Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

My response to Alan Yeap of Taiwan
The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 18)
Screw you, Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim
The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 17)
The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 16)

Posted: 28 Dec 2012 12:06 AM PST

So you see, you must suffer some loss of reputation or have suffered a financial loss by what I said about you. But if what I said has nothing to do with you but was about someone else and you suffered nothing from what I said how could you sue me? What is your locus standi? And what has the political party you support or do not support got to do with this?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

EDITOR: Many of you were not born yet in 1957 and yet you make so much noise about Article 153. Why apply different standards for different people?

RPK, do you realize how consistently inconsistent you really are? By the way, May 13 tragedy happened in 1969 and not 1957.

I remember reading your article on this tragedy and that you yourself interviewed Tunku Abdul Rahman in person. You got your article published in Harakah and this was repeated in your blog not too long ago when you were the RPK that people looked up to.

I have to honestly say that I don't know what Article 153 is. I assume it to be the May 13 tragedy.

EDITOR: You can't simply sue The Edge. You need locus standi and must prove you have been personally injured. Why are Pakatan supporters so stupid? Janganlah buka mulut kalau jahil. Malulah!

RPK, you were once an avid supporter of Pakatan and even risked your own safety canvassing and helping them win handsomely. You even got sent to Kamunting for that cause. I won't repeat your last two phrases. It sounds too …… demeaning.

****************************************************

That was Alan Yeap's comment, which he posted from the Shangri La Far Eastern Plaza Hotel in Kaohsiung City, Taiwan.

First of all, when someone accuses me of being consistently inconsistent, he or she has to be specific and offer some examples. I may be accused of being cheong hei (longwinded), but at least there is no confusion as to what I am trying to say.

If I were to say that the DAP leaders are not sincere, that would be a sweeping and very vague statement. Such an allegation would need examples to support what I say. In what way are they insincere and what is it they have done and/or said to give me the impression that they are insincere? To make a sweeping and vague statement is just not acceptable. That, sometimes, is the advantage of being cheong hei. You go into details and throw in a lot of examples to support whatever statement you make.

Thus, where is my inconsistency? Did I say yesterday that Islam is the best religion and today I say that Islam is the worse religion? That would be inconsistent for sure. So give me your examples.

Alan Yeap said that May 13 occurred in 1969 and not in 1957. I don't know why Alan Yeap is telling me something that I already know. The whole of Malaysia knows it was in 1969. After all, I am not only a student of history but I have written many articles about May 13. Hence I know that May 13 was in 1969 and not in 1957. And I never said that May 13 was in 1957. So I do not know what gave Alan Yeap the impression that I said it was in 1957 and not in 1969.

As for the second part of Alan Yeap's comment, I said something else and he responded with something totally unrelated to what I said. What has what he said got to do with what I said?

Alan Yeap challenged Khairy Jamaluddin to sue The Edge. Why are the Pakatan Rakyat supporters asking this person and that person to sue this, that or the other? You scream about freedom of speech and how Barisan Nasional and the government do not respect freedom of speech. And then you ask people to sue other people to stifle freedom of speech.

You have to decide whether you do want freedom of speech or not. You can't keep asking people to sue other people every time they give their opinion. Now, if they slander you that is another thing. If they say you cheated your company or you had an affair with your secretary and this is not true then you have every right to sue them. But you can't sue people for expressing their opinion.

I don't think that giving out ang paus in white envelopes during Chinese New Year is bad luck or that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. That is my opinion. But do you sue me just because that is my opinion and because I expressed my opinion?

I can even say that I think you are silly for believing in such things but that is still not grounds to sue me. What if I were to say that I do not believe that God exists and I am of the opinion that all those people who believe in such nonsense are silly people? Can you sue me for that?

Slander is one thing. That hurts you and you can sue me if I lied. But my opinion is my opinion and you can't sue me for that. Can I sue you because you said that all those who do not accept Christ will never go to heaven and only those who accept Christ will be saved and will get to see heaven? You have just insinuated that I will be going to hell and you have hurt my feelings. But is that grounds enough for me to sue you?

You cannot scream about wanting freedom of speech/opinion/expression and at the same time threaten to sue everyone when they express any opinion that differ from yours. And to sue someone you must have locus standi and whatever was said must have hurt you personally. This has nothing to do with whether you support Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional.

Can you sue me if I were to say that the Japanese committed a lot of atrocities in Nanjing during WWII? First of all, it was true. Secondly, are you Japanese and are you personally hurt by my statement? Has your reputation suffered or did you suffer financial loss because of my statement regarding the Japanese atrocities in Nanjing?

So you see, you must suffer some loss of reputation or have suffered a financial loss by what I said about you. But if what I said has nothing to do with you but was about someone else and you suffered nothing from what I said how could you sue me? What is your locus standi? And what has the political party you support or do not support got to do with this?

Finally, I do not know how long Alan Yeap has been living in Taiwan but it must have been for quite some time since he does not know what Article 153 is. Or is Alan Yeap Taiwanese rather than Malaysian and that is why he does not know what Article 153 is?

Anyway, my response was specifically regarding those people who say that Khairy should not talk about May 13 since it happened in 1969 and he was not born yet then (he was born in 1976). In that case can I comment about things that happened during WWII since I was born in 1950? And what about those who were born after Merdeka in 1957 and yet make comments about Article 153? Do they have a right to talk about a matter that happened before they were born?

Those are the issues. The first issue is about suing someone who gives his or her opinion and the second issue is about telling someone not to comment about something that happened before he or she was born. Tony Pua was born in 1972 and Hannah Yeoh in 1979. Going by the standards we apply for Khairy, Tony and Hannah also have to stop talking about a lot of things. After all, all these things they are talking about happened before they were born.

But then this 'don't talk about something that happened before you were born' is only a rule for Umno people and does not apply to opposition people. And when I point this out they respond with: do you no longer support the opposition? What shallow thinking and narrow-minded mentality?

Wrong is wrong and should not be only wrong for those who are pro-government but right for those who are anti-government. Why can't these people understand something so simple and so basic?

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 18)

Posted: 23 Dec 2012 05:02 PM PST

If Syed Hamid had accepted the court's decision and had left me alone then my move to the UK would have been delayed, at least by more than a year or even two years. But because he wanted me back in Kamunting he left me no choice but to leave the country earlier than planned. And because of that Marina's cancer had been detected probably two years earlier than it would have.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

We would like to believe that we are masters of our own destiny. Sure, there is such a thing called fate. But we would like to believe that we decide our own fate. Man proposes but God disposes is seldom a concept that we think about until after the event. And even then we always look at external events that influenced these changes to blame for that failure.

Are there such things called silver linings in dark clouds? I suppose those who believe in blessings would categorise it as a blessing in disguise. But why must blessings come in disguise? Why can't blessings come dressed in labels so that we can recognise them when they arrive rather than much later down the road long after the event?

We all have dreams. Those who no longer dream are those who have died, said the late Tun Abdul Ghafar Baba, one time Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. As long as we breathe we will still dream, explained the Tun. Hence to dream is what spurs us. The day we stop dreaming is the day we stop living, figure of speech, of course.

My dream was to ride my motorcycle from Malaysia to the UK. That never happened. I plotted and I planned, but God is the greatest plotter of all, as the Qur'an says. Hence whatever we say must always be tempered with the phrase Insha Allah (God willing or if God wills it) lest we tempt fate. Don't the English always say 'touch wood' to avoid the mischief by the devil of the trees that humankind worshipped in the days before 'Holy Books and 'Abrahamic Faiths'?

My father died, I had to seek employment to support myself, I got married, my first child Raja Suraya arrived, all within a space of two years to make that bike ride from Kuala Lumpur to London a dream that would never come true. Maybe I would still do it one day. Maybe I will still live my dream. But that would have to wait. It would now no longer be what I do before I begin my life. It would have to be something I do before I end my life. It would be what I do once I retire.

And so my wife, Marina, and I planned that retirement. But how would I interpret 'retirement'? I suppose retirement would be something that I stop doing. It would be a change of lifestyle of sorts. I would no longer do what I am doing now. I would stop doing what I am doing and do nothing. And then I would fill that empty space with something new.

But when should I retire and what do I do to fill in that time of retirement? Marina and I discussed it many times and for quite some time. This was during the height of the Reformasi days. Retirement would be when I reached 60. And that would, therefore, be after 2010. And when I retire we would move to England, buy a second hand Mini Cooper, and then tour Europe.

Okay, this is not quite riding my motorcycle from Malaysia to the UK. But that was my dream when I was still just 20. At 60, dreams have to be modified slightly. It was no longer just about me but would include Marina as well. And at 60 my bones were no longer what they used to be when I was 20. Hence driving my Mini Cooper all over Europe may be less taxing on my body than riding a motorcycle from Kuala Lumpur to London. And I doubt sitting on the back seat of a motorcycle for almost 10,000 miles would have been Marina's idea of fun.

The groundwork for our eventual move to the UK was laid in December 2001 soon after my first ISA detention that same year when we relocated two of our sons to Manchester. Three years later, in November 2004, soon after Malaysia Today was launched, Marina and I made a trip to Manchester together with our youngest, Raja Sara, to see how the boys were getting on. Were they happy in the UK? Would they like to stay on or would they like to return to Malaysia? Could our youngest join them later to continue her education in the UK?

It was decided that the move to the UK was viable after all. The children were okay with living in the UK and we found that life in Manchester was tolerable enough as a life of retirement. Another three years later, in 2007, we bought a family home in Manchester. There was no turning back now. Come 2010, when I reach 60, we would pack our bags and build a new life for ourselves in Manchester.

The following year, in 2008, I was detained under the ISA a second time. My sons wanted to return to Malaysia but Marina told them to stay on. The detention will not be forever. Probably in two years time, by 2010, I would be released. We would then join the family in Manchester.

I was, however, released earlier. After only two months the court declared my detention illegal and ordered my release. The Minister, Syed Hamid Albar, an old friend of 30 years, was outraged. They tried appealing my release and when that appeared to go awry Syed Hamid signed a new Detention Order and wanted to detain me a third time.

This time I was not going to get off so easily. Syed Hamid realised his mistake and he was not going to make that same mistake again. He was going to make sure that the new Detention Order was airtight so that no court would find any loopholes to order my release. And that was when Marina decided that enough is enough and demanded that I leave the country.

It was a week of confrontation and negotiation. Marina finally gave me an ultimatum. Either I leave the country or else she was going to leave me. She had had enough of driving up to Kamunting every Saturday to visit me. She was going to leave Malaysia with or without me.

Finally I relented. We were going to leave in or soon after 2010 anyway. 2009 was only a year or two earlier than planned. What difference does one year make? We left on a Saturday night and by Sunday we were across the border. On Monday, the police arrived at my house to detain me. We had made it with just 24 hours to spare. Our information was spot on and we got out in the nick of time.

It took a month to sort out our papers so that we could travel to the UK. Finally, in March 2009, we arrived in Manchester. It was now time to settle down into a British way of life. We registered with the NI and NHS and also registered as a voter. We needed an identity, as we were still a non-entity.

The NHS sent us letters to go in for a medical examination. For women of a certain age they also offer to do a test for breast cancer. Marina ignored the first letter she received, as she did the second letter. By the third letter I persuaded her to go in for the test since it is free anyway. If not they might keep sending her letters until she responded.

We drove to the place and they did the test. They then sent Marina another letter asking her to go in for a more thorough test. They suspected she might have breast cancer after all. My blood ran cold. I knew what breast cancer can do to a woman. I have lost enough friends and family members to that scourge to know.

Further tests proved that Marina did, in fact, have breast cancer. But it was still within stage one-stage two. Hence the chance for recovery was good. They would need to remove the cancer through surgery and thereafter put her under radiotherapy treatment. She would also require five years of medication, which would cost a bomb in Malaysia but was free in the UK.

We met the surgeon who told us that it was lucky that they had detected the cancer early. Hence Marina's chances of recovery were greatly enhanced. It was still stage one-stage two. If it had gone to stage three, or worse, then the chances of recovery reduces drastically.

Cancer is about early detection. If you must get cancer then better you know early because it increases your chances of survival. As fate would have it, Marina's cancer was detected early because we were forced to bring forward our plan to retire more than a year or two years earlier than planned.

Yes, man proposes but God disposes. We can dream but not always do our dreams come true. My first dream to ride my motorcycle from Malaysia to the UK never came true. My second dream to retire in or soon after 2010 and then move to the UK once I am 60 also did not come true. Instead, it happened earlier, soon after I turned 58. But it was not one of choice. It was what I was forced to do.

On hindsight, Syed Hamid did me a favour. If he had left me alone I would have done nothing. But if I had done nothing would that have meant by the time they detected Marina's cancer two years later it would have been too late? I suppose that is what fate is all about. You never know. You can only talk about blessings in disguise. You can only talk about silver linings in dark clouds. As they say: the Lord moves in mysterious ways.

TO BE CONTINUED

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 1)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 2)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 3)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 4)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 5)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 6)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 7)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 8)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 9)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 10)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 11)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 12)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 13)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 14)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 15)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 16)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 17)

Screw you, Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim

Posted: 18 Dec 2012 09:33 PM PST

"As a Muslim I am sad… it is clearly stated in the Quran that this sort of brutality is a crime and should not go unpunished. I trust the inspector-general of police [Ismail Omar] when he said the police are not racists. It has already been three weeks since the incident; more delays will only complicate the issue," National Indian Action Team chairman Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim said.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

You can read the full news item from Free Malaysia Today below. I just want to talk about this part:

National Indian Action Team chairman Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim, who accompanied the family, said he sympathised with the family's loss. "As a Muslim I am sad… it is clearly stated in the Quran that this sort of brutality is a crime and should not go unpunished. I trust the inspector-general of police [Ismail Omar] when he said the police are not racists. It has already been three weeks since the incident; more delays will only complicate the issue," he said.

Why must these idiots always say 'according to Islam', or 'according to the Qur'an', or 'as a Muslim', and so on? Is Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim trying to say that murder is only a sin in Islam but for all the other religions murder is allowed? Is murder wrong only according to the Qura'n whereas all the other 'holy books' condone murder?

Muslims just love to say something and then equate it to their faith or religious teachings. They try to impress us as to how noble and sincere Islam is -- meaning that since they are followers of Islam then this would also mean that they too are noble and sincere.

People can see what type of religion Islam is. You do not need to try to impress people by foaming at the mouth telling us what Islam allows and forbids. People will not judge you by the foam spitting out of your mouth. People will judge you by your actions.

If you keep reminding people that you do this good thing or that good thing because you are a Muslim and that this is what Islam or the Qur'an tells you to do, then when you do something bad people will also be reminded that you are a Muslim.

Why not Muslims stop telling us that they are Muslims? Stop telling us that we must do this or must do that because this is what Islam or the Qur'an tells us we must do. Stop boasting about Islam and about how good the teachings of Islam are and hence since I am a Muslim that means I am a good person.

If you stop doing all that then maybe when Muslims do bad things people will stop blaming Islam for it.

Murder is wrong. You do not need a holy book like the Qur'an or a religion like Islam to teach us that it is wrong. Can't you just as a human being oppose murder? Why must you oppose murder because you are a Muslim? So why bring Islam into this? If you bring Islam into everything then corrupted people will be identified as corrupted Muslims.

But when that happens you do not like it. You do not like Islam being associated with bad deeds. It is the person and not Islam that is at fault, you will say. But then who is the one associating everything with Islam if not the Muslims themselves?

**************************************************

'Police killed my brother'

(FMT) - The family of a man who died in custody wants to know why the police did not investigate the cause of his death some three weeks ago.

Sixty-year-old M Supamma broke down in tears in front of the Bukit Aman police headquarters today, demanding an explanation over her son's sudden death while in police custody on Nov 22.

"They did not let me see him. When I saw him in court, he could barely speak. He could only raise his hand to wave at me. I asked them [the police], why isn't my son talking to me?" she said.

She said a police officer, on duty to watch over her son in court, told her that S Krishnan had a head injury and was weak.

"I fainted after seeing my son like that," a sobbing Supamma told reporters. She was at Bukit Aman to hand over a memorandum asking the police to set up a task force to investigate her son's death in custody.

Supamma is a mother of three and Krishnan was her youngest. Suppama said she was devastated and was unable to accept that her son had died.

Krishnan, 34, worked at a sanitary company at Taman Tun Dr Ismail with his brother Palanisamy, 39.

Palanisamy said his brother was first arrested on Nov 8 in front of Block A PPRT Section 8, Kota Damansara. He was on his way back from work when he was asked to perform a urine test for suspected drug use.

"He tried to loosen his pants following orders from plainclothes policemen, but accidentally dropped his pants. He was assaulted and beaten up by the policeman for this.

"According to witnesses, his shirt was drenched in blood as a result of the beating," he added.

Palanisamy claimed the policemen gave him a different shirt before he was brought to the police station. He was then remanded at the Shah Alam police station.

On Nov 20, Krishnan was produced at the Petaling Jaya magistrate's court where he was ordered to be sent to Hospital Bahagia in Tanjung Rambutan, Perak, for observation.

However, Krishnan was only sent to the hospital on Nov 22, lifeless.

'Can you give me my brother back?'

According to the post-mortem report, the cause of death was septicemia. Septicemia is bacteria in the blood caused by infections; in Krishnan's case, it was caused by open wounds to both his wrists.

"In the last few months, Krishnan was regularly tested for drugs. At least three to four times each month, but all of the tests proved negative. Also, he has had no previous records of drug abuse," said Palanisamy.

He said a police report on Krishnan's death was lodged by the family on Nov 22, urging the authorities to investigate the cause of his brother's death.

At this point, Palanisamy started crying hysterically screaming: "The police have killed my brother. Can you give me my brother back? Who is going to take care of my mother now?"

National Indian Action Team chairman Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim, who accompanied the family, said he sympathised with the family's loss.

Krishnan's family lawyer, G Sivamalar, said the police can only use reasonable force if the suspect resists arrest.

"But in this case witnesses say Krishnan did not resist arrest but was beaten up when he accidentally dropped his pants during the urine test. This is not fair and just," she added.

Supamma handed over the memorandum to ACP Jahangir who represented the police force at the gates of the police headquarters. Also present with the family today was PKR leader R Sivarasa.

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 17)

Posted: 12 Dec 2012 06:08 PM PST

Kamaruddin and I drove to Anwar's house to inform him of the deal that Azmi had offered us. We were going to get to see the marked ballot papers so it can't go wrong. This was a sure thing. Anwar was furious. "I promised Mahathir that I would support him!" Anwar screamed at us. Kamaruddin and I looked at each other. Kamaruddin tried to explain that Dr Mahathir is probably going to lose anyway. So why not we make a deal and ensure that Anwar wins?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There is a difference between being political and being a partisan. You need to be political to be a partisan, but you do not need to be a partisan to be political. The example I always use is: you need to be a woman to be a lady but that does not mean all women are ladies -- if you know what I mean. And if you don't then that is your problem, not mine.

I got exposed to politics soon after the launch of the New Economic Policy (NEP) when I started my business. I went into business not because of the NEP. In fact, we did not even understand or care about the NEP yet at that time. It was purely coincidental that I launched my business a couple of years after the launch of the NEP.

I mean I was already in my mid-20s and with a wife and daughter to support -- so I needed to make something of my life. And earning a salary of RM250 a month is not quite a roaring career. It was, therefore, out of necessity that I went into business. If not I would have starved to death. I just wanted, as Malaysians would say, to cari makan.

It was then that I discovered that business and politics sometimes go hand-in-hand. And sometimes the mafia will eat you up if you try to remain a solo player. So I joined the Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Dewan Perniagaan) to seek 'protection'. It was sort of like in the US. You join the union so that you do not get beaten up on the way home from work.

And the Dewan Perniagaan was, in a way, an extension of Umno. Most of the state chiefs and central committee members were Umno 'strongmen' or had strong links (big cables) with the very top in government. Hence the Dewan Perniagaan was a good platform to sort out whatever problems you may face. And all businessmen in Malaysia know that business and problems come as a package -- unless you have some sort of protection.

I was not really interested in politics. I did not even care much who won the election and formed the government. When you are 24-25 and have a 'new' family to worry about and no money in your pocket, you just want to focus on putting food on the table and a roof over your family's head. My main concern was to try to figure out how to hide my car so that the finance company can't get its hands on it and take it away from me.

Yes, that's how bad my finances were. So who the hell cares who becomes the Prime Minister of Malaysia? Whoever becomes the Prime Minister my car is still going to get repossessed.

That was my priority back in 1974-1975.

Then, a couple of years later, I 'discovered' Islam, as I have written about so many times. Then, another couple of years later, the Islamic Revolution of Iran exploded and I transformed into a 'fundamentalist' (whatever that means but is a favourite word of the western media). And Anwar Ibrahim toured Terengganu as the ABIM President to talk in PAS organised ceramah. And that got me closer to PAS.

But I never became a PAS member. I was also not an Umno member either. For religious reasons I 'moved' with PAS but for business reasons I maintained links with Umno, mostly those in the Dewan Perniagaan. And we did not see this as being hypocritical or unprincipled because that is what you need to do in the business world. You kept your religious and business interests separate. They both did not really mix so you juggled with both and played a delicate balancing act.

Hence, 35-40 years ago, I already learned how to stay political but remain non-partisan. You worked with personalities, not with the party. Hence, also, we did not see anything wrong with supporting and campaigning for Anwar even though we were not Umno members but were PAS sympathisers -- but not really PAS members either.

That was the political culture we picked up 35-40 years ago. And until today that is still how we look at things. We could support certain things that Umno does and oppose certain things. We could also support certain things that the opposition does and oppose certain things. We can also support certain personalities in the party but yet not support the party.

And this is probably what most people do not understand, especially political novices or newcomers who became politically active only in the last five years or so since 2007-2008. To these political novices or newcomers, it is all or nothing. If you support certain things then you must support everything and you must give undying loyalty to the party.

We never operated under those conditions back in the 1970s and we still do not until today. We were brought up in a totally different political-non-partisan culture where we support causes more than personalities and sometimes support personalities without supporting his or her party.

Hence, when Anwar decided to join Umno in 1982 that was a great disappointment but not the end of the world for us. Anwar can move into Umno and we can oppose him for that. But that did not make him our enemy. We still supported him as far as his struggle for Islam was concerned. And when Anwar wanted to take on Suhaimi Kamaruddin for the Umno Youth Leadership, we could support him and campaign for him although we were not Umno members and actually did not support Umno.

Today, this would probably sound very strange. In fact, it may even sound very suspicious. But we are talking about an era of more than 30 years ago when the value system then is not the value system of today.

For example, when Umno came to see us to 'sell' tables for fund raising dinners at RM10,000 per table, we would buy a table or two and attend the dinner together with our family and friends who were not Umno members or supporters.

I suppose this was just like the Chinese back during the Communist insurgency in the time of The Emergency. For business reasons the Chinese would support the government but for ideological reasons or out of fear of retribution they also supported the Communist Terrorists. And the British knew this. That was why the British did not punish the Chinese but instead isolated them in 'new villages' to sever the links between the Chinese and the CTs.

So, when Anwar decided to take on Suhaimi, we supported him. Then, when Suhaimi gave Anwar a return match, we again supported Anwar. In the third round, Syed Hamid Albar took on Anwar and, again, we supported Anwar.

Anwar won all three rounds.

Then came the fourth round, the tussle between Team A and Team B that I wrote about in the previous episode.

The day before the now famous Team A versus Team B contest, Azmi, brother to the infamous Ibrahim Ali of Perkasa, contacted me and requested a meeting. I got in touch with Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's political Secretary, Noor Azam, and informed him about the clandestine meeting. The meeting was supposed to be after dinner at the Merlin Hotel (now called Concorde Hotel Kuala Lumpur).

I went to meet Azmi together with Kamaruddin Jaafar, Deputy Prime Minister Tun Ghafar Baba's Political Secretary (an ABIM activist and Anwar 'strongman'). Azmi then offered us a deal. Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's people will vote for Anwar for Vice President if Anwar's people will vote for Tengku Razaleigh and Musa Hitam for President and Deputy President respectively.

They will show us the ballot papers marked against Anwar's name for Vice President if we show them our ballot papers marked Tengku Razaleigh and Musa Hitam. Dr Mahathir and Ghafar would be history by that same time the following day.

I thought that was a good deal. We did not really care who became the President and Deputy President of Umno. We just wanted Anwar to go up to become the Vice President, which he can then later use as a springboard to take over the Deputy Presidency of Umno and then become the Prime Minister-in-waiting.

Hence it did not matter who became number one and number two. We were going to get rid of them in time anyway. It is number three that concerned us. And we wanted Anwar as the number three.

Kamaruddin and I drove to Anwar's house to inform him of the deal that Azmi had offered us. We were going to get to see the marked ballot papers so it can't go wrong. This was a sure thing.

Anwar was furious. "I promised Mahathir that I would support him!" Anwar screamed at us. Kamaruddin and I looked at each other. Kamaruddin tried to explain that Dr Mahathir is probably going to lose anyway. So why not we make a deal and ensure that Anwar wins?

"No way!" Anwar said. "If I win but Mahathir loses I will resign. I will not stay on if Ku Li and Musa win. So if you want me to stay on then you must make sure that Mahathir wins. If not, even if I win, I will resign."

Anwar had put us in a dilemma. The only way to 'help' Anwar would be to ensure that Dr Mahathir wins and Tengku Razaleigh loses. We were terribly unhappy about it but had no choice in the matter. As we were leaving Anwar's house he reminded us to make sure that Dr Mahathir wins if we do not want him (Anwar) to resign. "Don't make any deals behind my back," Anwar warned us.

It was around midnight when we returned to the Merlin Hotel and met up with Pak Wan (Datuk Dr Wan Ismail, Anwar Ibrahim's father-in-law), Ahmad Sebi (of TV3), Noor Azam, Syed Ibrahim Syed Mohamed and Kip Bahadum (the Umno Secretary). Our meeting was about how to ensure that Team A wins the party election the following day. And that was when we mooted the idea of the tricks that we would need to pull off, which I wrote about in the previous episode.

I am still confident that if we had done a deal then Tengku Razaleigh would have taken over as Prime Minister back in 1987. Because of Anwar, Dr Mahathir stayed 22 years as Prime Minister rather than only six years.

Then, ten years later, Anwar made his move on Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir was an animal that Anwar created. But when Anwar tried to put that animal to sleep that same animal turned around and bit Anwar in the butt.

If that is not poetic justice then I don't know what is.

When Tengku Razaleigh closed down his Semangat 46 in October 1986 and rejoined Umno soon after that, he knew that Dr Mahathir and Anwar were about to have a great fall out. Dr Mahathir was aware that Anwar was about to make his move. And, a few months later, Anwar made his move. On 1st September 1998, Dr Mahathir made his counter-move and checkmated Anwar.

And while all this was going on in 1996-1998, I brought out my popcorn and sat back to enjoy the drama. And when Dr Mahathir moved in to finish off Anwar for good, I applauded. It is not that I supported Dr Mahathir as much as I admire the great move that he made.

Unknown to most Malaysians, back in August 1998, Anwar had Dr Mahathir cornered. Anwar's gun was at Dr Mahathir's head. All Anwar needed to do was to pull the trigger and Dr Mahathir was dead meat. However, before Anwar could pull the trigger, Dr Mahathir pulled his gun out instead and shot Anwar dead.

The hunted turned hunter in just a flicker of an eyelid. Now that is what I call a political guru. And if you really want to be a politician you need to learn from the guru. Anwar, unfortunately, did not. And because of that he did not become Prime Minister.

Well, as I said, I may be political but that does not mean I am a partisan. And not being a partisan allows me to admire politicians from both sides of the political divide.

And don't you dare tell me what I can and cannot do and who I can and cannot admire. I do what I want to do, not what you want me to do. The last time I listened to what others want me to do we ended up with a Prime Minister who ruled for 22 years instead of just six years.

TO BE CONTINUED

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 1)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 2)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 3)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 4)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 5)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 6)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 7)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 8)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 9)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 10)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 11)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 12)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 13)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 14)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 15)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 16)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 16)

Posted: 11 Dec 2012 07:56 PM PST

There was a gap of about eight months between the August 1986 general election and the April 1987 Umno party election. And we were all told to take leave from our businesses to focus full-time on the Umno party election. I left the running of the business to my wife, Marina, and hit the road to prepare the groundwork for the mother of all battles looming over the horizon -- the contest between Team A and Team B.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

With the 1986 general election out of the way, it was now time to decide who the boss was. And this was what the real objective was all about, the Umno party elections. The 1986 general election was not the prize. That was merely the foundation stone to the real prize, the leadership of Umno.

And this was where the dirty tricks and the money politics would come in handy and would be extremely crucial. This was where the cheques would be cashed. The Umno party election was by far more brutal and more intensively fought than the general election. By comparison, the 1986 general election was almost like a walk in the park. And the 'debts' from the 1986 general election would now have to be paid in full in 1987.

And did it prove to be the mother of all battles! Never before had so much money been spent on a party election. Never before had threats as well as blackmail been used to the extreme to make people do the bidding of those who aspired for power. Never before had Umno been brought to the brink of destruction and which it never really recovered from ever since.

The 1987 party contest changed Umno for good and introduced a new culture into Umno that transferred the party from the hands of the nationalists into the hands of the capitalists.

Basically, Umno was transformed from a party of intellectuals and educators into a party of business taukays. Umno became what MCA always was -- a money party. Umno sent shivers down MCA's spine because Umno became more money-driven than even MCA itself.

The new Umno culture became: money talks, bullshit walks. And it has remained that way ever since.

Umno would never be brought back to what it was when it was first formed in 1946. Umno became 'Umno baru' in 1987 even before Umno Baru was legally and officially registered in 1988. And this is what many did not grasp at that time. When we, those from the business community, were 'press-ganged' into joining the campaign, we created more damage than good.

Basically, we did not have any sentimental attachments to Umno. We did not care what happened to Umno. In fact, we did not have any love for Umno because most of us loved PAS more (at least those of us in the ABIM 'gang'). We just wanted to win even if in the process that saw the destruction of Umno.

And, boy, did we win! And, boy, did Umno get destroyed!

I suppose PAS has to thank us for that. We went in to Umno and we just bombed the whole party to pieces. No doubt our team won. But the price they paid for that is that Umno lost.

Team A was headed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad with Tun Abdul Ghafar Baba as his Deputy and Anwar Ibrahim as his Youth Leader. Team B was headed by Tengku Tan Sri Razaleigh Hamzah with Tun Musa Hitam as his Deputy and Najib Tun Razak as his aspire-to-be Youth Leader.

And the rest of Umno was split almost 50:50.

Our job was to ensure that Najib changed sides. And to do that we had to get Najib's boys in Umno Youth into Anwar's pocket.

Anwar offered Najib a deal. Anwar would vacate the Umno Youth Leader's post and hand it to Najib uncontested. Anwar would then contest the Umno Vice Presidency. But Najib would have to openly throw his lot behind Team A.

In the beginning, Najib refused. However, Najib is not much of a fighter so it was not that difficult to 'persuade' him to change sides. Just threaten Najib that if he did not join Team A then he would have to fight for the Umno Youth Leader's post. It would not be handed to him on a silver platter. That was enough to make Najib change sides.

Then we had to get the Youth Leaders from the various states to join Team A. Sabah had no Umno divisions yet at that time so the two biggest states were Perak and Johor. Hence Ramli Ngah Talib (an 'Old Boy' of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar) and Muhyiddin Yassin, the Menteris Besar of Perak and Johor respectively, would need to be roped in.

Annuar Musa from Kelantan, Saad Man from Kedah, Hamzah Zainuddin from Perak, Bakar Dewa from Johor, Zubir Embong and Rahman Bakar from Terengganu, etc., were summoned for a meeting. In that meeting they were asked to state their stand. Do they support Team A or Team B?

At first most of them were wishy-washy. They did not dare commit themselves. The sentiments they expressed was that it was going to be a tie and that Dr Mahathir, because of the very narrow win of a couple of votes, might decide to throw in the towel and hand the party to Tengku Razaleigh. Unless they were sure that Dr Mahathir was going to stay on they would rather not openly declare their stand.

I reported this to Pak Wan (Datuk Dr Wan Ismail, Anwar Ibrahim's father-in-law) who brought me to meet Dr Mahathir's Political Secretary, Datuk Noor Azam. Noor Azam was furious. All these people came up because of Dr Mahathir. And now they dare not state their stand as to whether they support Dr Mahathir or Tengku Razaleigh.

I told Noor Azam it would help if Dr Mahathir can declare that even if he wins by just one vote he will still not resign. That would give everyone the confidence to support him. The rumour being spread is that unless Dr Mahathir gets a clear majority he is not going to stay on.

That night, Dr Mahathir made the announcement and the doubters swung over to Team A.

We spoke to Tan Sri Mohammad Tajol Rosli Mohamed Ghazali about forming a 'cheering squad'. It was agreed that we would infiltrate the Umno general assembly with about 200 to 300 'observers' and they would all be placed in the front row. Then, as Dr Mahathir delivers his speech, these 'observers' would stand up and shout 'Hidup Mahathir!' The delegates would then join the chorus.

Dr Mahathir was not told of this plan because we wanted it to look genuine. Halfway through his speech, we interrupted him with shouts of 'Hidup Mahathir!' Dr Mahathir was caught off guard when almost the whole hall stood up to join the chorus, even those who supported Tengku Razaleigh.

Dr Mahathir stopped his speech and sat down without continuing. He knew that we had clearly won the day. Team B was in panic.

The Umno Permanent Chairman, Tun Sulaiman Ninam Shah, then ruled that the voting would be held immediately. There were loud protests from Team B because after Dr Mahathir's speech it was supposed to be the tea break. That would have given Team B time for a last minute campaign before the voting.

Sulaiman ruled that the voting will be held immediately and anyone who left the hall would not be allowed back in to the hall to vote. Hence they must vote before leaving the hall. "Vote first and then you can go for tea. The tea is not going to run away," said Sulaiman.

Team A pulled through with a slim 3% majority.

In the next episode I will talk about how we almost kicked Dr Mahathir out the night before the party election but was prevented by Anwar from doing so.

TO BE CONTINUED

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 1)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 2)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 3)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 4)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 5)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 6)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 7)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 8)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 9)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 10)

The journey in life is never a straight line (PART 11)