach RM450 billion.

In other words, since the Asian crisis of 1998, we have been growing by borrowing heavily. In the 10 years since 1999, our debt has quadrupled. If we continue on this path, by 2020, our national debt will reach RM1.6 trillion. If our population is 40 million then, each Malaysian will have a debt burden of more than RM40,000 and this does not include our own personal borrowing. Assuming an interest rate of five per cent, paying the interest alone will cost the taxpayers RM80 billion per year!

The government has been reassuring us by saying that our debt is manageable. It argues that the debt at the end of 2012 will be only 54 per cent of our GDP, which is relatively low compared to the current crisis nations like Greece and Italy. (GDP is a measure of the total value of all the goods and services produced in a year in the country.) While it may not reach the levels of Greece by 2012, at our current rate of borrowing it won't take long before we become another Greece. Just to put this in perspective, our giant neighbour, Indonesia has a debt of only 23 per cent of GDP! Singapore has no debts.

The federal government debt alone does not tell the full story. Many government-owned enterprises also have borrowings. If these figures are included, then the total debt would be much higher. It is difficult to get the complete data on these borrowings.

Why has the debt been growing so rapidly?

Since the 1998 Asian Financial Crisis, government expenditure has consistently exceeded its revenue by a considerable margin. For example, in 2011 the spending is estimated to be RM229 billion while the revenue will be only RM183 billion. So the shortfall of RM46 billion has to be met by borrowing.

Of course it is not expected that the government balances its books every year. Prudent economic management requires the government to balance its budget over an entire business cycle. So we can have deficits during bad years and budget surpluses during good years. Since 1998, we have had at least two business cycles; yet every year without fail we have had budget deficits!

This is evidence of fiscal irresponsibility. Here is a government which does not know the meaning of saving for a rainy day. A good example is the situation in the current year.

Actual revenue for 2011 is going to be higher than the budgeted figure by RM17.6 billion. This is mainly due to the increased income from the rise in oil prices in 2011. The federal government relies heavily on different forms of revenues (corporate tax, petroleum profit tax, royalties, Petronas dividends, etc) that originate from the production and export of oil and gas in Malaysia. The proportion can be 30-40 per cent of the total government revenue. Thus a rise in the world price of oil translates directly into higher income for the government. So essentially, we had a windfall income.

What would a prudent government do with this windfall? It would reduce the planned borrowing. But that's not our BN government's way of financial management. Uncannily, the increase in the actual spending is going to be the same amount of RM17.6 billion!

When asked about this at one of the post-budget forums, a Treasury official explained that it was mainly due to higher spending on salaries and increased subsidy for petrol and diesel. We can understand the increased subsidy but why the higher salary? Did we just increase the size of the bureaucracy? This is a clear case of a government that has no control on its spending.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kim Jong-Nurul?

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 07:53 AM PST

KTEMOC KONSIDERS

One of the most troubling observations of Malaysian politics is the cultism of personalities, such as Tun Razak, Dr Mahathir, Anwar Ibrahim and yes, on the opposition side, Lim Kit Siang and Pak Haji Nik Aziz, and subsequently (again but this time on the other side of the political fence) Anwar Ibrahim, wakakaka.

It's troubling because cultism often leads to what I term as 'Kim-ism', a word derived from the 'Great Leader' (wakakaka) Kim Il Sung, president of North Korea from 1948 to 1994. He was succeeded by his son Kim Jong Il (1994 to 2001), who in turn had been succeeded by his son Kim Jong Un.

Now, would it be wrong for leading politicians to be joined and/or succeeded by their sons/daughters, like Tun Razak was by Najib, Dr Mahathir by Mukhriz, Lim KS by Lim GE, Pak Haji Nik Aziz by Nik Adli (who had the misfortune to be detained for 5 years under ISA for alleged terrorist activities and membership in KMM) and Anwar Ibrahim by Nurul Izzah?

Shall I also add AAB by s-i-l KJ? wakakaka.

Externally, there's our neighbour Lim Kuan Yew being succeeded by his son Lee Hsien Loong (with another PM Goh CT in between), Soekarno eventually by Megawati, and then there's the ruling oligarchy of the Philippines which has kept the presidency principally among 3 families.

Even sweetest Aung Sung Suu Kyi is the daughter of Aung San, founder of modern Burma or Myammar.

Sons and daughters (and son-in-laws wakakaka) succeeding their fathers/mothers (and f-i-l) as political leaders are found everywhere, in the USA, Australia, etc and are particularly common in the States of the sub-continent such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.

If these sons and daughters are qualified, capable, competent and experienced enough to be political leaders in their own rights, then why not?

But when a young brat is shoved upwards like Kim Jong Un, then it is 'Kim-ism'. I personally believe Najib being made MB of Pahang at 21 years old was definitely an act of 'Kim-ism', though to be fair to him NOW, some 30 over years have since gone by, during which time he was exposed to a variety of political & ministerial positions before assuming the position of PM, not unlike PM Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore.

Najib certainly has the experience and exposure to be PM, thus we should no longer accuse him of benefitting from cultist promotion anymore, though whether he is/will be a good one remains to be seen ...

... which brings us to Nurul Izzah, the so-called Puteri Reformasi and beloved icon of the anwaristas.

Many have been the times I read/heard of the preposterous proposals for Nurul to be nominated as the PM of a Pakatan-ruled Malaysia, in the event of the non availability of her father. Those proposals have been so unrealistically moronic, leaving me flabbergasted by the puerile mentality of those blind-as-bats idol-worshippers. Then I could only think of poor hard working, politically far superior Fuziah Salleh, who only lacks the (questionable) pedigree to be considered!

10 days ago, RPK made a far more reasonable proposal to chart Nurul's progress upwards, one which appears to be practical and not unlike the one Lee Kuan Yew had done for his son Hsien Loong, where the Chosen One is incrementally exposed to various appointments and experiences before finally stepping onto the Hot Seat.

RPK wrote this in his post The need to chart Nurul Izzah's career path. Some relevant extracts follow:

READ MORE HERE

 

Putrajaya contracts Gemas-JB double-track to Chinese firm

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 07:30 AM PST

(The Malaysian Insider) - Putrajaya has agreed to award the Chinese Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) a multi-billion ringgit contract to build the 197-km Gemas-Johor Baru electrified double tracking project (EDTP), instead of front-runner China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC), sources say.

The Malaysian Insider understands the project is worth between RM7 and RM8 billion, after it was put under a mid-term review in the Ninth Malaysia Plan. The Gemas-Johor Baru sector would be the final package for the EDTP, with the other sectors being the Ipoh-Padang Besar and Seremban-Gemas lines.

"Putrajaya has decided on China Road and Bridge Corporation after some last-minute lobbying," a source told The Malaysian Insider.

Another source said the award could be a wrinkle in Putrajaya-Beijing ties as only CRCC is authorised to tender for rail-related projects abroad. "The decision has been made and will be announced very soon," the source disclosed.

Putrajaya and Beijing maintain very good political and business ties, with China taking palm oil and other commodities apart from a flow of goods being traded under the Asean-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA). However, the Penang Second Bridge project has not drawn down a US$800 million soft loan from Beijing while Putrajaya has also rejected a Chinese firm's US$1 billion (RM3.1 billion) redevelopment bid for the Pudu Jail land.

But the Gemas-Johor Baru EDTP has always been seen as a project for Chinese companies, the sources said.

The project includes building nearly 200km of parallel railway tracks, including stations, depots, halts, yards and bridges and cover systems such as electrification, signalling and communications. This includes a realignment between Pulau Sebang, Melaka and the Gemas section.

Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha said in July that the Gemas-Johor Baru stretch was already in the final stage of design but declined to state if the tender would be open to foreign parties when it is completed by end of the year.

READ MORE HERE

 

kisah kaki lutu dan IPO Felda Global

Posted: 26 Dec 2011 07:26 AM PST

SAKMONGKOL AK47

Mengapakah ada tentangan kepada penyenaraian FGV global? Bukankah para peneroka yang berjumlah 220,000 itu akan mendapat durian runtuh? Isa Samad telah janji- peneroka mesti bergembira. Kerajaan UMNO sentiasa menjaga kebajikan para peneroka….dan kebajikan warga korporat. Soldadu perkasa pun kesana kemari menakutkan sesiapa yang menetang agenda kaki lutu Isa bin Samad.

Berapa nilai durian runtuh tersebut? Barang di ingat durian runtuh ini sekali sahaja. Dan peneroka akan menikmati nya jika mereka menjual saham free yang mereka terima. Free dari mana? Tentulah FGV yang akan beri. Jika tidak, maka tidak ada galakan atau insentif untuk peneroka menyerah jiwa dan raga mereka bukan?

Setelah di IPO kan, pegangan FGV ialah sekitar 28%. ( 39% dari 70% perniagaan). Pegangan KPF ialah 42%.  FGV akan set aside sebahagian dari saham mereka untuk di agihkan kepada 220,000 peneroka. Berapa banyak yang akan di agihkan? Katalah 10%. 10% itu berapa nilai nya dalam sebutan mutlak? Saya tidak tahu macam mana mereka buat perhitungan, tapi target FGV ialah mencatat nilai 7 billion apabila di IPO. Jadi kalau mereka set aside 10%, maka nilai mutlak nya ialah 700 juta. Bahagikan 700 juta ini dengan 220,000, maka seoang peneroka akan mendapat lebih kurang RM3200 seorang.

Terpulanglah kepada peneroka untuk berfikir adakah premium 3200 seorang ini setimpal dengan penyerahan segala yang mereka miliki secara lansung melalui KPF dalam FH berbaloi. 3200 di bahagikan dengan 12 bulan, tidak sampai 300 Ringgit sebulan.

Tapi siapa mahu kasi 3000-4000 setahun kepada setiap peneroka? Anwar Ibrahim? Kit Siang? Nik Aziz? Semua tak boleh. Hanya Isa bin Samad sahaja yang boleh. Siapa tentang akan kena lutu. Sebab Isa Samad kata kalau dia jumpa orang itu, dia akan lutu. Hoho. Dalam dunia ini Isa bin Samad sahaja yang boleh lutu. Dan Isa Samad sudah pun lutu Zulkifli Wahab. Sehingga Isa Samad hantar gerombolan perkasa supaya menakutkan Zul Wahab.

PM telah beri tugas kepada Isa Samad, Isa- you jayakan IPO ini by any means necessary. Maka, tentangan terhadap penyenaraian akan di pandang serong dan di anggap suatu sikap yang anti peneroka. Sedangkan jika di kaji, bukankah penyenarian tersebut akan meninggikan harga saham koperasi permodalan FELDA?

Tapi kita serius sikit. Apakah yang merisaukan atau boleh merisaukan peneroka? Kepentingan peneroka terletak pada pegangan KPF dalam FELDA Holdings. Peneroka menguasai 51% daripada saham dalam FH. Ini bermakna mereka mempunyai penguasaan lansung atau direct control keatas tanah2 dan asset dalam FH. Bila penyenaraian berlaku, semua tanah dan asset di pajak kepada syarikat FGV yang disenaraikan. Sebagai balasan peneroka memiliki saham melalui KPF. Mereka tidak lagi menguasai secara lansung tanah dan asset.

READ MORE HERE

 

Report based on interview with DCM Dr Ramasamy

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 11:25 PM PST

(The Star) - The Star stands by the article written based on an interview with Deputy Chief Minister II Dr P. Ramasamy on Dec 21 by our journalist Ian McIntyre.

The interview was arranged and agreed upon by Dr Ramasamy on two counts; one is about allegations of poor governance including about him having an extra-marital affair and secondly, his take on issues confronting the Indian community.

The allegations were made against him by some Indian DAP grassroots activists here.

"As a responsible journalist, I cannot disclose the identity of these activists, as they related their problems to me in good faith and confidence.

"I felt that the interview was necessary as it would give an opportunity for Dr Ramasamy to air his side to the allegations made against him," said Mcintyre.

The interview took place at Dr Ramasamy's office located on the 51st floor of Komtar.

Mcintyre said it was a cordial get-together as all of them (including two journalists from Malaysiakini) have interacted with each other in the past on friendly terms.

"When I raised the allegations, Dr Ramasamy responded swiftly, saying he heard about it and there was no truth to them," Mcintyre said.

He proceeded to outline the allegations made by the grassroots, describing them as senseless.

McIntyre also recalled Dr Ramasamy as saying: "There are only three or four of these grassroots members unless you want to count earth worms as grassroots."

"I think you would be astounded if I relate to you some of their demands."

He might not have uttered the word "grand design" but said that some quarters might be conspiring to oust him ever since he was appointed to head the (state) Hindu Endowment Board, said McIntyre.

Dr Ramasamy reiterated a few times throughout the interview that the issue was not about the warlord-godfather squabble with DAP chairman Karpal Singh, but it was mostly on the allegations made against him and on the plight of poor Indians.

The Star would also like to point out that when Dr Ramasamy called on the morning of Dec 23 to clarify some points, it was immediately uploaded onto the online edition which he himself agreed was "fine".

Dr Ramasamy was quoted in some online portals on Monday as saying that his row with DAP chairman Karpal Singh was due to the reports in The Star.

He denied at a press conference Monday that he ever accused DAP grassroots leaders of being corrupt.

 

Prophet Muhammad is a Malay (NOT)

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 08:44 PM PST

The "Malay World" is actually very small. Regardless of Article 153, UMNO can Malay this, and Malay that, and yet, I find it both amusing and sad that they are claiming the "Superiority" of a clan which is actually fast diminishing.

By John Doe

Everyday we hear of someone screaming and shouting about Article 153. Article 153 seems to be the Bane-of-Malaysian-Unity, the Bondage-of-UMNO, and the Brunt-of-Kopitiam-Discussions. Somehow, dress like, speak like, practise customs like, and is Muslim defines a race. Race, race, race, race. That's all Malaysians are bombarded with all day long. Has Malaysia no "udder" better topics to speak about? Chinese-Indian-Malay this, Chinese-Indian-Malay that. This will be the last time I will discuss this. And once and for all put to rest all this nonsensical cloak-and-dagger discussions.

Before I begin, and this is trained at Pakatan Rakyat - STOP screaming about Tax-Payers' Money. 90% of Malaysians do NOT care! Why? Because only 10% of the Malaysian Population pays Tax. And those who do NOT pay Tax, do NOT care! The majority of Malaysian Government's income comes from Oil Money. And to stop UMNO, you have to stop their source of income. This Oil income is circa 45% of Malaysia's Wealth. Capisce? And why do I bring Oil into the formula? Simple! The Majority of oil comes from Borneo. And in Borneo, there are only 11% Malays in Sabah. And once you deduct the percentage of Melanaus in Sarawak, you are left with about 3% Malays in Sarawak. 

 

Number one: 

Melanaus are Melanaus. Malays are Malays. Ibans are Ibans. And you will never hear anyone speak about the Teochew race. Since when is a Chinese Muslim a Malay? And since when is a Kerala-boy a Malay?

Number two: 

Konvensyen Dunia Melayu proudly proclaims that the "Malay-World" has a population which includes Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Philippines, Brunei, Singapore, Indonesia, Burma and Vietnam. Sounds dandy. But to the average person, this is confusing. It seems to suggest that all of Thailand, which has a population of circa 60 million is Malay. However, for that to happen, then Konvensyen Dunia Melayu needs to accept that you MUST also accept the definition of a Buddhist Malay in Indochine, Hindu Malay in Bali, and Abangan Malay in Jowo, as well as a Catholic Malay in the Philippines!! Clearly, these countries are as Austronesian (Malay) as the samples found in Malaysia, but they are definitely not Muslim. 

Konvensyen Dunia Melayu needs to trim their numbers down by quite a bit then. Let's start with some of the Major-slashings. (You do the math yourself.) Approximately 80% of all Javanese are of the Abangan Religion, and Jowo has a population of about 120 Million. Bali is 93% Hindu, Philippines is 87% Catholic, and less than 2% of Thais are Muslim.

 

And what about Malaysia then?

According to the latest Census, despite all the body-snatching, conversions of Chinese, and Indians for Business Purposes, conversion of Chinese and Indians for Marriage Purposes, plus the deeply encouraged importation of Indonesian Muslims, Project IC of the Philippino Muslims, Southern Thai Muslims, Bangala Muslims, India's Muslims, Pakistan's Muslims, heck, even Serbia's and Palestinian Muslims and the insistence that "Malays" needing to breed 16.3 children per woman, it is perhaps SHOCKING to reveal that the census of Malaysia in the year 2011 proudly announces that:

 

"Malays are (now finally) the largest ethnic group in the country, comprising 50.1 per cent of the 27,484,596 total"
Taken from Here: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/census-population-hits-27.5m-mark/

 

Wait a minute!?! ONLY 50.1 PERCENT? Yes. It reads correctly. What happened to the 68% Malay-Muslim the Main-Stream-Media had always advertised, and insisted that we believe?? You mean now, and only now there are 50.1% Malays in Malaysia? Was there a drop in Islamic popularity? An 18% drop is a serious concern, by everyone involved. Regardless, let's assume that the 50.1% is not faked in any way ....

What if we deducted all the Chinese Muslims, all the Indian Muslims, and all the "dan lain-lain Muslims", what percentage would we end up with? 30%? Less? (Yea, yea, we all know guys like Abdullah Tee, Mahathir, and his koncho-koncho are called "Malay" because of Article 153.) What if we also deducted all the Malays who have been successfully proselytized? Yea, all those closet Hindu Malays, and Buddhist Malays, Catholic & Christian Malays, Jewish Malays, Hare Krishna Malays, Bahai Malays, Mahakari Malays Zoroastrian Malays and Atheist Malays .... What numbers then would we have? 20%? Less?

What was it ten years ago? What was it 30 years ago, and what was it half a century ago?

Who is a Malay? 

A 1974 document issued to the United Nations by the Government of Malaysia, prepared by DOROTHY Z. FERNANDEZ, AMOS  H. HAWLEY, SILVIA PREDAZA, defines "Malay" as:

"... Malay: Malay, Indonesian, Negrito, Jakun, Semai, Semdai,Temiar, Other Orang Asli and Other Malay(s)..."

Hold on a second ... A Negrito, Jakun, Semai, Semdai,Temiar, Other Orang Asli are Muslim? What happened to Article 153?

 

Also, why is every Indonesian on Malaysian soil considered a "Malay"? There is also no mention of the word Bumiputra in that Document at all. Mind you that this was prepared in 1974, and Article 153 was already almost twenty years old!!

What is interesting to note is a particular paragraph which reads like this, and I quote verbatim:

"...There was also an immigration of Malays from the neighboring islands, particularly from Java and Sumatra, to work on the rubber estates. It is not possible to trace their numbers through the early years. Attempts were made to identify "Malays and Other Natives of the Archipelego" in the enumerations of 1891 and 1911, but the ease of assimilation of Malay migrants from Indonesia made the counts very unreliable..."

 

What then is all this nonsense about "Malays" NOT being "pendatangs" and all?

Read again the above. It clearly and plainly states "immigration of Malays from neighboring Islands, particularly Java and Sumatra..." 

 

If this sentence does not define "Pendatang Malay", then I don't know what does!!! I must remind you that this is indeed a Malaysian Government Official Document, prepared for the United Nations.

What is significant in this document, is that on page 16, it gives a breakdown of the races. Including all the (in their own words) "Pendatangs".

The "Malay" Population in Malaysia totaled 3,125,474, the Chinese 2,333,756, and the Indians 696,186. It is strange that there was no "dan lain-lain" category. As if they did not exist at all. The total population in this table is drafted at 6,278.758. And thus, we can deduce that if we added 3,125,474 (Malay) to 2,333,756(Chinese) and 696,186(Indian), and subtracted this number from the grand total of 6,278.758, we would have the numbers for the "dan lain-lain" category, which amounts to 123,342. However, when one divides 3,125,474 (including Indonesians, Orang Asli's, Sabahans, and Sarawakians etc etc) by the total population of 6,278.758, then you would hit an astonishing figure of 49.778539%.

Hold on a minute now. You mean that despite all those inclusions of "Pendatang Indonesians" and Sabahans, and Sarawakians (they are classified as the "other Malays") and just about everyone else, the total "Malay" population in 1974, in percentage terms was only 49.778539% ? Anyone else can see the number-manipulations which has been going on now right under your noses?

The full document in PDF form can be downloaded here: http://www.cicred.org/Eng/Publications/pdf/c-c34.pdf
(Yes, it was typed with a typewriter. Clickety-clack, smudges and all)

Number Three:

DNA, according to Prof Zilfalil Alwi, defines "Malay" as an admixture of multiple races with 52% coming from Chinese DNA, and the rest, from Indians, amongst others. The long and short of it, a term which most Malaysians endear, "Chindian". Another theory presented by Professor Zilfalil was that early Malays could also be Indian priests who came to the Malay peninsula to spread Hinduism. Sejarah Melayu fortifies this when it recorded that the first Kings of Malaya were indeed of the Keling stock, which I wrote about here, titled "Parameswara is a certified Singaporean Keling - Not a Joke"
You can read the full piece here: http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/letterssurat/43394-parameswara-is-a-certified-singaporean-keling-not-a-joke

 

 

On Dec 23rd 2011, on USM's own website, they presented this again
Read it yourself from the horse's own mouth here: http://www.usm.my/index.php/about-usm/news-archive/66-news-highlight/5956-DNA-MAPPING-PROVE-ASIANS-HAVE-SAME-GENETIC-ANCESTRY-.html

 


http://www.usm.my/images/stories/newspic/12b4b580b884f53df8d998e695feb49d.JPG

 

I will call your attention however, to one of Prof Zilfalil Alwi's own statements, and that is "...From his presentation, the 'Indianisation' of the Malay peninsula was described in early Chinese accounts, where there was a Hindu kingdom...", and the only thing which I want to stress, is that they are called "Chinese Records" because the Chinese were already in Geographical Malaya. And being a Hindu certainly does NOT make one an Indian!! Race and Religion do NOT correlate. Country borders and religion does have a correlation though, and that is something else to think about.

Number Four:

Why is it that once a Chinese or an Indian converts to Islam, they have to change their name(s) to an Arabic one, and inadvertently put Abdullah as your father's name?

Perhaps Malay Muslims have never heard or come across Hui Liangyu (China vice premier) and Sania Mirza (tennis player). Their names never resembled anything Arabic but they are well-known Muslims. This includes Yvonne Redley (a reporter once detained by Taliban), Nicolas Anelka and Frank Ribery (both footballers) are still proud to be called by their original name despite their conversion to Islam. It is important to note that none carry the "bin Abdullah" suffix.

Many become Muslims when they want to marry a Muslim while others convert to Islam as a means of tapping in to the social and economic benefits that Muslims enjoy. This is certainly an excellent way to promote one's religion.

Number Five:

The Baju Melayu is NOT Muslim clothing. Neither is the Songkok. I guarantee you that neither the Prophet Muhammad, nor any of his 10,000 Soldiers wore the Baju Melayu. Unless of course, someone from UMNO tells you that Prophet Muhammad was a Malay!! The Songkok clearly comes from the Bataks of Medan, who in turn were either inspired or (more likely) copied it from Nehru in India. The Kopiah, on the other hand, is as Jewish as it is Islamic. (Google "Religious Skullcap" yourself.) The Jewish word for it is "kippah". For those who do not know, the French government banned the wearing of kippot, hijabs and large crosses in public primary and secondary schools in France in March 2004. Contrary to what you were told, the French were NOT only banning the Hijab. In fact, one could proudly wear the baju Melayu in France and no one gives a hoot, because it is NOT Muslim clothing, and is not recognised as so.

Number Six:

The 20-point agreement and the (now erased) 18-point agreement between the Federation and Borneo can be read here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20-point_agreement

How many of these have been violated? Anyone been to Kuching would note that the street-signs are all in English (most of them anyway.).

I want to point your attention to 

Point 12: Special position of indigenous races

"In principle the indigenous races of North Borneo should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays in Malaya, "

This in essence means that there is absolutely no need for conversion to any religion other than their own to enjoy the same details of Article 153. Failure to comply with this probably allows for both Sabah and Sarawak to "un-join" themselves like what happened to Singapore.

Although, this remains the prerogative of the future "Republic of Borneo" citizens to decide. That is the true trademark of Democracy. Decision by the people, and not decision by the Dictators, and this is perhaps the best explanation of what is happening around the world. Regime after Regime is collapsing one by one. Perhaps the UN would welcome the "Republic of Borneo" as its 197th country after Sudan (North and South?) Borneo certainly has the resources to do so, and if they exercised "skill procurement" like Singapore, they can continue to "brain-drain" the peninsular of her top Academics, and trained professionals. The Oil wells will certainly carry her through the year 2030, especially with Rigs like "Kiki" being one of the top producers beating the combined wealth of all of Miri's oil rigs (but that's another story).

 

I'm also pretty sure that Pakatan Rakyat would assist you in gaining this independence, as their assurances of fairness to all, based on their Championing of Human RIghts, Voice-of-the-People Battle-Cry and so on would be happy to grant you this, if you collaborated with them before the coming 13th General Elections. After all, it's a win-win situation. Pakatan gets to defeat UMNO, and the "Republic of Borneo" is born. What a fantastic photo-finish!! No longer will Penans have to be raped, no longer will Taib be robbing Sarawak, and Bruno Manser's body may finally be found after all these years. For West Malaysians, it makes no difference to you at all. Most of you have never been there anyway, and even if you did today, you still need to show either your Passport (before) or show your MyKad (aka IC).

So, in addressing Abraham-son-of-Ali's statement about Article 153 and the church, and it's relevance to May 13th, what is the relationship? Are you telling everyone that Perkasa would launch another May 13th if "dan lain-lains" start to debate Article 153?

As shown above, the Borneo people have been denied their Bornean Article 12 Rights. Are you defending the Bornean Article 12 as well? Was Article 153 written by Prophet Muhammad? Is Article 153 called a Hadith? The Koran? Is this man-made document so "Holy" that it cannot be changed?

I know for a fact the Malaysian Constipation has already been changed almost 600 times since 1957. With the "most significant change" pertaining to the de-clawing of the Sultans. Proselytizing of Muslims? You want evidence? Sure, I'll give you evidence. Just read here:

 

(A kid with internet access would have found these easily): http://www.strategicnetwork.org/index.php?loc=kb&view=v&id=2557&fto=633&

 

and here: http://www.partnersintl.org/partners/se/mymw

Go ahead. The evidence is clear. Arrest them! Hang them, stone them, or decapitate them. Show the world that Malaysia is indeed NOT the moderate Muslim country which she pretends to be!! And all because of a few over-zealous individuals who pretend to be "Holier-than-Thou" whilst digging their hands into the wealth of the country, and robbing it blind!

What happened to Article 11 of the Federal Constipation? Did Abraham-son-of-Ali erase it? Did he also erase Sarawak's 18-point agreement? It's certainly contained within the same Constipation which he screams and rants about (while saying three times on Al Jazeera as well). So where does that leave us?

 

The truth of the matter is, the "Malay World" is actually very small. Regardless of Article 153, UMNO can Malay this, and Malay that, and yet, I find it both amusing and sad that they are claiming the "Superiority" of a clan which is actually fast diminishing. Javanese are now called Melayu, Bugis are now called Melayu, Acehnese are now called Melayu, Minangs are called Melayu and even Southern Thais, and Southern Philippinos are called Melayu. What exactly is so important about being a Melayu which warrants the attack on the Nons?

Prophet Muhammad was certainly NOT a Malay, and hence, the "Ketuanan Melayu" is pure bollocks. Who are you trying to impress? Article 153 is man-made, man-written, and man-changeable. Who knows if we continue to let UMNO Dictate the future of Malaysia, one day, UMNO might declare that Allah is a Malay??

 

Legitimacy of the Judiciary: Political Foes, BN Businessman and You

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 08:40 PM PST

If the rich are fearful to fight for their rights, the weak, the poor and the disadvantaged have no chance at all. Many are suffering in silence. This is because we did not speak up when it was needed to. 

By William Leong Jee Keen

Tay Choo Foo, a Barisan Nasional friendly business man, has lost all confidence in the Malaysian judiciary. When he was sued, he was sure the Courts will throw out the case. To Tay Choo Foo, the claim was a fabrication of lies. To his horror, the Court accepted the claimant's witness hearsay evidence and threw out his testimony. The High Court ordered him to pay RM13 million. The Court of Appeal and the Federal Court upheld the High Court judgment. Tay Choo Foo feels like a victim of sexual assault, he feels violated except he does not have a video to prove it.

Tay Choo Foo now realizes from bitter experience what Alexander Hamilton warned Americans in 1787, more than 200 years earlier in the Federalist Papers, that:-

 "A steady, upright and impartial administration of the laws" is essential because "no man can be sure that he may not be tomorrow the victim of a spirit of injustice, by which he may be the gainer today."[1]

Tay Choo Foo is writing a book entitled "Lawless" to warn Malaysians of the dangers of judicial corruption and to stir citizens into action. The question is whether Malaysians having been warned will act on it. When it mattered most Malaysians did not act. 

In 1988, Malaysians did not speak out when Tun Mahathir sacked the Lord President and the 5 Federal Court Judges. In 1998, many stood by when he sacked his Deputy Prime Minister and the Courts convicted and put him in jail for 6 years. The Federal Court judges, who had dedicated their entire career to the principle of upholding the Rule of Law, became victims of the Rule of Man. They suffered a grave injustice in being sacked, disgraced and robbed of their personal dignity and self-esteem. The monetary payment given twenty years later can never compensate for their pain and suffering. An even graver injustice was visited on Anwar Ibrahim when he was arrested, beaten and imprisoned for a crime he did not commit. All this was done for the purpose of destroying his political career in order to prolong that of others. It is not just heinous it is evil. The Federal Judges were sacked and the Deputy Prime Minster was imprisoned for political purposes.     

Malaysians allowed political powers to exert influence over the judiciary for political ends. They did not realize that like in all usual public private initiatives, economic entities would also gain influence over the Courts. Thus were spawned judicial decisions:- 

·         That interfered with the shareholding control of a public listed company such as the infamous Insas Bhd v Ayer Molek Rubber Co Bhd [1995] 2 MLJ 833;

·         That allowed multi-million ringgit defamation suits against MCG Pillay, Param Cumaraswamy, Raphael Pura, Tommy Thomas and Skrine & Co for writing about judicial corruption; 

·         That allowed contempt cases to be instituted against Zainur Zakaria, Tommy Thomas, Manjit Singh and prosecution of Karpal Singh who dared to challenge the unfairness of court proceedings;

·         That allowed a forger to acquire indefeasible title to property such as the Federal Court decision in Adorna Properties v Boonsom Boonyanit [2001] 1 MLJ 241 that made our country a forger's haven for 10 years until corrected by the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San [2010] 2 MLJ 1 FC;

·         That ordered an insurance company to pay an arsonist that set fire to his own factory to claim on his insurance policy and dismissed the insurance company's application for review in Asean Security Paper Mill v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (Malaysia) Bhd [2008] 5 AMR 377 

·         In Tay Choo Foo's case, the administrators of the estate of Tunku Mansur (deceased) sued him for the purchase price of 1.2 million Harrisons Holdings Berhad shares. Tay Choo Foo contended that the shares were given to him by Tunku Mansur as commission for arranging an investor to participate in the management buy-out led by Tunku Mansur. The High Court allowed the hearsay evidence of a purported conversation between the witness and Tunku Mansur to be admitted under section 32(1) (b) of the Evidence Act. Until the Federal Court upheld the High Court decision, section 32(1) (b) of the Evidence Act is accepted of only allowing a statement made by a deceased clerk in the entry of account books and records kept in the ordinary course of business. Tunku Mansur was not a deceased clerk and the statement was not an accounting entry or documents kept in the ordinary course of business. The Federal Court held that section 132(1) (b) should be given a broad and liberal interpretation. The Federal Court decision adopted a new approach that differed from what lawyers and academicians knew about section 32(1) (b). The decision may be a development of the law but it gave rise to the issue of satisfying the requirements of certainty and predictability which is so essential to the legitimacy of judicial decisions.        

There are many more cases that are not reported. I have a friend who lost his family business built over several generations to a third party despite non-compliance of the clear provisions of the law. He dared not challenge the matter in the courts because the third party is well connected. If the rich are fearful to fight for their rights, the weak, the poor and the disadvantaged have no chance at all. Many are suffering in silence. This is because we did not speak up when it was needed to.

In 2008, the cycle of political interference has been repeated. The 2nd edition of the Anwar Ibrahim trials is instituted to clip the opposition's momentum after the 12th General Elections. The Guardian in its editorial on 13th December 2011 described what the Courts will do to Anwar Ibrahim as an egregious travesty of justice.[2] The last vestiges of the judiciary's legitimacy will be lost on 9th January 2012 if Anwar is convicted.    

The public knows there is a clear distinction between a legitimate system of law and a mere system of commands coercively enforced.[3] It is not necessary for the public to be lawyers or legally trained to know whether a judicial decision is legitimate or not. Each of us has a built-in antenna that can sense the truth from a lie and whether a judicial decision is fair or unjust.

The public can detect judges, who while hiding behind a veneer of fairness make intellectually dishonest decisions. They make procedural and evidential rulings to admit into evidence facts favourable to the outcome they want. They shut out facts that would make it inconvenient for them to arrive at the desired outcome. They are thus able to write impeccable decisions by adopting the applicable laws to the selected evidence.[4] 

However, to the losing litigant and the public such decisions are complied with only because of the coercive force the court can bring to bear. The decisions are not accepted as expressions of legal and valid authority. They lacked legitimacy. It is public confidence that gives legitimacy to the judiciary and its decisions. To enjoy public confidence the judiciary must honour the values and principles of consistency, coherence, legal certainty, predictability and not the least justice and objectivity.[5] The citizens must always be vigilant and remind the Judges of their sacred duty. Sandra Day O'Connor said:

"If judges are to be independent guardians of rule of law values, they must be incorruptible. Judges are entrusted with ultimate decisions over life, freedoms, duties, rights, and property of citizens. But judges will never win the respect of the citizens[6] if they are subject to corrupt influences. Whenever a judge makes a decision for personal gain, or to curry favour, or to avoid censure, that act denigrates the Rule of Law… If the judiciary is perceived as being corrupt, biased, or otherwise unethical, society's confidence in the legal system and its respect for the Rule of Law will crumble"

The public is aware that the Anwar Ibrahim trials lacked legitimacy:-

  • In the first Anwar Ibrahim trial for corruption, the Judge attracted adverse worldwide criticism for the manner he conducted the trial. The Judge threatened and charged defence counsel for contempt for complaining the court was not impartial and fair.[7] The words "Irrelevant! Irrelevant! Irrelevant!" were uttered so often that it was only matched 10 years later by a subsequent refrain of "Correct! Correct! Correct!" The trial did not meet the requirement of impartiality, justice and objectivity;
  • In the second Anwar Ibrahim trial for sodomy, the High Court Judge applied the wrong law in convicting Anwar Ibrahim. It is a well established law that the court cannot convict on uncorroborated evidence of the complainant in a sexual offence. The Judge can only do so upon reminding himself of the danger of convicting on uncorroborated evidence. The Judge is required to set out in his judgment the reasons he found the complainant's evidence were sufficiently convincing to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt.[8] The High Court Judge failed to do this and the Court of Appeal did not pick up this error. It was only after the change of Prime Ministers that the Federal Court pointed out that the complainant's evidence lacked credibility and that the confession of sodomy was extracted by torture and improper means.[9] The second trial did not meet the standards of consistency and coherence to existing legal principles;
  • In the 2008 edition of the Anwar trials, Ragunath Kesavan, Chairman of the Malaysian Bar Council said that the Federal Court's decision to dismiss Anwar's application for access to key evidence was a regressive decision. The decision contradicted the clear language and intent of Parliament in section 51A of the Criminal Procedure Code[10]. The section imposed on the prosecution a statutory duty to provide to the accused before the commencement of the trial the documents that the prosecution intended to use at the trial. This was made in the interest of enhancing an accused person's right to a fair trial. By barring Anwar access to CCTV footage, medical reports, chemist reports and witness statements, Anwar was severely and unfairly impaired in defending himself. The Federal Court decision did not meet the standard of coherence, consistency, certainty and predictability, impartiality and justice;
  • Anwar applied under Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules 1995 to review the Federal Court's decision in dismissing his application for disclosure under section 51A Criminal Procedure Code. The second Federal Court dismissed the application on the ground that the Federal Court does not have jurisdiction to review an earlier Federal Court decision. NH Chan said that the decision fly in the face of the plain words of Rule 137. Rule 137 provides that nothing shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the court to hear any application or make any order as may be necessary to prevent an abuse of the process of the court[11]. The Federal Court decision was clearly incoherent and inconsistent with the clear words of the Rule;
  • The trial was filled with rulings on procedural and evidential matters that left the public with the distinct feeling that the decisions did not satisfy the standards and values of impartiality, legality, certainty, predictability, transparency and justice;       

International and domestic observers with a sense of fair play have a bad taste in the mouth at the injustice perpetrated. The New York Times in an article published on 13th December 2011 reported that human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have criticized the trial. [12] Condemnation has also come from Al Gore, the former US Vice President who with Paul D Wolfowitz, the former US Deputy Secretary of Defense wrote in the Wall Street Journal that the trial "threatens not just Mr. Anwar but all those who have struggled for a freer and more democratic nation."

Malaysians had twice missed the call to stand up and speak out against injustice in 1988 and 1998. If we miss the third chance on 9th January, it will be strike three and Malaysia shall be struck out. It is therefore not inappropriate to recall the famous words of Martin Niemoller who emerged as an outspoken public foe of Adolf Hitler:-

      "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out

       Because I was not a Socialist;

       Then they came for the Trade Unionists and I did not speak out

       Because I was not a Trade Unionist;

       Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out

       Because I was not a Jew;

       Then they came for me- and there was no one left to speak for me"

Martin Niemoller's quotation reminds us that the people were complicit through their silence in the Nazi imprisonment, persecution and murder of millions of people. We will similarly by our silence be complicit in the erosion of our society's foundation.  By staying neutral, by keeping silent, we will allow the rule of law to be replaced by the rule of man, criminals to go unpunished, the innocent to be deprived of a fair trial and the poor losing out to the rich. This country has deteriorated not because of bad people but because good people did not stand up and speak out against injustice. Tay Choo Foo is now standing up and speaking out. Many more must do so otherwise, they will take Anwar, then Tay Choo Foo and when they finally come for you, no one is left to speak for you.  

 

William Leong Jee Keen

Member of Parliament for Selayang

27th December 2011  

 

 

 

             



[1] The Federalist No 78 (Alexander Hamilton) Clinton Rossiter 1961.

[2] Najib risks Malaysia"s reputation in his treatment of Anwar Ibrahim Simon Tisdall guardian.co.uk.

[3] A Passerin d'Entreves, The Notion of the State. An Introduction to Political Theory. Oxford Claredon Press 1967 p 141; M. Webber, Wisrtschaft und Gesellschaft Tubingen JCB Mohr (Paul Siebeck) 1972 p 19. Weber's three pure or ideal types of legitimate power as distinct from mere force are traditional power, legal-rational power and charismatic power.

[4] Elena Ruth Sassower, On Judicial Misconduct and Discipline, The Long Term Review Massachusetts School of Law Vol 4 No 1 197 pp 990-97

[5] J.L.M. Gribnau Legitimacy of the Judiciary Netherlands Comparative Law Association

[6] Sandra Day O'Connor, Associate Justice Supreme Court of the United States of America; Vindicating the Rule of Law: The Role of the Judiciary. Remarks delivered at the National Judges College, Beijing China on September 18, 2002

[7] NH Chan Judging the Judges 2007 p9

[8] NH Chan Judging the Judges p140

[9] Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim v PP [2004] 3 MLJ 405 FC

[10] Speech by Ragunath Kesavan, Chairman of the Bar Council at the Opening of the Legal Year 2011 given on 15 January 2011 [2011] 4 MLJ c

[11] NH Chan Judges Can Fly-In the Face of Rule 137 of the Federal Court Rules.

[12] The New York Times December 13 2011 by Liz Gooch: As Trial Nears End, Opposition Leader Vows No Surrender.


Man linked to NFC issue re-arrested

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 08:01 PM PST

The businessman was arrested in connection with an alleged petrol station scam in the Klang Valley.

(Bernama) - A businessman who was remanded since Thursday to facilitate in the investigation into the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) case was re-arrested today in connection with an alleged cheating case.

His lawyer Ahmad Damanhuri Mohd Yusof told reporters his client was re-arrested by policemen from the Commercial Crimes Investigation Division of the Dang Wangi Police headquarters after being released from the Bukit Jalil police detention centre at around noon.

Bukit Aman Commercial Crimes Investigation Department director Syed Ismail Syed Azizan, when contacted, confirmed the matter, saying that the businessman was arrested in connection with an alleged petrol station scam in the Klang Valley.

He said a police report dated Aug 7, 2009, stated that a female complainant, in her 40s, claimed that she had met the suspect over a petrol station project.

"The suspect is said to have asked for RM280,000 as consultation fee to help the complainant to get the project, which he failed to deliver.

"Based on the report, we arrested the suspect today after he was released by the MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission)," he explained.

Syed Ismail declined to comment further on the remand period, but said the case was being investigated under Section 420 of the Penal Code for cheating.

The 45-year-old businessman was reported to have been remanded for five days from Dec 22 to facilitate in the investigation into the NFC case under the MACC Act 2009.

The NFC issue surfaced following the 2010 Auditor-General's Report in October which stated that the NFC had failed to comply with the objectives of its formation, while opposition parties alleged misappropriation of its funds, particularly in relation to the purchase of a luxury condominium in the city.

 

Rayer describes Ramasamy's statement as self-servient

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 07:50 PM PST

(Bernama) -- Seri Delima assemblyman RSN Rayer has described the statement issued by DAP deputy secretary-general P. Ramasamy, who attacked the party and its highest leadership, as being a self-servient act.

He said Ramasamy's statement claimed that criticisms directed at him (Ramasamy) were intended to topple him from the position of Penang's deputy chief minister 11.

"I'm very saddened the deputy chief minister 11 made such a statement, that DAP members practised such behaviour. It's an attack on the party and its members," he said.

"The news report shows he has no respect whatsoever for the party leadership, including advisor Lim Kit Siang, secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and life advisor Dr Chen Man Hin. It also shows his arrogance," said Rayer at a press conference here, today.

On Dec 24, DAP national chairman Karpal Singh told Ramasamy to resign as Penang's deputy chief minister 11 for defying the DAP Central Executive Committee's (CEC) directive barring members from making open statements attacking the party's leadership.

Karpal Singh reportedly said Ramasamy's statement, claiming his critics were conspiring to oppose him for not fulfilling their requests for projects and special privileges, clearly defied the CEC directive.

Ramasamy's action sparked off a quarrel and, when the Perai assemblyman also announced candidates for the next general election, an infuriated Karpal Singh warned him not to behave like a "warlord" and choose whom he liked.

Ramasamy retorted by calling Karpal Singh DAP's "godfather", which made Rayer and Bagan Dalam DAP assemblyman A. Tanasekharan to join the fray by siding Karpal Singh.

Meanwhile, Rayer denied he requested for projects and privileges from Ramasamy, even though his name was not mentioned in the report of a newspaper, saying he was responding to queries from various parties.

"There are queries on the Internet and Twitter as to why I've not responded until today, whereas Karpal Singh and Tanasekharan have answered. I vehemently deny the allegation and it can be verified by my staff who know all our expenditure," he said.

 

Ramasamy denies claiming DAP leaders corrupt

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 07:49 PM PST

(The Sun Daily) - Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy yesterday denied that he had ever accused DAP leaders as corrupted as reported by an English newspaper on Friday.

The Star in its report quoted Ramasamy as hitting out against his critics for their "grand design" to oust him. The report also stated that Ramasamy claimed his critics were plotting against him because he did not respond to their overtures for projects and favours.

"I categorically reject the baseless allegations against me stating that DAP leaders are involved in corruption.

"I also never mentioned anything to the effect that there was a grand design to oust me from Penang," he told a press conference here yesterday.

Explaining further, Ramasamy said he telephoned the reporter and expressed his regrets about the article.

"He promised to put a retraction on the same day on the publication's online version," he added.

However, before the retraction was published, Ramasamy said DAP Chairman Karpal Singh had already called for his resignation as the Penang Deputy Chief Minister.

Ramasamy said the article was published after he met reporters on Dec 21. He insisted that he only touched on issues relating to the state development.

"The source of the present controversy stems from a discussion I had with two journalists on Dec 21.

"The discussion was about how Penang could go forward with a particular attention paid to the Indian community. There were questions and answers about the contextual situation," said Ramasamy, adding that he did not make any comment on internal party matters.

"I'm not saying the reporter doctored it...I'm just clarifying that I did not say those words. My discussion was not about party internal matters, but how Penang could move forward. The last thing I want to speak about is party internal matters,"he said.

Ramasamy recalled that some questions were asked about the party but 99% was about how to bring Penang forward.

He, however, refused to comment on Karpal's call for his resignation, stating he will leave it to the party to handle it.

Meanwhile, in GEORGE TOWN, on Sunday, Seri Delima DAP assemblyman RSN Rayer hit out against Ramasamy for allegedly tarnishing the party's image.

"By making such statements, he is giving the impression to the public that DAP is no different from other (political) parties out there, which are corrupted," claimed Rayer, who is also the Penang DAPSY vice chairman and legal adviser.

He also said that if there was any malpractice or corruption within the party, the matter should have been reported to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and make available the evidence to the allegations.

Penang DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow, who is currently in China, issued a press statement, appealing to its party members to remain calm in the spat between Karpal and Ramasamy.

"This is to allow the party Central Executive Committee's three-man panel to continue to mediate and find a solution to resolving their spat," he said.

 

UMNO selepas PRU : adakah UMNO akan jadi seperti George Foreman?

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 07:46 PM PST

ASPAN ALIAS

Di mana-mana kita pergi kita kedengaran orang ramai bertanya di antara satu dengan lain. Pertanyaan wajib apabila mereka bertemu ialah, bila pilihanraya akan di adakan. Saya pun selalu juga ditanya soalan itu dan saya memberikan jawapan yang standard: bila BN akan kehilangan kuasa. Maksud saya bila-bila pun boleh tetapi keputusannya ialah UMNO dan BN akan hilang kuasa. Itulah dia tarikh pilihanraya umum.

Saya yakin yang UMNO itu akan akhirnya menghadapi realiti yang masa untuk parti ini berehat sudah semakin hampir tiba. Seperti orang yang bermain gasing; sudah tiba UMNO untuk mengambil giliran untuk memusing dan orang lain pula yang memangkah mereka. UMNO sudah memangkah begitu lama, kali ini biarlah orang lain pula untuk memangkah.

Apa yang UMNO patut membuat perkiraan, di antara 56 kerusi yang mereka menangi di Semenanjung ini berapa yang mereka masih mampu untuk mengekalkannya dan di antara 13 kerusi di Sabah berapa pula jumlah kerusi yang UMNO boleh kekalkan berada dalam tangan mereka. Bagi kerusi-kerusi MCA dan Gerakan serta MIC rakyat sudah membuat keputusan lebih awal sebelum pilihanraya sebenarnya di adakan. Patah-patahkan jari, kiralah sendiri.

Sabah dan Sarawak merupakan tempat pertarungan hebat politik selepas ini. Cerita Sabah dan Sarawak menjadi 'fixed deposit' BN sudah berlalu dibawa angin yang lalu. Rakyat di kedua-dua buah negeri ini nampaknya dengan deras sedang melakukan perubahan selepas menjalani 'soul searching' sejak beberapa ketika dahulu.

Di seluruh negara samada di Semenanjung mahu pun di Sabah dan Sarawak angin untuk membawa perubahan itu sudah mula bertiup kencang dan tidak mudah untuk mengalihkan arah tiupan angin itu. Pendeknya perubahan itu akan tetap berlaku kerana angin itu semakin hari semakin kencang tiupannya.Apabila saya memikirkan nasib UMNO dan sekutu-sekutunya, saya teringat pula kepada pertarungan tinju di antara Muhammad Ali dan George Foremen lebih dari dua dekad dahulu.

Dalam pertarungan itu George Foreman telah jatuh kalau tidak silap saya dalam pusingan yang ke-lima. Apabila Foreman kalah dan jatuh secara knock out itu, media telah membuat interview dengan Foreman. Pemberita sukan telah bertanya kepada Foreman kenapa beliau tidak bingkas bangun setelah dijatuhkan oleh Muhammad Ali, Foreman menjawab, "Saya tidak boleh bangun lagi kerana saya tidak pernah jatuh rebah"

Adakah UMNO akan menghadapi nasib seperti George Foreman? Saya tidak tahu jawapannya. Kita tengok sahaja apabila sampai waktunya. Saya bukan seorang wali atau aulia untuk memberikan jawapannya. Jika saya tahu pun jawapannya biarlah jawapan itu berada di dalam benak saya sendiri.

READ MORE HERE

 

Rama: Let party decide on my fate

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 03:46 PM PST

The Penang Deputy CM II also claims that he was misquoted by the media on the alleged grand design to remove him.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Embattled Penang Deputy Chief Minister II P Ramasamy today said he would leave it to the DAP leadership to determine his fate in the party.

"I have no comment. Let the party deal with it," was his response to DAP chairman Karpal Singh's demand that he resigns from his DCM his post for making allegations against party leaders.

Karpal had said that Ramasamy's position was no longer tenable as he had defied a directive from the party not to talk about their ongoing spat to the press.

"He has made baseless allegations against party leaders and his statement amounts to attempted corruption," Karpal had said in a press statement on Saturday.

Karpal was referring to a report in The Star on Friday in which Ramasamy was quoted as saying that there was a "grand design" against him because he did not respond to overtures for projects and favours.

Ramasamy was also quoted as saying: "People will be astounded if I reveal what the grassroots leaders want in terms of projects."

Responding today, Ramasamy told reporters here that he had been misquoted in the original media report.

"I categorically reject the allegations that I said DAP leaders were corrupt and that there was a grand design to oust me in Penang," he said.

He added that he had originally met up with two journalists, one from The Star, to hold a discussion on Penang and the plight of the Indian community in the state.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kit Siang reins in Kulasegaran, Nga

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 03:45 PM PST

(The Star) - DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang has stepped in to calm the simmering feud between its party vice-chairman and Perak DAP secretary.

In a tweet Monday, the veteran leader issued a gag order on M. Kulasegaran and Nga Kor Ming.

"Both Kula n Nga agree int(internal). party channels x (not) BN msm (mainstream media) 1st resort 4thrashing out matters affecting party leaders," he said.

"Nga 2explain 2party leadership," he added.

The war of words between the Ipoh Barat MP and Nga started after Kulasegaran urged the Pantai Remis assemblyman to come clean over his alleged involvement in awarding a tailoring contract to his wife during Pakatan Rakyat's rule in 2008.

Kulasegaran had reportedly said business and politics did not mix and one should not enter politics to make money.

Meanwhile, Nga, in his blog, said he respected the party's directive and thus would refrain from commenting on the issue.

"I shall leave it to the party's leaders and members to judge his (Kulasegaran) conduct," he said.

In his tweet, Kulasegaran defended his action of calling Nga to come clean over the tailoring contract.

"I made no allegation/accusation. Unfortunately my comments misinterpreted as internal problems/ bad blood," he said.

"Many members/supporters also talked about it. They wanted answers too. So I said Nga should come clean - to explain," he added.

 

Pakatan to launch election manifesto at January convention

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 03:24 PM PST

(The Star) - Pakatan Rakyat will launch its manifesto for the 13th general election during its national convention in January.

Kedah PKR chairman Datuk Wan Salleh Wan Isa said Opposition pact's third convention would be held on Jan 14 at the Sultan Abdul Halim Stadium here.

A total of 1,800 delegates and 200 leaders from DAP, PAS and PKR will attend the convention, he said.

Wan Salleh said PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang, PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and DAP national adviser Lim Kit Siang were expected to launch the manifesto.

The manifesto, based on Pakatan's Common Policy Framework (Buku Jingga), is a continuation the Orange Book, he said in a press conference here Monday.

Wan Salleh also said the manifesto would be distributed to those attending the launch.

When asked about the possibility of Anwar not attending the convention following the High Court decision on his sodomy trial to be given on Jan 9, Wan Salleh said this would not affect the party's focus.

"Whatever the outcome, it will not affect the party's momentum. We will continue to work hard for the party," he said.

 

Ramasamy blames The Star for latest row with Karpal

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 03:22 PM PST

(The Malaysian Insider) - Deputy Penang Chief Minister II Dr P. Ramasamy blamed The Star today for his protracted row with DAP chairman Karpal Singh, and denied he ever accused DAP grassroots leaders of being corrupt as was reported by the newspaper.

"I categorically reject the allegations... The allegations against me that appeared... are baseless and frivolous," Ramasamy told reporters today at a press conference here.

"I have never made these statements against DAP leaders and the reporter himself felt that injustice has been done to me."

On December 23, The Star reported Ramasamy as hitting out at his critics for their "grand design" to oust him.

The newspaper said his remarks came despite the party's stand that the "godfather-warlord" feud between Ramasamy and Karpal had been resolved on December 15.

Ramasamy claimed his critics were plotting against him because he did not respond to their overtures for projects and favours, The Star had reported.

This had resulted in Karpal demanding that the Penang deputy chief minister II resign from his post for making allegations against party leaders.

Karpal said Ramasamy's position was no longer tenable in the state government because he had defied a directive from the party's three-member committee not to talk about their spat to the press.

Today, Ramasamy denied making the allegations that were reported in The Star.

"He (the reporter) promised to put a retraction or counter-statement on the same day on the publication's online version. However, (the next day) the statement was reduced to one sentence in the article 'Prof Changes His Tune Again'," Ramasamy said.

"On the same day, DAP chairman Karpal Singh called a press conference to ask for my resignation as the DCM of Penang," he added.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘There is a godfather in DAP but it’s not Karpal’

Posted: 25 Dec 2011 12:54 PM PST

The dispute between Karpal Singh and Penang DCM P Ramasamy was an orchestrated ploy to rid DAP of Karpal who had "outlived his usefulness'.

Kua who left DAP in 1995 said that his five-year experience in the party revealed that none of the top DAP leaders including the then secretary-general (SG), Lim Kit Siang, had any inclination to have a social democratic party programme as an alternative to Barisan Nasional.

Stephanie Sta Maria, Free Malaysia Today

In just two weeks the DAP spat that was presumed dead and buried has resurrected to draw its proponents closer in dispute.

DAP national chairman, Karpal Singh, and Penang deputy chief minister, P Ramasamy, first lunged at each other's throats after the former branded the latter a "warlord" prompting the Ramasamy to call him a "godfather".

A three-man panel was formed to resolve the matter but they were unexpectedly relieved of this task when a Tamil daily confessed to misquoting Ramasamy on an election-related issue that sparked the fracas.

The spat had only just become old news when Ramasamy suddenly claimed last Thursday that his critics were plotting his downfall.

Karpal's response was swift and stinging. He asked for Ramasamy's resignation as payback for defying a party directive to refrain from making public statements on the party and openly attacking its leaders.

The Bukit Gelugor MP's reaction is instinctive of a leader who has his party's best interest at heart. But DAP's critics say it is also hints at the very real existence of a godfather culture that has the party in its stranglehold.

According to them DAP's polished exterior has as much to do with its intolerance for dissent as with its strict disciplinary code.

Among these critics is former DAP Petaling Jaya Utara MP and current Suaram director, Kua Kia Soong.

Although he declined to be interviewed, he requested that he be quoted from his book "Inside The DAP" published in 1995 but "still relevant to this day".

'Lim is considered indispensable'

Kua who left DAP in 1995 said that his five-year experience in the party revealed that none of the top DAP leaders including the then secretary-general (SG), Lim Kit Siang, had any inclination to have a social democratic party programme as an alternative to Barisan Nasional.

He was especially critical of Lim whom he portrayed as wielding absolute power over the party and its leaders.

"The SG (Lim) is considered "indispensable" by the party leaders," Kua wrote.

"He has become synonymous with the DAP through concentration of power and authority in his position.

"The SG (Lim) didn't seem to be able to settle simple questions of doubt cast in the media, such as the question of the 'father and son' syndrome in the DAP."

Kua went on to call the "frozen oppressive atmosphere" of the Central Executive Committee (CEC) as "unbearable and demeaning" in the presence of the SG (Lim) and labelled his loyalists as "sycophants" and "tiresome emperor's apologists".

"Despite leadership problems there were no serious attempts by the SG (Lim) or CEC to address the problem of party renewal and preparation for leadership changeover or collective leadership," he wrote.

"The important CEC posts of Discipline, Publicity and Organising Secretaries were filled by secretaries beholden to the SG (Lim)."

"No factional problems were decisively solved in a democratic way within the CEC, only the SG (Lim) held all the cards.

"The SG's (Lim) inordinate power rests in his final say in the selection of candidates for the general elections."

'It's not Karpal'

Lim has since moved up the ladder to the post of DAP advisor but former DAP Bukit Bintang MP, Wee Choo Keong, pointed out that he has taken his fist of power with him.

The current independent Wangsa Maju MP was ejected from DAP in 1998 for allegedly not showing "love and affection to the party leader".

It is a charge that flabbergasts him to this day and which forms the basis of his insistence that the godfather culture is alive and well in his former party.

"There is only one godfather and it is not Karpal," he told FMT.

"Any past or present DAP member will tell you that Kit Siang loves to hear that he is DAP and DAP is him."

"How could I have been charged for not showing "love and affection" to a party leader?

"Even Chairman Mao didn't demand this! Only one person matters in DAP and it is (Lim) Kit Siang."

Wee predicted that come January 2012 Lim would begin speculating on the 13th general election dates, going month by month until the actual date is announced.

This, he said, is a subtle warning to candidate hopeful to listen unquestioningly to Lim's directives.

"The candidate selection is done by a committee but everyone knows that Kit Siang has the last say.

"This is how he eliminates any room for dissent within the party whether it is public or not," he said.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved