Ahad, 7 Oktober 2012

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


Only losers scream

Posted: 04 Oct 2012 06:12 PM PDT

What happened to you all those years? When we told you we need change and when we explained why we need change you still went ahead and voted for Barisan Nasional. You not only voted for Barisan Nasional but you gave 101 excuses as to why you had no choice but to vote for Barisan Nasional. And now you talk full of self-righteousness and scream: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There is one comment that is oft repeated. It is repeated by readers who post comments here in Malaysia Today. It is repeated by Bloggers, writers and 'political analysts'. Many of you keep saying this over and over again. And that comment is: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

Why do you keep repeating this? Is it because you thought that this is something we do not already know? Or did you think that maybe we have forgotten this and that is why you have to keep reminding us? Or is it you wanted to impress us with your analytical skills in being able to come to that conclusion using your intelligence and superior education?

This is like telling us that water is wet. Do you think we do not already know that? Do you feel smart because you have told us something you thought we did not know until you told us? Even if we did not realise this, does it make you feel smart because you are telling us something that 500 or 1,000 people before you have already told us?

Anyway, Barisan Nasional has not ruled Malaysia for 55 years. Barisan Nasional was formed in January 1973. Hence Barisan Nasional is only 39 years old, going on 40 in another three months time. For the first 16 years after Merdeka, it was the Alliance Party that ruled Malaysia.

Even then it can be argued whether the Alliance Party was in power for 14, 16 or 18 years. The first municipal elections were held in 1955, two years before Merdeka, and the first general elections were held in 1959, two years after Merdeka. Hence did the Alliance Party come into power in 1955, 1957 or 1959?

Whatever it may be, for purposes of this discussion, let us just say that Umno has been in power for 55 years. They took over when the British granted independence to Malaya and it ruled though one coalition called the Alliance Party for 16 years and thereafter through a second coalition called Barisan Nasional for another 39 years. So the total for both coalitions would come to 55 years.

Now, what do we achieve by discussing this matter? So it may have been 57 years or 55 years or 53 years or just 39 years. Does it make any difference if we argue about how long Barisan Nasional has been in power? And what do you achieve by screaming over and over again: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

If you keep repeating this, you are merely admitting your own stupidity. I do not care how long Barisan Nasional has been in power. I do not care whether the correct answer is 57 years or 55 years or 53 years or just 39 years. I would rather ask: how was Barisan Nasional able to stay in power for so long (whether the correct answer is 57 years or 55 years or 53 years or just 39 years)?

If Barisan Nasional is bad for the country and if Barisan Nasional has been in power just too damn long, that can only mean that there are many stupid people who voted for them to allow them to retain power for 12 general elections since 1959. So who are these stupid people? And aren't these stupid people the same people who voted for Barisan Nasional, election after election, and now scream: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

When I voted in the general elections I voted for the opposition. And to prove that I voted for the opposition I held up the ballot paper for all and sundry to see before I put it into the ballot box. You should have seen the shocked faces of the election workers who panicked when I held up my ballot paper so that they can see whom I voted for.

I did not even bother to go into the booth to mark my ballot paper. When they handed me the ballot paper I asked for them for a pencil and marked it right there, in front of them. When they tried to usher me into the booth I told them no need to do that because I was going to vote for the opposition. I then showed them my ballot paper as proof that I had voted for the opposition.

And while I did this each and every general election do you want to know what you did? You expressed anxiety that your vote may not be a secret because the ballot papers have serial numbers on them so the government can actually find out whom you voted for.

You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were worried that if you voted for the opposition you might get into trouble. You did not want to vote for Barisan Nasional but you were scared of voting for the opposition so you did not come out to vote.

You voted for Barisan Nasional because you did not have confidence that the opposition can run the country. You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were worried that the economy would suffer if the opposition takes over. You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were scared that if the opposition wins the election there might be race riots.

You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were not aware that Barisan Nasional is bad, you thought they were good. You voted for Barisan Nasional because you did not have access to the Internet so you were not informed about the truth. You voted for Barisan Nasional because no one told you about the bad things that Barisan Nasional had done.

You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were scared of PAS's Islamic State so you would rather Umno run the country. You voted for Barisan Nasional because you were scared that DAP would abolish Ketuanan Melayu so you would rather Umno run the country. You voted for Barisan Nasional because it had proven it can run the country while the opposition had not proven itself yet.

In short, you voted for Barisan Nasional and today you give all sorts of lame and stupid excuses as to why you did that. So it is not your fault that you voted for Barisan Nasional. It is someone else's fault that you voted for Barisan Nasional. And because you voted for Barisan Nasional they were able to retain power for 55 years (or 57 years or 53 years or 39 years) or 12 general elections (or nine general elections since 1974 after Barisan Nasional was formed).

So, now you want to kick out Barisan Nasional, is it? Why do you want to kick out Barisan Nasional? You want to kick out Barisan Nasional because: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

But why do we need change? We need change because there is so much corruption in Malaysia. We need change because there is no democracy in Malaysia. We need change because the government does not respect human rights, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to lead the lifestyle of your choice, etc. We need change because we need transparency, good governance, separation of powers, independence of the judiciary, etc.

In short, the system is not working, the government is not working, society is not working, in fact, everything is not working. So we need change.

But when did all this begin to break down? Only since 2008? Only since 1998? Or since 1958?

Tell me what has changed since Merdeka of 1957? Things are basically still the same. Okay, you argue that things have gotten worse over the last 55 years. Have they? Who told you that? Do you mean there was no corruption in Malaysia until Barisan Nasional took over?

There was already corruption in Malaysia even before there was a Malaysia. 200 years ago Yap Ah Loy was already bribing the government officials so that he could open his brothels and opium dens along Jalan Ampang in Kuala Lumpur. The Chinese tin miners were bribing members of the Selangor and Perak royal families 200-300 years ago so that they could mine tin in those two states.

Barisan Nasional did not invent bribery. Bribery had been 'invented' hundreds of years before that. The Chinese, the Malays, and the government, were already involved in bribery long before Merdeka. Many towns and cities in Malaysia emerged and flourished against the backdrop of bribery and corruption.

So, Malaysia got independence in 1957. And bribery and corruption was already well entrenched in Malaysian society back in 1957. The government and the businessmen were corrupt to the core. And we told you this back in the 1970s. We told you this back in the 1980s. We told you this back in the 1990s. Now, suddenly, you are screaming about corruption.

What happened to you all those years? When we told you we need change and when we explained why we need change you still went ahead and voted for Barisan Nasional. You not only voted for Barisan Nasional but you gave 101 excuses as to why you had no choice but to vote for Barisan Nasional. And now you talk full of self-righteousness and scream: Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. 55 years is long enough. It is time for change.

 

Losers galore

Posted: 03 Oct 2012 06:04 PM PDT

When we talk about change or reforms that has to mean something different and something better. If we act and talk just like the Barisan Nasional or Umno people do, then what change or reforms are we talking about? We lie, we distort facts, and we practice double standards and hypocrisy. We are just the reverse side of the same coin. So what changes or reforms are we talking about?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Actually, it is not only comments that whack Islam that do not get published here, comments that whack you also do not get published here. Are you saying you are on the same level as this great religion Islam? And are you saying whacking you is seditious, inflammatory, malicious and racist? I have read comments in other blogs where they say that comments here that do not agree with you or whack you do not get published. (Kim)

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

That was a comment by Kim. According to Kim, "I have read comments in other blogs where they say that comments here that do not agree with you or whack you do not get published."

First of all, Kim did not reveal what 'other Blogs' he was referring to. This is like saying that 'I heard something' or 'some people say'. You need to be specific. Which 'other Blogs' are you talking about?

If it was a pro-Umno or pro-Pakatan Blog, then I can understand why they say this. They are biased. They have a political master and their job is to serve a political master.

Would you believe it when TV3 or Utusan Malaysia says that Anwar Ibrahim and Azmin Ali are immoral people and hypocrites to boot? You would allege that TV3 and Utusan Malaysia are owned by Umno and serve Umno's agenda. Therefore you cannot believe what they say.

When the Umno Blogs came out with a story saying that the Deputy Chief Minister of Penang, Dr Mansor Othman, called Lim Guan Eng cocky, arrogant and tokong, you did not believe it. You said that that was a lie. And you did not believe it mainly because it was the Umno Blogs that were saying this. Whatever the Umno Blogs say cannot be believed.

Then Dr Mansor and Guan Eng held a joint-press conference so that this incident can be denied. Then you said, "There you are. That is the proof that the Umno Blogs lied."

Then TV3 played a recording of Dr Mansor saying what he initially denied saying. Then you said, "So what? Dr Mansor has a right to express his opinion. What is so wrong with that?" Then you say that the person who leaked this recording should be hunted down and action must be taken against him/her.

This is the same kind of kepala otak as Kim. They cannot see things beyond their own nose. They will simply talk without knowing the facts. And then, when they are caught with their pants down, they will twist and turn and say things that suit them.

Secondly, what was this specific comment that was posted that I am alleged to have blocked or deleted? Can you quote that comment? Kim said, "Comments here that do not agree with you or whack you." What was that comment? I want to know what that comment said.

It is so easy to make a sweeping allegation without any supporting details. When I said that the PKR lawyers are getting legal work from the Selangor government, everyone demanded proof and details. You cannot accept a sweeping allegation. You want details.

So give me details. Quote me that comment that you are talking about. Be specific. I too can make such allegations. The Chinese plan to take over Malaysia. The Christians are trying to convert Muslims to Christianity. My allegation is as 'strong' as Kim's allegation if we can make sweeping allegations without proof or details.

Then I gave you the details and evidence to prove that the PKR lawyers got legal work from Selangor (now, even some DAP leaders have come to to confirm this). I even published a letter to show that certain PKR people had issued instructions that legal work must be given to PKR lawyers.

You demanded details and evidence. You will not believe it unless I give details and evidence. So I gave you the details and evidence. Then what do you do?

You said that the amount of legal work that the PKR lawyers got was small compared to what the Umno lawyers got when BN was running Selangor. If the Umno people can do it so what if the PKR people also do it? The Umno people are worse. The PKR people are not that bad, only small time corruption -- so can be forgiven.

When we say something, you say it cannot be believed unless the details and evidence can be shown. When we show you the evidence, you make a U-turn and explain why it is okay and you say that it is not considered a crime or something wrong because it is small corruption and not big corruption.

What kind of people are you? You are so immoral and hypocritical.

When Anwar Ibrahim and the Pakatan Rakyat leaders fly in a private jet sponsored by businessmen it is very okay. When Ali Rustam's son's wedding is sponsored by businessmen it is not okay.

When Karpal Singh disagrees with Hudud it is okay. When Tunku Aziz Tunku Ibrahim disagrees with demonstrations it is not okay. Karpal Singh is just following the law so it is okay to disagree with Hudud. Tunku Aziz is also following the law but it is a bad law so it is not okay to disagree with demonstrations.

So, according to Kim, "I have read comments in other blogs where they say that comments here that do not agree with you or whack you do not get published." Well, tell me which Blogs said that and what were the comments that I blocked or deleted. Until then I can only say that Kim is lying through his/her teeth. I can also say that 'Kim' is actually Tian Chua who is posting under a false name. Can I prove that? Do I need to prove that? Kim does not need to prove what he/she says either.

When we talk about change or reforms that has to mean something different and something better. If we act and talk just like the Barisan Nasional or Umno people do, then what change or reforms are we talking about? We lie, we distort facts, and we practice double standards and hypocrisy. We are just the reverse side of the same coin. So what changes or reforms are we talking about?

We say that Pakatan Rakyat may not be clean but they are not as bad as Barisan Nasional or Umno. We say we want freedom of expression as long as that does not include criticising the opposition. What is all this? Look at yourself in the mirror and tell me what you see. Can you see a clone of Barisan Nasional staring back at you?

Do you remember this article?

Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

Well, that is unbridled freedom of expression. But from the almost 300 comments in that article you do not seem to regard that as freedom of expression. And why not? Isn't that the type of freedom of expression that you are talking about? So why get upset? Even Haris Ibrahim was very upset. And I thought he was one of the greatest defenders of freedom of expression.

Are you telling me that freedom of expression has its limits? Or are you telling me that freedom of expression means the right to criticise the government but not to criticise the opposition?

By the way, the total donations received by Ahli Parlimen Lambah Pantai for August was RM22,231.80 and for September was RM31,393.35.The total received for Aug-Sept was RM53,625.15.

That was all. Less than RM54,000. And that reflects the level of commitment from Pakataan Rakyat people. Yes, Pakatan Rayat people talk a lot. They sure can scream. But that is all they do -- they talk and scream. But they never put their money where their mouth is.

And because of that Raja Nong Chik Zainal Abidin is going to win the Lembah Pantai Parliament seat and Nurul Izzah Anwar is going to be a one-term MP.

Do you know who is Raja Nong Chik's strategist? The man who is heading Raja Nong Chik's election campaign is the ex-Secretary General of PKR. Yes, that's right, that is Raja Nong Chik's head of election strategy and campaign, Datuk Salehuddin Hashim.

Raja Nong Chik has plenty of money, a ministerial position, and a good campaign team headed by the ex-PKR Sec-Gen. And Nurul Izzah has a bunch of young chicos running around in circles, with RM54,000 in the bank, and many 'supporters' amongst the readers of Malaysia Today who talk a lot and are not even registered to vote in Lembah Pantai.

Yes, I know, I have read the comments that said people refuse to donate to Nurul Izzah because they don't trust me. What have I got to do with this? That is not my bank account. It is Nurul Izaah's bank account. I am not contesting the election. Nurul Izzah is. I am just the messenger boy.

So you don't trust me. So what? Where is the logic in not donating to Nurul Izzah because you do not trust me? I do not get the logic in that. The bottom line is many of you are just hot air, a load of bullshit, and you are trying to 'explain' the poor figure that Nurul Izzah collected by trying to shift the blame to me.

That is the level of intelligence of Pakatan Rakyat supporters. And because of that Barisan Nasional is going to win the coming general election. And on the morning after Polling Day I am going to write an article that is going to say, "Ha…ha...ha…I told you so."

What a bunch of bloody losers!

 

97 cows for me and 3 cows for you

Posted: 02 Oct 2012 08:08 PM PDT

Hence trade and commerce is very crucial to Islam. And the distribution of wealth (zakat) is one of the tenets of Islam alongside praying, fasting and performing the pilgrimage (Haj). And in Islam it is mandatory that every year you pay 2.5-3.0% of your wealth as zakat. This zakat is then distributed to the needy, poor, orphans, people too old or too sick to work, travellers, people in debt, etc.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

This was an e-mail sent by a friend in the UK to another friend in the UK. Both are Malaysians although I have not revealed their names. I thought it would be interesting to read the exchange.

Obviously you need some proper understanding of what is meant by socialism. Give me a call to meet up for a sensible discussion. Hopefully you will then realise the trash you are circulating has nothing to do with socialism.

Brown's "socialism" was a continuation of Reagan/Thatcher free market for the greedy to take all they could take in an unregulated market. Free market is not about rewarding those who worked hard. Free market is about giving the descendants of land and cattle thieves (the lords and ladies of the manor) and the generations of the slimy greedy bloodsuckers the freedom to accumulate more wealth by using their existing wealth, power and connection to screw the majority of the population. 

I am saddened that a nice and intelligent guy like you is circulating trash on behalf of those bloodsuckers who wish to divert attention from their despicable greed that caused the economic and financial disaster we are all facing today.

I am currently in Malaysia, best wishes.

Basically, my two friends above were debating the workings of 'western' socialism. Let me join the fray (or throw the cat amongst the pigeons) and add 'Islamic' socialism to the discussion.

Muslims would normally argue that Islam is not a religion but a way of life (adeen). However, not every Muslim practices what they preach. Hence we tend to find a lot of hypocrisy amongst Muslims -- as we also find amongst the other religions that preach love but invade other countries since the last 1,000 years and have never stopped doing so until today.

If you were to study Islam in depth, you will find that Islam is a combination of socialism and capitalism. For example, Islam teaches you that doing business is better and more virtuous than working for someone. Prophet Muhammad was a businessman, as was his first wife who owned the business that the Prophet was managing. And so on.

Now, as much as most Muslims would never want to admit this (and will whack me for saying it), the first 'Holy War' was actually a war concerning trade. This first 'war' at Badr (a village south of Medina on the road to Mekah) was a caravan raid and was meant to cripple Mekah's position as the centre of trade for the Arabian Peninsular.

At that time, Mekah was the centre of commerce and this resulted in it also being the centre of religion, or vice versa. People from all over did their pilgrimage to Mekah and at the same time engaged in trade. If Medina wanted to replace Mekah as the new centre, it would have to first cripple Mekah's trade supremacy. And to achieve this the Prophet attacked the trade caravans on route to Mekah. Before the war of Badr, many caravan raids were conducted and the biggest 'battle' was supposed to be the one passing through Badr.

Hence while the Islamists would insist that the first 'holy' war of Badr was about religion, I will insist that it was about trade, although it can be indirectly regarded as about religion since whichever became the centre of trade invariably would also become the centre of religion. In short, trade and religion went hand-in-glove and to be the centre of one you must be the centre of the other.

Let me put it another way. The Prophet's forces attacked the trade caravans not to convert these 'pagans' to Islam but to disrupt the trade routes and cripple Mekah's supremacy as the trade centre of the Peninsular. Mekah, in turn, sent an army to Badr not because the Prophet was propagating Islam but because he was disturbing Mekah's trade. The fact that one force was Muslim and the other 'pagan' was incidental.

That is my interpretation of the events and is based on history and not theology. And the Islamists for sure will not agree with my interpretation of events -- but that is their problem, not mine.

Hence trade and commerce is very crucial to Islam. And the distribution of wealth (zakat) is one of the tenets of Islam alongside praying, fasting and performing the pilgrimage (Haj). And in Islam it is mandatory that every year you pay 2.5-3.0% of your wealth as zakat. This zakat is then distributed to the needy, poor, orphans, people too old or too sick to work, travellers, people in debt, etc.

In short, you are encouraged to do business rather than work for someone so that you can become wealthy and so that once you are wealthy you can take care of those less fortunate than you. So, as I said, Islam is a combination of capitalism and socialism. Islam wants you to create wealth so that you can share this wealth.

Now tell me, how many Muslims will understand this or will agree with this? Of course, the manner in how you make your money and how much profit you make is also an issue. But let's not go into that or else this piece is going to turn into a thesis.

The long and short of it would be no one starves or sleeps on the streets under Islam's capitalist-socialist system. But the reality is, there is more poverty in Muslim countries than in non-Muslim countries plus more exploitation, discrimination, injustice and so on. So, the system may be good but the people living under that system do not comply and deviate from what should be.

And that is why I always say that changing the system (or the government) is of no use unless the people themselves are prepared to reform. In theory, the Islamic capitalist-socialist system is superb. In practice, Muslim countries suck. It is not about the system or the government. It is about the mentality of the people.

In Malaysia, when we scream about reforms, we normally talk about changing the system or the government. But if it is merely old wine in a new bottle nothing good is going to come out of it. Islam's capitalist-socialist system is already good enough. It is better than even some western concepts. But show me one superb Muslim country. And show me one Muslim country that changed its government and became a Shangri-La. Most times the new government was as bad or worse than the old government. Hence the best system in the world would be like throwing pearls to swine if the people are not capable and resist change.

 

Read more here: http://www.hidaya.org/zakat-calculator?gclid=CLXv5_HE5LICFaTHtAodKToA0g

 

This is how it works

Posted: 01 Oct 2012 05:13 PM PDT

Now, if you want to whack Islam I have no problem with that. Just send me an e-mail with your details and I will register you to comment in Malaysia Today. Once you are registered your comment will automatically get published without needing to wait for the moderator to approve it. If you refuse to register then what more can I say? That would be your fault, would it not?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

A number of readers have posted comments accusing me of being a hypocrite for not practicing what I preach. They allege that while I propagate freedom of expression, I do not walk the talk, I block or delete their comments. They further allege that I am denying them their right to post comments in Malaysia Today and hence am not respecting their freedom of expression. This, therefore, makes me a hypocrite.

A couple of readers also posted comments wanting to know why I blocked or deleted their comments whenever they bash Islam. If some readers can bash Christianity, they say, why can't they also post comments bashing Islam?

First of all, those whose comments get posted without 'censorship' are those readers who have registered to comment. So, whenever they post a comment, their comment automatically gets published, even if it is seditious, inflammatory, malicious, racist, etc. Those who are not registered will have to wait for the moderator to view that comment before it gets published. In such a situation the comment may or may not get published.

So this is a problem normally faced by those not registered to comment. Those registered to comment would seldom face a problem of blocked or deleted comments unless under very 'severe' situations.

Another point to note would be when so many readers repeat the comments of others. For example, one reader (or two or three readers) already posted a racist comment about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's Mamak or Indian birth and this comment (or two or three comments) gets published. Then another ten or 20 readers post similar comments whacking Dr Mahathir's Indian or Mamak birth.

Do we need 20 comments all similarly referring to Dr Mahathir's Mamak or Indian birth? I think the first (or two or three) readers have already made his/her point -- and that point is Dr Mahathir is evil because his father was Indian. If his father had been Chinese or Malay then he would not be so evil. Hence anyone who has an Indian father is an evil person.

However, two or three comments regarding Dr Mahathir's Indian father should be enough, don't you think so? Why do we need to read comments from 20 people saying the same thing?

I think most, if not all Malaysians already know the story of Dr Mahathir's father, grandfather, great-grandfather, etc. It is already common knowledge. But not many know the story of Dr Mahathir's mother. Now, if someone wants to post a comment regarding Dr Mahathir's mother, grandmother, great-grandmother, etc., that would probably be something interesting since no one talks about that.

Hence if you have something new to say by all means post your comment. But if you just want to repeat what 500 people before you have already said then maybe we need not publish your comment. It would be most boring to read 500 comments regarding something we all already know -- Dr Mahathir's father's race.

Hence, also, if your comment does not get published it could be because your comment is so boring. I mean, you might not find it boring even though 500 other people have already said what you are saying before you said it. You may even get an orgasm with your comment. But then this could just be because you are a boring person.

Boring people normally regard what they say as extremely exciting although others may find them boring.  Malays call this 'shiok sendiri'. It is like mental masturbation. They get turned on by the sound of their own voice and they think that others also get a hard on just because they do. Hence they get very upset when we find their comment too low standard and not worthy of publishing. They cannot accept the fact that their comment is not good enough for publishing. But I suppose that is the problem with shiok sendiri readers.

Now, if you want to whack Islam I have no problem with that. Just send me an e-mail with your details and I will register you to comment in Malaysia Today. Once you are registered your comment will automatically get published without needing to wait for the moderator to approve it. If you refuse to register then what more can I say? That would be your fault, would it not?

I can't understand why these people who want to whack Islam refuse to register to comment. It is not like they have to pay anything to register. Registration is free. Just e-mail me your details and you will get registered with no hassle whatsoever. It is so simple to do and yet they do not do it. It is really mind-boggling.

So, for those readers who complain that they want to whack Islam and their comments do not get published, send me an e-mail with your details now and I promise you I will immediately register you. I will also not block or delete your comments -- they will automatically get published. Can you do that?

Another point I want to discuss is regarding rights and privileges. Many readers confuse privileges with rights. They think that they have rights in Malaysia Today.

Actually you do not have any rights in Malaysia Today. You see Malaysia Today is not a democracy. No one appointed me or elected me to head Malaysia Today. I set up Malaysia Today and appointed myself. So I call the shots, not you. Hence I decide what happens in Malaysia Today and I can even make up the rules and change them as we go along.

Of course, you do not have to like this or agree to this. And if you don't like it you can set up your own Blog with your own rules. Then you decide what happens since it is your own Blog and set up with your own effort and money.

This works just like your passport. A passport is not a right. It is a privilege. The passport does not belong to you. It belongs to the government and the government can take it away if you abuse the privilege. Your passport does not determine your citizenship. You can be a citizen of the country without owning a passport.

Hence don't start screaming about your right to post comments in Malaysia Today. You have no rights whatsoever. You are merely a guest and as a guest I will allow you certain privileges. And I can also take away these privileges or deny you any privileges. And I do not need any reason to do that. Maybe I don't like your smell or your hairstyle or I think your skin is too dark or your eyes too shifty or whatever. I need no reason and I need not tell you my reason. That is how it works.

I trust you now understand how it works. In short, you have privileges while I have rights. You have the privilege to post comments in Malaysia Today and I have the right to decide whether your comment gets published or not. You have the privilege to register to comment in Malaysia Today and I have the right to refuse your registration or delete your registration later if I don't like what you say.

Is that now clear? And if it is not, then get a friend to help translate this into Bahasa Malaysia, Tamil or Mandarin.

 

Secularism is the way to go

Posted: 30 Sep 2012 05:17 PM PDT

Yes, as Anwar said, and as I have also been saying for many years, Malaysia can't make it just with electoral reforms. We need political and government reforms as well. And this is why I joined LibDem in the UK. While the others were talking merely about electoral reforms, LibDem was talking about political and government reforms.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Anwar touts Turkey as model for economic, political reforms

(The Malaysian Insider) - Like Turkey, Malaysia can regain its economic lustre within a short period only through comprehensive political and government reform, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today in debating Budget 2013.

The opposition leader blamed Malaysia's blunted competitive edge on the Barisan Nasional (BN) government's failure to redress the lopsided economic policies awarded to "cronies and rich parties with interests", leading to a protracted Budget deficit for the last 15 years.

"Turkey's success under Reccip Tayeb Erdogan, for example, gives us confidence that economic policy and governance that is based on social justice, transparency, trust and recognising the potential talent of its people can boost the country's economic prosperity within a short period."

"That is why Pakatan Rakyat has from early on stressed that change and economic improvements cannot happen without political and government reform," he said in his Budget speech.

Using Turkey as an example, the former finance minister said in the 10 years since Erdogan became its prime minister, the latter had managed to transform the secular Muslim country's economy that had contracted in 2002 to become a "new economic miracle".

Turkey's gross domestic product (GDP) had tripled in nine years, he said, from US$233 billion (RM722 billion) in 2002 to US$773 billion last year. Its projected economic growth for this year is estimated to be more than 11 per cent, based on the first-quarter figures, which Anwar said topped China's and every other developed country worldwide.

He pointed out too that Turkey's economy had grown an average of between seven and nine per cent a year during Erdogan's administration and, more notably, the country would have offset its €1 billion (RM4 billion) sovereign debt to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by next April, the shortest-ever repayment considering the amount owed.

The Permatang Pauh MP said Malaysia was now facing the risk of being left further behind by other Asian countries that used to lag behind it in the 1970s and 1980s, like South Korea, which had succeeded in forging ahead with measures to combat corruption and level the economic playing field to raise the competitive edge for business entrepreneurs.

But he believed that Malaysia, which had a higher economic potential due to its oil reserves, still stood a strong chance of surging ahead by overhauling the existing economic structure.

"Barisan Nasional's failure to end the Budget deficit for 15 consecutive years while Malaysia has oil reserves shows there is a structural economic problem that it has neglected and allowed to spread like a cancerous tumour, for resolving the economic imbalance means touching cronies and the rich parties with interests," he said.

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

Turkey's political system is based on a separation of powers. Executive power is exercised by the Council of Ministers while legislative power is vested in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. The judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. Its current constitution was adopted on 7th November 1982 after the Turkish constitutional referendum.

The function of head of state is performed by the president who is elected every five years on the principle of universal suffrage according to the current constitution. The president does not have to be a member of parliament but he/she must be over 40 years old and hold a bachelor's degree.

Executive power rests with the president, the prime minister and the Council of Ministers. The ministers do not have to be members of Parliament. The prime minister is appointed by the President and approved through a vote of confidence in the Parliament.

Legislative power is invested in the 550-seat Grand National Assembly of Turkey representing 81 provinces. The members are elected for a four-year term by mitigated proportional representation with an election threshold of 10%. To be represented in Parliament, a party must win at least 10% of the national vote in a national parliamentary election. Independent candidates may run, and to be elected, they must only win 10% of the vote in the province from which they are running.

Turkey has a legal system that has been wholly integrated with the continental European system. For example the Turkish civil law system has been modified by incorporating elements of the Swiss Civil Code, the Code of Obligations and the German Commercial Code. The administrative law bears similarities with the French Counterpart and the penal code with the Italian Counterpart.

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

When Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim talks like this I will certainly support what he says. These are the type of things I like him to say. This not only gives Anwar a more statesmanlike image but what he says is in line with my own thoughts.

And, just like most Pakatan Rakyat supporters, I will agree with someone who says things that I agree with and will whack all those who say things that I do not agree with. In fact, that is not just the Pakatan Rakyat way but also the Malaysian way -- you have the right to say anything as long as I agree with what you say.

Above is a bit of background into the Turkish system. Turkey used to be called 'The Sick Man of Europe'. Today it can actually be called one of the most progressive Muslim countries in the world. Even Anwar would agree with this.

However, Islamists and fundamentalist Muslims would disagree with this prognosis. They would consider Turkey a bad example of what a Muslim country should be like. For that matter, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the man whom the west calls 'The Father of Modern Turkey', would be called an apostate and a traitor to Islam by the fundamentalist.

I once prayed in the Rusila mosque in Terengganu and the PAS President, Tok Guru Abdul Hadi Awang, actually whacked Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to kingdom come. Hence I know for a fact that the PAS President (and most fundamentalist Muslims) does not regard Mustafa Kemal Atatürk highly. He would consider Mustafa Kemal Atatürk as someone whose head should be separated from his neck.

In Turkey, everyone is entitled to freedom of worship, religion, conscience and belief. In other words, apostasy does not exist in Turkey. That can never be accepted in a 'proper' Muslim country. On that one score alone Turkey can never be accepted as a Muslim country. Hence, how can we classify Turkey as the perfect example of a Muslim country (at least be western interpretations) when by Eastern interpretations it cannot qualify as a Muslim country?

Anwar is singing Turkey's praises and is telling us that if Malaysia can be like Turkey then Malaysia's economy will become just like Turkey's. And in singing Turkey's praises he lists down Turkey's virtues.

I can buy that. I agree that if Malaysia became like Turkey then we can expect to see our economy improve, just like Turkey. But to become like Turkey we will need, as Anwar said, political and government reforms -- to quote what Anwar said.

Again, I can buy that. In fact, Anwar took the words right out of my mouth. And this is what I have been saying for many years. And this is what I said when Anwar and I met up in London two years ago. And this is what I said when we launched the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM). And this is also what I said in my TV3 interview in April 2011 and my NST interview on 1st January 2012.

Yes, as Anwar said, and as I have also been saying for many years, Malaysia can't make it just with electoral reforms. We need political and government reforms as well. And this is why I joined LibDem in the UK. While the others were talking merely about electoral reforms, LibDem was talking about political and government reforms.

So what do I now say? Do I say 'I told you so'? Do I say 'now Anwar Ibrahim is singing the same song as I have been singing for so long'? Or do I say 'how far is Pakatan Rakyat prepared to go to see political and government reforms'?

So we want to become just like Turkey -- a successful country, in particular in terms of governance and the economy. But are we prepared to do things just like Turkey? Maybe I should pose this question another way: will the Islamists and fundamentalists agree to Malaysia becoming like Turkey? In short: we cannot be slightly pregnant. Either we are or we are not. That is the bottom line.

And does Anwar realise that to become just like Turkey we need a lot of reforms -- not just cosmetic changes but a major structural change?

That, I fear, is what most Malaysians are not ready to accept. And that is why I have been screaming at both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat. They talk about setting up home but they shy away from marriage. So are you saying we need to live in sin? Either we go all the way or we are neither here nor there. And this is what we plan for Malaysia -- a lot of cosmetics to give the impression of external beauty but rotten to the core internally?

And don't try to tell me that once we kick out Barisan Nasional all this is going to change. The problem is not Umno. The problem is the Muslims. The Muslims are not prepared to embrace secularism in favour of Islam, like what the Turks have done. That is the core issue here. Hence no change of government is going to help if Muslims resist a change of mindset.

 

Sometimes I can’t understand Umno

Posted: 25 Sep 2012 05:58 PM PDT

Umno needs to walk the talk. If it wants to convince Malaysians that it is serious about reforms and that it respects the rights of Malaysians to free speech then Umno has to prove it. Talking alone is not enough. Unless you can demonstrate that you mean what you say then expect many voters to vote against you come the next general election.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I can't understand why Umno is making a big fuss regarding the foreign funding that Suaram, Bersih, Malaysiakini, and so on, are alleged to have received. Is it illegal for Malaysian organisations to receive money from overseas (or from local sources for that matter)? Organisations, especially NGOs, need donations and grants to survive. If not how would they operate?

I myself donate monthly to the cancer research institute and the seeing-eye dogs for the blind NGO (http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/) here in the UK. They stand on street corners and go door-to-door to sign people up as monthly donors. In fact, the dog I have adopted is called 'Sparkle' and it is being loaned to a blind person for a payment of just one pound.

Umno should demonstrate a bit of maturity and not treat everything as a political issue. Umno reminds me of the opposition supporters who question me as to where I get my funding from, as to who is sponsoring me, as to how I survive here in the UK, and whatnot. That is very childish -- raising issues that are a non-issue. Umno should not reduce itself to this level.

The private jet that was loaned to the Pakatan Rakyat leaders is another issue that is silly. So a Malay businessman lent the opposition leaders the use of his jet -- or he paid the cost to rent a private jet. Is that wrong?

The fact that the businessman does business in the Pakatan Rakyat ruled states should not be the excuse to turn this into an issue. You are just assuming that since this person is a businessman then there must be strings attached. That is malicious and mischievous. You are jumping to conclusions and are insinuating that one is considered guilty until proven innocent.

Again, Umno is acting like those Pakatan Rakyat supporters who questioned me about my friend's yacht that I holidayed on in Phuket during the Christmas holidays last year. Actually, we had a meeting on that yacht and a few activists such as Haris Ibrahim also joined me a couple of days in Phuket. And that meeting was actually what resulted in me doing that NST interview on 1st January 2012.

Another thing that Umno is being silly about is regarding Deputy Higher Education Minister Saifuddin Abdullah's statements. He has always demonstrated an independent spirit and has always spoken his mind. No doubt some of his statements and opinions may go against Barisan Nasional's 'party stand'. But then what Saifuddin said is very true and is mere coincidental that some of the things he says are what some people in Pakatan Rakyat are also saying.

But just because what he says is sometimes also what those in the opposition say does not mean he is a traitor, Trojan horse, mole, or whatever. As the Deputy Higher Education Minister, what he says is very important because the youth are Malaysia's future. Hence it is very crucial that the youth are told the right things and who better to do that than the Deputy Education Minister himself, especially one from Umno?

Umno, which has been in power for more than half a century, should know this and, therefore, should allow its ministers some degree of independence. Umno cannot always expect its leaders to just toe the party line. When it is right the leaders must be allowed to say it is right and if it is wrong to say it is wrong.

Umno should prove to Malaysians that it is really interested in reforms and respects the rights of Malaysians to speak freely. Umno should not act like those in Pakatan Rakyat who are calling Nasharudin Mat Isa a Barisan Nasional agent, mole, Trojan horse, and whatnot, just because he speaks his mind and what he says does not go down well with the Pakatan Rakyat leaders.

Umno should know that the days when you vilify someone for expressing an opinion opposite to yours is long gone. Maybe some in the opposition still do that but this is forgivable since Pakatan Rakyat has not ruled Malaysia for more than 50 years like Umno has. Hence, while the opposition can be excused for being less tolerant or matured, there is no excuse for Umno to also be like that.

Umno needs to walk the talk. If it wants to convince Malaysians that it is serious about reforms and that it respects the rights of Malaysians to free speech then Umno has to prove it. Talking alone is not enough. Unless you can demonstrate that you mean what you say then expect many voters to vote against you come the next general election.

That is all I wish to say to Umno. If Umno does not wish to listen that is their problem. Then expect the voters to show you what they think of your hypocrisy when they next go to the polls. And if the people vote against you don't get upset. You have only yourself to blame.

 

Apa sebab pergi cari pasal?

Posted: 21 Sep 2012 06:31 PM PDT

You can find almost anything in this world if you go looking for it and if you know where to find them. There are even gay parties, wife-swapping parties, orgies, 'adult' entertainment centres, nudist colonies, singles resorts, etc. You name it; you can find it -- even sex with cows and goats if that is what turns you on.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Israel won't force Google to block anti-Muslim video

Court rejects MK Talab el-Sana's petition to prevent the controversial film from being available to people in Israel via the Internet • Court: Those who may be offended by it should not look for it on the Internet.

(Israel Hayom) - The Jerusalem District Court rejected a petition by MK Talab el-Sana (Ra'am-Ta'al) on Thursday requesting that the controversial film, 'Innocence of Muslims', produced in the U.S., be made inaccessible to people in Israel through the Internet. Judge Miriam Mizrahi decided to refrain from issuing an order to restrict access to the film through the YouTube website.

El-Sana, together with other Israeli-Arab political and religious leaders, requested that the YouTube page featuring the film be shut down, or, alternatively, that the page be blocked from access throughout the country.

Although the petitioners asked for an urgent hearing on the matter so that the court could issue a temporary order to prevent the film from being accessible on the Internet, Mizrahi said in her ruling that those who thought they would be offended by viewing the film should not search for it on the Internet. "Whoever does not look for the film will not find it, so the public who would be offended by the film can avoid seeing it," Mizrahi said.

The court is scheduled to continue to discuss the matter on Oct. 15, after both sides submit their detailed legal explanations. The petitioners, through attorney Kais Nasser, claimed, "The movie is extremely offensive, desecrates the image of the Prophet Muhammad in a racist manner, tramples his sanctity and name, and offends the honour and faith of more than a billion Muslims throughout the world and more than a million Muslims who are citizens of Israel."

(READ MORE HERE)

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

When my wife and I first moved into our new home in Manchester three years ago, on Saturdays and/or Sundays people from the local church would come knocking on our door to talk to us about Jesus Christ. Most times I would be in my office working so my wife goes to answer the door.

My wife would stand there patiently as they spoke to her about Jesus. They would also invite her to the local church to meet the community. After their 'ceramah' they would leave pamphlets and booklets with her before they left. My wife would just place the material on the sideboard and later would dump them in the dustbin together with the other 'junk mail' that goes out with the Thursday rubbish collection.

Different people would come at different times and sometimes they would ask what religion we profess. My wife would reply that we are Muslims and they were usually very pleased to hear that. This probably made their 'mission' more interesting and challenging.

They don't come around that much nowadays, at least not weekly any longer like before. I suppose they have given up on us as a 'lost cause'.

Nevertheless, my wife (and I as well whenever I happen to be the one answering the door) is never rude to these Christian evangelists. We always smile -- and maintain the smile throughout even when they stand on our doorstep for half an hour -- and politely give them our full attention. We never show that we are impatient for them to leave. We will allow them to finish what they want to say and leave when they are ready to leave. Until then we stand there and play the perfect host and make sure they are not uncomfortable about 'disturbing' us.

I sometimes even flip though the pamphlets and booklets before I throw them into the dustbin. I feel guilty about throwing them away without reading them and therefore waste their effort and money in their attempt to convert us to the way of Christ. They left them so that we will read them -- so I do just that, I read them. Hence at least that part of their mission succeeds although they failed to get us to go to church.

I just hope that at least that small effort of ours at being nice, hospitable and friendly managed to give these Christian evangelists the impression that not all Muslims run berserk and will foam at the mouth when you try to preach Christianity to them. I consider this my greatest jihad for Islam -- showing Christians that Muslims can be nice, hospitable and friendly.

They never tried to tell us that Islam is bad or is the wrong religion. They just focused on talking about Christianity and to tell us that Jesus loves us and is our saviour and all that. They also tried to put across to us that they love us as well and is why they come to our door every week to talk to us. And I also showed them that I love them and appreciate the trouble they took to come to speak to us.

I could, of course, have screamed at them to leave us alone. I could also have told them that we are Muslims and hence are not interested to hear what they have to say about Christianity or Christ. But that would be downright rude and unfriendly even though that would be within our rights to do so. After all, they are disturbing us very early on a Sunday or Saturday morning so I have every right to tell them off. At the very least I could have just not opened the door and after a while they would have gone away.

But why disappoint them? Why make them feel like they have wasted their time? Why make them feel unwelcome by not opening the door when they clearly know we are at home? Make them feel welcome and let them go home happy that they managed to talk to a Muslim about Christianity and Christ.

I know most Muslims reading this will be appalled. They would probably think that my imam (faith) is very weak. How can week after week I layan (entertain) Christian evangelists who are trying to convert me to Christianity?

Well, I am not a 'regular' Muslim. If you can't accept me for what I am then that is your problem, not mine. You lead your life the way you want to lead your life and leave me to lead my life the way I want to. That is the long and short of it all.

I want to now talk about that news item from Israel above. What the Israeli court said regarding that controversial movie is very sensible.  "Those who may be offended by it should not look for it on the Internet. Whoever does not look for the film will not find it, so the public who would be offended by the film can avoid seeing it."

You may have heard or read that there is a trailer of an anti-Islam movie on the Internet, YouTube in particular. But did they come to your door to give you a copy of that movie? Did they force you to sit down and watch that movie? Are you obligated to watch that movie?

You heard or read about it. Then you went looking for it. And then you found it. After that you get angry and run berserk. Apa ni? Apa sebab pergi cari pasal? You go looking for it and then you get upset.

There are many things out there. There are brothels and prostitutes (plus transvestites) walking on the streets and hanging around seedy back lanes and side alleys. There are massage parlours that throw in sex or a hand job/blow job for an extra fee. There are bars, pubs, clubs, etc., where you can go to get drunk plus to pick up girls, boys, lady boys and whatever may turn you on. There are casinos, gambling dens and gaming outlets where you can gamble.

You can find almost anything in this world if you go looking for it and if you know where to find them. There are even gay parties, wife-swapping parties, orgies, 'adult' entertainment centres, nudist colonies, singles resorts, etc. You name it; you can find it -- even sex with cows and goats if that is what turns you on.

So don't go looking for it. And if you go looking for it and find it, don't go and get upset about it. Now, if they come to your home and knock on your door to offer you these 'services', then by all means get upset. Scream, rant and rave if you want since they came to your home to disturb you.

But even then, if they came to my home and knocked on my door I would not get upset. I would either politely refuse them, tell them not to disturb me again, or just not open my door. But I would not bother to run amok, even if they came to my door.

And if they did not come to my door why the hell would I want to go and seek them out and then get upset?

 

Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

Posted: 20 Sep 2012 03:43 PM PDT

Cina sudah kurang ajar. Cina perlu diajar. Cina sudah lupa 13 Mei. Ini negara Melayu. Agama Malaysia ialah Islam. Sekiranya Cina tak boleh terima ini maka mereka boleh keluar dari Malaysia.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

"It appears like the opposition is not consistent with its stand regarding freedom of speech. When we say something they don't like they whack us. They call us all sorts of foul names. They call us a traitor and turncoat. They call us a Trojan horse." -- RPK.

Whacking, calling foul name, and calling traitor/turncoat might be inflammatory, but they are still covered by freedom of expression under USA 1st Amendment and also re-affirmed by later ruling of US Supreme Court. Alas, we are not USA. Despite we are not USA, we should still appreciate how the freedom of expression can and have prevented monopoly of those in powerful position. How to prevent the over-concentration of power (i.e. the hallmark of dictator)? One of the answers is to protect the right of expression of every citizen; the right must include whacking, calling foul name, and other inflammatory remarks. The freedom of expression includes the right to say stupid things and being bias to "your team". It is that "pain" of freedom of expression that allows powerful counter-weight to those in power position. If we cannot take that "pain" or sacrifice, we can kiss goodbye to democracy. 

"I remember when Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim expressed his personal view and he was whacked kau-kau for that. Does not Tunku Aziz also have a right to his personal view just like Ngeh?" -- RPK.

So is the right of those who whack Tunku Aziz kau-kau. We should stop confuse people about the right of freedom of expression. Whacking someone kau-kau might be bad manners and even politically stupid, but it has not violated the right of Tunku Aziz.

I think I can understand RPK whacking DAP and Pakatan Rakyat asking them to behave. But, confusing people on what is freedom of expression is a great "sin" -- as far as nurturing nascent democracy is concerned. (Comment by Shiou in my article 'How the knife cuts both ways').

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

That was what Shiou commented in my article 'How the knife cuts both ways'. Basically, Shiou is of the opinion that freedom of expression means 'no holds barred', anything goes, there are no limits or boundaries to what one can say.

Let's say I buy that. Let's say I go along with what Shiou says -- that freedom of expression means 'no holds barred', anything goes, there are no limits or boundaries to what one can say.

But then, in the same breath, Shiou contradicts himself/herself and concludes that confusing people on what is freedom of expression is a great sin. If Shiou is a propagator of absolute freedom of expression with no limits or boundaries, then how can he/she infer that confusing people is a great sin? There are no sins under absolute freedom of expression, going by Shiou's argument.

Would not whatever I say, even if it is my intention to confuse people, be my freedom of expression? How can Shiou regard a statement meant to confuse people as a great sin? There is no such thing as a sin as far as absolute freedom of expression goes. Everything is fair game -- even a lie, misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, distortions, innuendoes, and whatnot. All are kosher. They all come under freedom of expression if we use Shiou's interpretation of no limit to freedom of expression.

Now look at this photograph.

And then read the heading of my article: Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

I am relating my heading to the photograph above. To Shiou, this Chinese chap is merely expressing himself under his right of freedom of expression by stepping on the photograph of the Prime Minister. I, too, am expressing myself under my right of freedom of expression by saying, "Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?"

Am I making a racist statement? Am I instigating racial hatred? Is what I am doing dangerous considering that racism in Malaysia has reached a dangerous level never seen before since May 1969?

As far as I am concerned I am just applying Shiou's standards and yardstick of freedom of expression. Under your right of freedom of expression there should be no limits or boundary. Anything goes. Everything is kosher. And I do not see that Chinese chap who is stepping on the Prime Minister's photograph as him exercising his freedom of expression. I see it as Chinese arrogance and a challenge to the Malays (cabaran kepada Melayu). Hence I say: Cina sudah kurang ajar! Dah lupa 13 Mei ke?

Maybe what I am doing is dangerous. Maybe what I am doing may trigger racial discord. It may even expose Malaysia to the danger of racial conflict and violence. But that is not important. What is important is that I am expressing my view under my right of freedom of expression. What I am doing may result in deaths, maybe even hundreds or thousands of deaths. But can we allow that possibility to stand in the way of freedom of expression?

Cina sudah kurang ajar. Cina perlu diajar. Cina sudah lupa 13 Mei. Ini negara Melayu. Agama Malaysia ialah Islam. Sekiranya Cina tak boleh terima ini maka mereka boleh keluar dari Malaysia.

Yes, that statement, too, is covered under my right of absolute freedom of expression. So how can you say it is malicious, seditious, vicious and mischievous? Under freedom of expression, as Shiou says, there are no limits. There are no boundaries. Everything goes. All is kosher.

 

Talk is cheap

Posted: 18 Sep 2012 04:33 PM PDT

And what I mean is that while we talk about struggle and sacrifice in the interest of seeing change, very few are prepared to compromise and sacrifice for the sake of this change. Hence all this talk of struggle, sacrifice and change is mere idle talk that is going to lead to nowhere.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Kalau takut pada risiko, usah bicara tentang perjuangan.

Kalau takut dipukul ombak, jangan berumah di tepi pantai.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

There is a reason why Muslims fast for 30 days during the month of Ramadhan. It is to teach, train and condition yourself to endure pain and suffering, resist temptation and lust, and to enter into a mental state of tolerance and patience. Many Muslims who seldom pray or do not pray at all would still fast. You rejoice when the month of Ramadhan arrives and you gladly deny your body its desires. In short, you abstain from worldly needs and distractions.

Muslims also have to pray five times a day. And to be able to pray five times a day on a very rigid schedule means you must also have discipline. You must also live with inconvenience because no matter whether you are travelling on a journey or locked in a meeting you must always find the time to pray, even when it is not really convenient to do so. Even if you are sick in bed you will wake up to pray and then go back to sleep.

Hence facing and tolerating inconvenience is a daily routine for you and you endure it not with a sigh of regret but with a willing heart and joy. You look forward to your prayers, as you do your fasting.

Humans have needs and urges. Humans have passion and emotion. Humans suffer thirst and hunger. Humans suffer vanity, ego, anger, lust, fear, envy, greed, jealousy, and much more. But all these need to be suppressed. There are only two things you are allowed to feel: patience and tolerance. Everything else need to be set aside.

Considering that these are the objectives and ideals of fasting and praying five times a day, those who comply to these tenets or rituals should have been taught, trained and conditioned to become marvellous human beings. If by the time you are, say, 30, and you have been praying five times a day and fasting for 30 days every year since you were in standard one, you would have been programmed to smile under duress and under any provocative situation.

This, however, does not appear to be so. In spite of all that training, Muslims still have a very short fuse and will fly off the handle at the slightest provocation. They will become very violent and will easily resort to physical action when rubbed the wrong way, however mild that provocation may be. Muslims give the impression that they are a time bomb just waiting to explode.

This is the greatest contradiction you will find in Muslims. Their lips would constantly utter words such as berjaung (struggle), korban (sacrifice), sabar (patience cum tolerance), etc. But it is only lip service. It is not something in their hearts. It makes you wonder whether their prayers and fasting have done any good. Would they have been better off smoking marijuana and doing meditation? At least those who do would preach love, tolerance and peace although they may not believe in Allah or Prophet Muhammad.

The 'turn the other cheek' doctrine is nonexistent for most Muslims. They do not even practice the concept of 'an eye for an eye'. It is more like 'your whole head for an eye' dogma.

Hence we are seeing the violent reaction all over the world at what Muslims perceive as an insult to Prophet Muhammad. The irony of this whole thing is that those who are punished are not really the culprits. We punish other people for something someone else did. If an Indonesian robs us in Bangsar we bomb Jakarta although that particular Indonesian who robbed us may be living in Petaling Jaya.

Malays/Muslims are not the only ones who demonstrate hypocrisy, though. Chinese, Indians, natives of East Malaysia, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, etc., are also the same. They talk about struggle and sacrifice. But struggle and sacrifice are what they expect others to do. They themselves would not do all this.

They understand that struggle and sacrifice work hand-in-glove. One can't exist without the other. But are they prepared to endure one for the sake of the other? Very few Malaysians would although they accuse others of violating this basic principle of the cause.

Okay, we want change. We want to see the end of Barisan Nasional rule. We want to see a new government. And we want Pakatan Rakyat to be that new government.

I can buy that. I have no problems with that. I am prepared to struggle for that. I am even prepared to sacrifice for that. But are you? Are you people who are screaming and shouting about change prepared to also struggle and sacrifice to see this change happen? Or do you want others to do the struggling and sacrificing so that you can be spared this inconvenience?

Actually, the majority of you are all talk. Mere hot air. Very few of you are prepared to struggle and sacrifice. You talk about struggle and sacrifice, no doubt. But you talk about it in the context of what you expect others to do, not what you are prepared to do.

And most of you will deny this. And you will get very angry if I were to suggest this. You are noble and sincere and how dare I accuse you otherwise? But most of you are actually a load of bullshit. And to make matters worse you do not even realise you are a load of bullshit.

So you are noble and sincere, are you? You are prepared to struggle and sacrifice, are you? You want to see change, do you? Well, let's see.

Are the Malays prepared to drop the Islamic State and Hudud agenda in favour of a Secular State for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the non-Malays prepared to embrace the Islamic State and Hudud agenda for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the Chinese prepared to drop their Chinese school and mother-tongue education agenda in favour of national schools for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the Indians prepared to drop their Hindu agenda for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the East Malaysians prepared to drop the 18/20-Point Agreements and accept federalisation for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the Malays prepared to drop the New Economic Policy in favour of meritocracy for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the non-Malays prepared to embrace the New Economic Policy for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the Malays prepared to drop the Monarchy in favour of a Republic for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Are the Malays prepared to accept a woman or non-Malay Prime Minister for the sake of change if that is the only way to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with Pakatan Rakyat?

Rest assured the above are but a few examples. My list can go on and on if you wish to include the rights of gays, conversion of Muslims to other religions, Bibles in Bahasa Malaysia, English as the language of the Federation, and so much more. But I trust even these few examples demonstrate what I mean.

And what I mean is that while we talk about struggle and sacrifice in the interest of seeing change, very few are prepared to compromise and sacrifice for the sake of this change. Hence all this talk of struggle, sacrifice and change is mere idle talk that is going to lead to nowhere.

And you got the bloody cheek to scream at me for not being true to the cause and for refusing to join the fight for change? How can you expect me to join a group that comprise of a whole bunch of hypocrites?

 

Siege mentality and conditioning of the mind

Posted: 16 Sep 2012 05:03 PM PDT

Unless we stop indoctrinating or brainwashing Muslim children we are never going to solve the problem. Muslims will always view any act as an attack against Islam that requires a hostile and violent response. When you train dogs to attack they will attack. When you train children, who are more intelligent than dogs, that violence is the only legitimate and appropriate response against the 'enemies of Islam', then expect that to happen.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Tantawi, motivasi dan akhlak perjuangan

Hidup di landasan perjuangan Islam ini tidak mudah. Hakikatnya, tiada siapa kata perjuangan Islam ini mudah. Dengan berbekalkan ketaqwaan dan keimanan pada Allah, ramai yang cuba menempuh perjuangan ini.

Namun, tanpa ketaqwaan dan keimanan kepada Allah yang kuat beserta kemahiran memotivasikan diri sendiri, ramai yang tersungkur.

Ramai yang menarik diri di pertengahan jalan.

Ramai yang terpengaruh dengan kesenangan duniawi, dan mengatakan kepada diri sendiri, ada orang lain yang bakal meneruskan perjuangan ini.

Ada pula yang menggunakan jalan terpesong untuk memperjuangkan agama Allah, yang akhirnya bukan dia saja yang tersungkur malah Islam terpalit dengan nama buruk akibat "perjuangan" beliau.

Ada ramai yang menyatakan mereka sedang memperjuangkan Islam. Namun, apabila ditanya apakah perjuangan Islam? Jawapan yang didengari cukup berbeza. (READ MORE HERE)

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

Nasrudin Hassan at Tantawi, the PAS youth leader, has just launched his new book called 'Catatan Seorang Pejuang' -- translated to 'Notes (or Diary) of a Fighter (or Warrior)'. The subtitle for that book is: 'No one said the Islamic struggle (or fight) is easy'.

Have you noticed that Muslims like using the word pejuang, berjuang or perjuangan together with the word Islam? Where you find the word Islam you will find the word pejuang, berjuang or perjuangan.

Perjuangan or berjuang means war, battle, struggle, fight, skirmish, scuffle, tussle, resist, wrestle, grapple, strive, labour, strain, toil, fight back, etc. Basically, it is a word that implies offence, not defence.

This is very important to note in trying to understand the mindset of Muslims -- Malays included, of course. Islam is seen as something that requires some sort of fighting or conflict. You can't be a Muslim unless you are prepared to enter into a conflict or engage in a struggle or fight.

Muslim kids learn the term perjuangan Islam long before they learn what Birkin handbags means. In fact, some Muslims like me learned what Birkin handbags (made by Hermès) meant only by the time we were past 60. But at six we already knew about perjuangan Islam.

Muslims are indoctrinated and conditioned at a very early, impressionable and tender age that Islam equates to conflict. They develop a siege mentality and are made to believe that Islam is consistently under attack and hence every Muslim needs to be a soldier -- just like every Christian was a 'soldier of Christ' 500 years or more ago.

In short, Muslims are perpetually on 'war mode'. And this is because they have been brainwashed into believing that Islam is 'at war'. Hence any criticism (or perceived insult) of Islam is seen as an act of war. And any act of war requires a hostile and physical response. Hence, also, any retaliation involving violence is seen as a legitimate and appropriate response.

When you train dogs to attack in response to just one word, 'attack', these highly trained dogs would attack when commanded to do so. Even animals can be conditioned to take someone's life at a mere one-word command. What would you expect, therefore, from more intelligent mammals that have been trained for 20 or 30 years that we are at war and that our religion is under siege and when under attack we need to retaliate?

The fact that the PAS youth leader writes a book with such a title gives you a pretty good idea about what flows through his mind. (To be fair, though, I have not yet read the contents of the book so I am 'judging the book by the cover', so to speak).

Nevertheless, the title of the book reflects the conditioning or indoctrination that the writer has received. And books such as these will in turn condition or indoctrinate other Muslims. Hence we will have a whole Muslim community (Ummah) that builds its foundation of Islamic values on the basis that Islam is perpetually on war mode and every act is perceived as a coordinated conspiracy against Islam.

It is, therefore, very difficult to find Muslims who are 'cool' about what they perceive as a criticism of Islam (I emphasis the word 'perceive'). Muslims are always 'hot'. In fact, every criticism, never mind how mild, is perceived as an insult. And even if you criticise the conduct of Muslims it is seen as a criticism of the religion itself and of the Prophet Muhammad.

Nasrudin Hassan at Tantawi is the PAS youth leader. And he is the PAS youth leader because there are many party members who support him. If not he would not be able to become the party youth leader. That means there are many more people who think like him. If not they would not have voted for him.

Hence Nasrudin Hassan at Tantawi is not alone or in the minority. And the fact that his book is being well received is further proof that many others think just like him.

Unless we stop indoctrinating or brainwashing Muslim children we are never going to solve the problem. Muslims will always view any act as an attack against Islam that requires a hostile and violent response. When you train dogs to attack they will attack. When you train children, who are more intelligent than dogs, that violence is the only legitimate and appropriate response against the 'enemies of Islam', then expect that to happen.

Now, after writing this article, do you really think I can still go back to Malaysia?

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

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


Migrants, church may end BN’s Borneo vote bank

Posted: 07 Oct 2012 12:21 PM PDT

Sabah Christians walk during a procession ahead of Sunday Mass to celebrate Malaysia Day in Tambunan on September 16, 2012. With a general election due within seven months, the ruling BN is banking on Sabah and Sarawak state to prolong its 55-year grip on power. — Reuters pic
(The Malaysian Insider) - Housewife Fawziah Abdul wants to thank former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for making her a citizen 10 years after she illegally slipped into Borneo from the southern Philippines in search of a better life.

The 50-year-old lives on the outskirts of Kota Kinabalu, the capital of Sabah, where her tin-roofed shack jostles for space with more than 1,000 others in a slum where children play beside heaps of rubbish.

She is hopeful that her three children will get a new home and identity cards if she votes for the government again.

With a general election due within seven months, the 13-party ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition is banking on Sabah and neighbouring Sarawak to prolong its 55-year grip on power.

But its support in the two Borneo states, which account for a quarter of Parliament seats, is showing signs of slipping.

Residents of Pulau Gaya's water village, who are mostly Filipino migrants, gather outside their houses on the sea outside Kota Kinabalu on September 17, 2012. — Reuters pic
A large presence of Muslim immigrants, like Fawziah, has fuelled complaints of government discrimination against Christians who have also been a bedrock of government support.

Fawziah said she was a beneficiary of a secret plan said to have been approved by Dr Mahathir that has helped fuel a five-fold surge in Sabah's population since the 1970s and turned it into a vote bank for the ruling coalition.

"I am part of Project Mahathir," she said, referring to the plan. "I was told to turn up at an office with two photographs and some money," added Fawziah, who showed her identity card that lists her as a Sabah-born citizen.

Without support in the two eastern states, the ruling coalition would have lost power in the last general election, in 2008, when a resurgent opposition won a majority of votes on Peninsular Malaysia. Now that support looks fragile.

Residents of Sabah complain about competition from Filipino and Indonesian migrants for jobs in the oil and gas-rich region, whose revenues are mostly channelled to the federal government and where one in five people lives on less than US$1 (RM3.10) a day.

Christians, mostly members of indigenous groups such as the Kadazandusun in Sabah and the Dayaks and Ibans in Sarawak, once made up nearly half of Sabah's population but now form less than a third of its 3.2 million people.

But they can still give a potentially vital boost to the opposition, which won a majority of votes in mainland Malaysia in 2008 but only got three of 56 seats in Sabah and Sarawak.

FLEXING POLITICAL MUSCLES

The election is expected to be the closest in the former British colony's history after the coalition lost its two-thirds majority for the first time in 2008.

This is partly due to Christian, Buddhist and Hindu minorities in the mostly Muslim country abandoning the coalition, complaining of discrimination over issues such as the airing of Islamic programmes on state television.

Arnold Puyok, a political scientist at Universiti Teknologi Mara Sabah, says the frustration could translate into votes for the opposition led by Dr Mahathir's former deputy, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, which could pick up at least 10 seats out of 25 in Sabah.

Opposition strategists say they need to win an extra 10 seats each in Sabah, Sarawak and mainland Malaysia to win the election with a simple majority of 112 seats.

The opposition — a coalition of Borneo parties and a mainland alliance that campaigns for greater transparency — won 15 seats from the ruling bloc in Sarawak state elections for its best showing in 24 years. It got votes from indigenous Christians as well as from the ethnic Chinese minority.

As Christian frustration grows over Muslim migrants, churches are becoming more vocal. Malaysia's largest evangelical group held a 40 day-fast last month, which included prayers for the resolution of what they see as the immigrant problem.

A Sabah Christian reads from a prayer book with the Arabic word 'Allah' in reference to God, at a church in Tambunan on September 16, 2012. — Reuters pic
The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship also held prayer meetings across the country for Malaysia Day on September 16 — a holiday marking Sabah and Sarawak's entry into Malaysia 49 years ago. The Borneo states agreed to join Malaysia on condition that religious freedom as well as the protection of native lands and cultures were guaranteed.

"There are quite a few unhappy Sabah people. Sabahans do not usually show it openly, they are doing it through prayer," Stephanie Rainier, a Kadazandusun among 7,000 worshippers at a stadium in Kota Kinabalu, said of people's frustration.

"They are taking over businesses. They are everywhere," she said of migrants.

Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/migrants-church-may-end-bns-borneo-vote-bank/

Beyond the fight to be Lembah Pantai MP

Posted: 07 Oct 2012 12:20 PM PDT

The next general election is expected to be the closest fight to form the new Malaysian government. And several seats across the nation are likely to be heated battles with the slimmest of majorities. The Malaysian Insider takes a look at some of these hot seats in what will be an intense election for control of Malaysia. 

Joan Lau, The Malaysian Insider

Bangsar Baru with its leafy affluent neighbourhoods and trendy cafes serving artisanal coffee is a far cry from Kampung Kerinchi and Pantai Dalam where the residents are more accustomed to teh tarik and sup ekor. Yet these two areas are part of the federal constituency of Lembah Pantai, one of the next general election's hot seats. 

The incumbent is PKR's Nurul Izzah Anwar, the daughter of Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. She is touted to be the future opposition leader so there is much talk in Barisan Nasional (BN) circles that it is important she be "taken down." To be denied re-election to the seat she won as a rank novice back in 2008.

Her opponent — even though it is still unofficial — is Raja Datuk Nong Chik Zainal Abidin, who is the federal territories and urban well-being minister. Although Raja Nong Chik, 59, an accountant, is more well-known in the corporate scene than the political arena, he has taken to his role as Lembah Pantai challenger rather well with a mix of on-the-ground events and social media.

There is the perennial accusation of phantom voters and a suspicion that some 14,000 Umno members have been relocated to Lembah Pantai from bordering seats of course. All this will purportedly bump up the number of votes the BN candidate — whoever it is — will receive of course. 

Nurul Izzah has found it a tough to carry out events and hold ceramahs within her own constituency.
After all, Nurul Izzah only won by a 2,895-vote majority in 2008 against the then-incumbent BN's Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, who won previously with a huge majority of 15,288 votes.

Still, Nurul Izzah, 31, has found it a hard slog trying to carry out events and hold ceramahs within her own constituency. "Yes, it is practically impossible for the current Lembah Pantai MP to use any Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) facilities," said one of her aides, referring to Kuala Lumpur City Hall. "We are stonewalled."

Getting permits for her events has been particularly difficult in the Kampung Kerinchi and Pantai Dalam areas. Very often Nurul Izzah has had to cancel ceramahs planned for the People's Housing Project flats neighbourhood and hold them in private homes, using their compounds, instead.

"Yes, her programmes have been blocked many times. Sometimes directly, others indirectly," said another aide. "We've been told that those who host her programmes — especially those in the low-cost housing area — are often harassed by DBKL or other agencies afterwards."

The stonewalling takes on various forms: she has been blocked from presenting aid to students at a school in Pantai Dalam; not permitted to distribute dates and her MP newsletter at the Masjid Saidina Abu Bakar As Siddiq in Bangsar during Ramadan (she had to retreat to a nearby carpark) and so on. 

The more affluent middle-class component of Lembah Pantai — Bangsar, Bukit Travers and Pantai Baru — is home to the chattering masses. These are well-educated, highly opinionated Malaysians who used to be content to just chatter and complain. But in the past two years, many of them have walked their talk... attending both Coalition for Free and Fair Election (Bersih) rallies, for example. 

Raja Datuk Nong Chik is expected to be the BN candidate for Lembah Pantai.
At the last Bersih rally, the Orchid Room at Lake Club — that bastion of senior civil servants, lawyers and corporate heads — was filled with yellow T-shirt-wearing members who were having a refreshing drink after a hot and thirsty outing at the rally. Many of these people are residents of the previously mentioned Bangsar, Bukit Travers and Pantai Baru areas.

They will very likely vote for the incumbent but across at the land of low-cost flats and blue-collar workers, the largesse a BN candidate will very likely bring may just be too tempting. 

Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/beyond-the-fight-to-be-lembah-pantai-mp/

Exposed! Soros RM120m for regime change devils

Posted: 07 Oct 2012 12:17 PM PDT


Devilry afoot in the serious business of regime change

Brothers, don't get your scarves in a twist, but this regime change business is getting serious, really serious. Did you know that George Soros has now managed to snare Manchester United into his global network of regime change NGOs?

uppercaise

You know, of course, that Manchester United is an NGO, a non-governmental organisation?

Did you know that Manchester United is registered as a company?

Did you know that it has received billions in foreign funds?

Did you know that George Soros personally funded a RM120mil investment in this NGO, company and club?

That's how seriously he takes this business of regime change.

You should show more concern. The devil himself aka George has been behind your devilry on football nights. (Or you could tell your wife "Soros made me do it".)

No less than Mahathir Mohd Mudahlupa and the Malaysian government say so. Mahathir, of course, is always right and the Malaysian government never wrong. Don't you know that Mahathir can foretell the future with uncanny accuracy? And if the future gives him the devil's own time, it's always because of George Soros.

Feeling poorly? Take two scandals and blame George

George Soros is also the man who, they say, single-handedly toppled half a dozen countries around the world, almost all located somewhere around North Africa.

Soros must have done all this, you know?

They say he installed puppet regimes in all those countries, too.

Stop it fools: you're just puppets of Soros

Man Utd a serious player in regime change

The latest news about Man Utd shows you the depths of this man's wickedness. He will stop at nothing to get his way.

Many regimes toppled by Man Utd

Manchester United are serious players in the regime change business. They have been relentless. One after another, regimes have fallen at their feet: among these the Chelsea regime of a Russian; the Arsenal regime of a Frenchman; and the Liverpool regimes of a Scotsman and an Italian. All foreigners, you see.

Puppet regimes installed by Man Utd

Man Utd, just like Soros, are also reputed to have installed their own puppet regimes, headed by shadowy creatures with names such as Mark Halsey, Howard Webb and Mike Riley.

Reds gunning for Light Blues

Now the devils have a new target: they aim to topple the regime of the Light Blues at the other end of town. This is really serious. (That's why they call it the Premier league, see?)

No wonder George Soros pumped in US$40mil (RM122mil) in August. It looks like he's taking a little flutter on the Reds to topple the regime of the Light Blues.

Read more at: uppercaise.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/devils-in-regime-change

 

Britain's brutal rule in Kenya on the docks

Posted: 07 Oct 2012 12:10 PM PDT

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/kent1.jpg

(Al Jazeera) - Also closely following McCombe's decision were Indians, Malaysians, Cypriots, and Guyanese - others who lived and suffered under British rule. Cases have been filed across the former British empire's vast expanse seeking reparations for colonial-era abuses.

The British colonial officers ordered the Kenyans off the crowded bus, hunting for insurgents who had brazenly challenged the empire's rule.

It was just before Christmas in 1957. Mbithuka Kimweli was travelling with his wife Naomi and their three young children. The officers demanded to know his involvement with the "Mau Mau" anti-colonial movement.

They separated Naomi from the children, blindfolded and beat her, then raped her with a glass bottle. Nearby, they castrated her husband with a pair of pliers.

"I denied any knowledge of the Mau Mau, yet they destroyed me," Mbithuka Kimweli says.

The abuses were part of a systematic campaign of torture conducted by the British to suppress the Mau Mau uprising in the 1950s and early '60s. The anti-British group had launched a guerrilla war against British settlers and Kenyan loyalists from the forests of central Kenya.

The panicked colonial administration detained more than one million people, most of whom, like the Kimwelis, had nothing to do with Mau Mau. Some remained incarcerated for as long as 10 years.

According to the Kenya Human Rights Commission, about 90,000 people were executed, tortured, or maimed during the rebellion.

" These are the marks left by the clamps they used to torture us...When I said I hadn't taken an oath (to the Mau Mau rebels), they would squeeze the clamps tighter together."

- Mbithuka Kimweli

Naomi Kimweli did not think, as she lay for weeks in King George hospital in Nairobi, that the men who tortured her and her husband would ever be held accountable.

But 55 years later, justice will now be served. Justice Richard McCombe ruled Friday in London that the British government's Foreign and Common Wealth Office must answer for crimes committed more than half a century ago in Kenya.

In Nairobi, elderly Kenyans - many the victims of torture under British rule - waited anxiously at the Kenya Human Rights Commission for the verdict. George Morara, the commission's officer in charge of the case, received the call from London.

"Temeshinda kesi yetu!" Morara excitedly told the crowd in Kiswahili, a Swahili language. "We have won our case."

The elderly Mau Mau jumped and danced in age-defying ways.

Also closely following McCombe's decision were Indians, Malaysians, Cypriots, and Guyanese - others who lived and suffered under British rule. Cases have been filed across the former British empire's vast expanse seeking reparations for colonial-era abuses.

Colonial crimes

Sitting in the dusty courtyard outside his home in rural Kenya, Mbithuka Kimweli lifted up one leg of his trousers. Underneath, his skin is badly scarred.

"These are the marks left by the clamps they used to torture us," he says. "When I said I hadn't taken an oath (to the Mau Mau rebels), they would squeeze the clamps tighter together."
 
As the British empire retreated from its African colonial possession in 1963, the administrators incinerated most of the incriminating records. The new Kenyan government, meanwhile, sidelined the Mau Mau, overlooking their role in the independence struggle and painting the group as "terrorists".

Naomi Kimweli sits at a table on the south bank of the River Thames leafing through an Olympics pamphlet. It is just after 5pm and Londoners are gathering for a glass of Pimms and some rare sunshine.

 
 

Naomi and three other elderly Kenyan torture victims spent two weeks at the Royal Courts of Justice in July 2012. For six hours a day they watched men and women in powdered wigs read aloud evidence of their rapes and castrations in a language they could not understand.

In 2003, Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki lifted the 40-year-old ban on the Mau Mau, ending their political marginalisation. About the same time, historians researching the Mau Mau uprising gained access to secret colonial archives detailing the extent to which the colonial authorities systematically used torture to suppress the rebel movement.

The old horror stories of the Kimwelis and thousands of other Kenyans found new legal footing. Thus began the legal battle that would challenge the impunity of empire.

"We are not talking about phantoms," said Morara of the Kenyan Human Rights Commission. "We are talking about real men and women who exist and still bear scars."

Morara interviewed hundreds of torture survivors before selecting five claimants to sue the Foreign Office, seeking both a formal apology and reparations. Since the filing of the lawsuit in 2009, one claimant has passed away and another has fallen ill.

The first hearing in July of 2011 ended in Mau Mau's favour.

"The claimants have arguable cases in law and on the facts as presently known, that there was such systematic torture and the UK government is so liable," declared McCombe.   

During the second hearing last July, the Foreign Office faced growing piles of evidence - oral testimony, medical records, and diplomatic wires from London. In their opening statements, lawyers representing the British government admitted torture had occurred.

However, the Foreign Office fought to ensure that moral responsibility did not become financial. Its lawyers claimed too much time had passed and that most of the defendants are now dead. They also argued that the Kenyan government, as a sovereign successor to the colonial one, should face the lawsuit.

"We consider these as acts of torture, and crimes against humanity are not time bound," Morara said, countering the Foreign Office's argument.  

Read more at: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/10/201210610143126968.html

Muhyiddin supporters can't wait for the PM's exit

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 08:58 PM PDT

IT'S TOFFEE'S TURN

Muhyiddin Yassin's supporters have finally come out to stake the claim for their chief as the next PM of Malaysia, and it is not really surprising as so many things have gone weirdly wrong with Najib's running of the country, the party, and most of all the elections campaign, that most of the people in the BN seem to be sure that with Najib at the helm the BN will suffer an agonising and  humiliating defeat when he calls for elections this time around.

To Muhyiddin, and  in fact the majority at UMNO, Najib has and is taking  the party in the wrong direction, he has not asserted his authority sufficiently to maim the opposition, to them he does not have enough, "fire in the belly" to win the elections they way his predecessors did.

Najib's deputy has scarce respect for him,  he has displayed that time and again by deliberately contradicting  so many directives of Najib's, as one observer noticed,  "the other so called "heavyweights" in UMNO - Nazri, Rais Yatim, Khairy,  and even the likes of Sharizat seem to leaning towards Muhyiddin almost to say that there is this general feel in UMNO that Najib  has to go."

Many in UMNO see Najib today as excess baggage and they want him out, he is causing too much discontent amongst the Malays in Johor claim. They are worried that the Pakatan Rakyat is fast gaining a foothold in some major parts of Johor and many within the inner circles have conceded that this time around they may lose Negeri Sembilan and Trengganu  too.

Instead of  building on UMNO's  strengths, he has opted to go all out to win back Penang, Selangor and Perak which they managed to snatch back and this is being done to the detriment of Negeri and Johor says the UMNO leadership in both these states. 

One UMNO division leader in Johor is openly asking for Najib's ouster as he thinks if they wait till after the elections it may be too late and if the BN loses this elections it will never recover from it in the near future.


He says,  "there is so much to reveal about the inner workings of UMNO that the next generations of Malays will not want to trust them anymore, and when Pakatan wins they will reveal all, that is how serious the situation is," notice his choice of words, "when Pakatan wins" is that an accepted fact in Johor?

Go to Parit Sulong in Johor and see what the UMNO people are saying, there is scant regard for both Najib and Mahathir, there they say - "Mahahtir must shut up and get out, and Najib must learn how to keep his house in order, if he can't how can he be the leader," now that sentiment is seems to be spreading in Muar too, if you have the opportunity talk to the Malays there.

As one Malay observer in Muar put it, "in those days the Malays never openly took sides, the listened quietly and gave their support, there was hardly a whisper, today they are not quiet anymore they are not even whispering, they are shouting on top of their voices, 'we're  fed up!!!' we have been betrayed for so long and this party has not only betrayed us they have stolen from us and other Malaysians, we'd rather vote the DAP." 

The Malays led by UMNO  have long not trusted the DAP. UMNO successfully branded the DAP a Chinese chauvinistic Party, but the DAP went on building it's image, from the Rahim Tamby Chik case, to it's MP Ahmad Noor, and its exposure of all the UMNO corruption more and more Malays feel they have a better alternatives in the DAP than UMNO and the BN.

The general feeling down south is, those who still do not trust the DAP there are other alternatives - PKR and the PAS and the Malays are taking it and whilst this BN government is now really worried about this Malay vote many feel that they will lose more with Najib at the helm, whether this a Muhyiddin strategy or a fact is better known within UMNO as each faction will tell you.

With Sabah in shambles, with Sarawak who delivered during the last elections and on whose strength the government was formed - only to land up with a few meager inconspicuous ministerial positions the dynamics have changed, the East Malaysians want a leader from their midst, all parties this time around have to make that offering they must see one of their people capturing Putrajaya - becoming the PM of Malaysia and the demand is, "he is not to be from UMNO."

The Dayaks and the Kadazans will tell you that and this time around they mean business, but UMNO can't afford to give them that, because that will be political suicide for the UMNO leadership. To Pakatan Rakyat that is easy, it is no problem, and PAS and DAP will point  to the fact that Anwar readily became their choice for a leader without any infighting.

Right in January this year this blog spoke of the rift and Muhyiddin's behind the scene strategies to wrest power from Najib. "Live by the gun die by the gun," so the saying goes, Mahahthir removed Hussein Onn that way, Najib removed Abdullah and now his deputy is doing the same, it seems to be becoming the UMNO culture, however, has Muhyiddin got the clout to do it.

Muhyiddin has made no secret about his intentions, for every major strategy that Najib has put in place he - Muhyiddin has had a spanner in the works, he is Malay first and Malaysian next. Remember?

READ MORE HERE

 

Why Najib has to watch his back

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 06:02 PM PDT

 

Hence Najib's career all depends on how well he performs in the coming general election. Unless he can do better than what Abdullah Badawi did in March 2008 then he would have to go. Winning the general election is not good enough. He would have to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat does not win more than 80 Parliament seats and Selangor falls back to Barisan Nasional plus Barisan Nasional retains Perak.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

UMNO President and PM Abdullah announced on July 10 he will step down as Prime Minister in June 2010 and hand over power to his deputy Najib Tun Razak. He also will relinquish his positions as president of United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) and as chairman of the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition to Najib. The PM added that he would not lead BN into the next general election, which has to be held by May 2013, as at that time the country would have Najib as its new Prime Minister. At a press conference after chairing the UMNO Supreme Council and a briefing to around 1,000 UMNO grassroots leaders, Abdullah added that he would defend his UMNO President's post, with Najib as his running mate, at the national party elections scheduled in December.

Abdullah stated at the press conference that during the two-year transition process, he would consolidate and restore the people's confidence in UMNO and BN. The PM also stated that he chose the time frame to ensure he will be able to implement to the programs outlined in the Ninth Malaysian Plan (2006-2010), particularly hardcore poverty eradication and the judicial reforms he had earlier announced. The Prime Minister noted that he would give Najib more tasks and duties to prepare him for the leadership take-over and to face the next general election.

Abdullah told reporters that UMNO grassroots leaders at the July 10 closed-door briefing had welcomed his transition proposal. One Johor UMNO delegate who spoke with us said those attending the briefing applauded the Prime Minister's announcement as they had no choice, in the meeting at least, particularly given Najib's acceptance of the deal. The UMNO delegate clarified that the UMNO Supreme Council had not precluded a contest for the top two slots (a decision the Supreme Council has taken in certain past elections). It remained to be seen whether branches and divisions would fully support the transition deal, or endorse other nominations.

Standing beside Abdullah at the press conference, Najib expressed his gratitude and reiterated his loyalty to Abdullah. The DPM described the transition as in accordance with UMNO's tradition, and hoped that UMNO grassroots would accept and support the plan. One UMNO divisional leader told us that Najib knew that many grassroots leaders were not happy with the deal, but Najib had explained he had never challenged the party president before and was not about to change that record.

PM Abdullah supporters in the UMNO Supreme Council echoed Najib's view that the transition announcement was in keeping with UMNO party tradition. Party Information Chief Muhammad Taib stated that the plan was the best way to strengthen UMNO, particularly as history has shown that a contest for top posts will only divide the party. Youth Chief and Najib's cousin Hishammuddin and Deputy Youth Chief and Abdullah's ambitious son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin both stated that the transition plan will help unite the party and enable BN to concentrate on fulfilling its election promises. UMNO Women's Chief Rafidah said, with support for the transition plan, party leaders could focus on tackling the challenges arising out of current global economic problems.

Not all UMNO leaders rushed to endorse Abdullah's hand-over plan. Veteran UMNO leader Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who has been campaigning for the party presidency, described the transition plan as a "wrong move" and "unconstitutional". Razaleigh claimed he was confident of getting sufficient nominations to contest the presidency, as he would now attract the support of those who previously backed Najib to oust Abdullah. Three-term UMNO Vice President and Minister of International Trade and Industry, Muhyiddin Yassin, who aspires to the deputy president slot, voiced disappoint with the transition plan describing it to reporters as "too long".

Previously, Muhyiddin publicly urged Abdullah to step down sooner rather than later. Muhyiddin stated categorically that the decision on the transition should be left to UMNO members during the branch and division meetings, hinting that the deal may not be acceptable to the UMNO grassroots. Stirring the pot, Former Prime Minister Mahathir, now a strong critic of Abdullah, took exception to the transition plan and predicted that in the end Abdullah would not allow Najib to become Prime Minister. Writing in his blog, Dr. Mahathir said Najib would be purposefully weakened by damaging allegations, so much so that Najib would no longer appear suitable for office.

Some party activists took exception to the autocratic nature of Abdullah's pronouncement. John Pang, an advisor to Tengku Razaleigh, described Abdullah's plan as arrogant and undemocratic. He told us that the "feudal culture in UMNO in directing the grassroots" is destroying the party. In support of Razaleigh's statement (and political ambitions), Pang claimed that Najib's supporters were "rabidly" unhappy with the transition deal.

Abdullah's announcement was clearly timed to influence the UMNO grassroots immediately prior to party branch meetings, scheduled for 17 through August 24, which start the nomination process for the top UMNO posts. Following the party's unprecedented set-back in the March general elections, Abdullah has come under pressure to resign in favour of Najib or not seek party re-election in December. By confirming a hand-over date and Najib as his successor, Abdullah hopes to cement his re-election bid and head off any grassroots mobilisation in favour of challengers, including Najib, Muhyiddin, and Razaleigh.

Currently, Najib is in no position to reject Abdullah's proposal, given Najib's vulnerability to unconfirmed but widely believed allegations of his connection to the Altantuya murder case. The UMNO grassroots will have the opportunity in the next few weeks to signal whether they acquiesce to Abdullah's plan. The reaction of senior UMNO figures who lose in this deal, like Tengku Razaleigh and UMNO vice president Muhyiddin, also will be important to gauge.

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

That (above) was the confidential report that the United States Embassy in Kuala Lumpur sent to Washington on 11th July 2008. This report was regarding Umno's closed-door meeting to resolve the succession issue.

Basically, the then Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was not prepared to resign immediately. He wanted a 'transition period' where he would 'eventually' had over power to his Deputy, Najib Tun Razak.

The Umno grass-roots leaders plus the top leadership did not agree to this. And amongst those 'top leadership' of Umno who also did not agree to this was ex-Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who did not see the need for the delay. He wanted Abdullah Badawi out straight away.

Dr Mahathir wanted Najib to challenge Abdullah Badawi for the Umno Presidency, and hence that would mean for the Prime Ministership of Malaysia as well. Najib, however, refused to do that and even publicly stated that he supports Abdullah Badawi and is loyal to him.

This upset Dr Mahathir. But then Najib has never had to challenge anyone in the past. Even his post of Umno Youth Leader was handed to him on a silver platter -- by no other than Anwar Ibrahim. So Najib is not the fighter that Dr Mahathir had hoped he would be.

Dr Mahathir made it very clear that if Najib did not want to challenge Abdullah Badawi for the leadership, then he (Dr Mahathir) will back another 'horse'. And this 'dark horse', so to speak, would be Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. And to push the point home, Dr Mahathir started 'flirting' with Tengku Razaleigh.

This spooked Najib who saw his chances of taking over fading. But there was one issue that was the stumbling block for Tengku Razaleigh. And that stumbling block was: Tengku Razaleigh refused to be Dr Mahathir's proxy with the latter being the de facto Prime Minister who will 'guide' the former.

Tengku Razaleigh was adamant that if he became Prime Minister then he would be 'independent' and will not be under the control of Dr Mahathir. That, in fact, was supposed to have been the arrangement between Dr Mahathir and Abdullah Badawi. However, as soon as he became Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi all but ignored Dr Mahahir's wishes.

And that was Abdullah Badawi's downfall -- his refusal to honour the deal he had made with Dr Mahathir.

Abdullah Badawi was smart, though. He agreed to all the 'terms and conditions' and then after taking office he did a U-turn. Tengku Razaleigh was not so smart. He rejected the terms and conditions so Dr Mahathir had no choice but to dump Tengku Razaleigh and revert to Najib -- who agreed to comply with whatever terms and conditions to become Prime Minister.

Technically, Najib is Prime Minister at the pleasure of Dr Mahathir. If it is displeases Dr Mahathir then he can no longer become Prime Minister. And it would certainly displease Dr Mahathir if Najib cannot do better than Abdullah Badawi did in the March 2008 general election.

Hence Najib's career all depends on how well he performs in the coming general election. Unless he can do better than what Abdullah Badawi did in March 2008 then he would have to go. Winning the general election is not good enough. He would have to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat does not win more than 80 Parliament seats and Selangor falls back to Barisan Nasional plus Barisan Nasional retains Perak.

Furthermore, even if Pakatan Rakyat gets to retain Penang, Kedah and Kelantan, it has to be with a reduced majority.

So this is not just about whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat gets to win the coming general election. Barisan Nasional is not concerned about losing the general election because they are confident of winning it. It is about how impressive a win. And whether Najib remains the Prime Minister would all depend on his election performance.

But not everyone is happy with Najib. Many within Umno would like to see him fall. The question is: would they play certain 'tricks' to make sure that Barisan Nasional wins with a lesser majority than in March 2008?

Umno is worried that it may see elements of internal sabotage in the coming general election. After all, this is what they did in 2008 to force Abdullah Badawi out of office. So they have done this before. And Umno is worried that they may do it again so that Najib can be forced out off office just like Abdullah Badawi was.

Sometimes, in politics, we need to make alliances with the other side. And many alliances across the political divide are going to be made in this coming general election. Enemies are going to become temporary friends based on a common goal. All through history this has been the case where enemies ally themselves to defeat another but common enemy.

Of course, once this common enemy has been defeated that does not mean the alliance will continue. But that is a matter to be resolved once you need to cross that bridge. For the meantime, the battle lines are not too clear. Expect enemies to ally and friends to sabotage each other.

No doubt, if Umno thought it was going to lose the election then they would close ranks to deny Pakatan Rakyat the government. But if they thought they were going to win and there was no threat of a Pakatan Rakyat take over, then Umno with turn on itself and the warlords in Umno will try to kill each other off.

Hence it does not serve Pakatan Rakyat's interest to demonstrate too much confidence. That would just strengthen Umno's unity. Only if Umno thought that Pakatan Rakyat posed no danger to it would we see a house divided and a house divided is a house that will fall.

This, however, appears to be something that I can't get across to Pakatan Rakyat. The response I get from the Pakatan Rakyat supporters over the last two years is the opposite of what they should be saying. And that, I suppose, can only work in Umno's favour.

 

Assaulted DAP man receives ‘threat’ calls

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 04:13 PM PDT

Taman Murni DAP branch chairman, A Thirumalvalavan received two calls that threaten to injure him.

K Pragalath, FMT

A DAP member who alleged that he was assaulted by gangsters in a party meet last week has received calls from unknown people who want to assault him.

"I received the first phone call at 10.23pm from an unknown Indian man. The caller wanted to kick, beat and chop me up.

"I also received another threatening call, this time from a private number about 26 minutes later," said Taman Murni DAP branch chairman, A Thirumalvalavan in his police report.

The police report was lodged a short while later at Sepang district police headquarters in Bandar Baru Salak Tinggi.

He claimed that the threatening calls were made as a result of his allegations that DAP has gangsters within the party fold.

"The man threatened me because I spoke to the media on Friday," said Thirumalvalavan.

On Friday, he and another party member R Selvan alleged that they were assaulted by gangsters when they attempted to give a memorandum that also included allegations of gangsterism within the party.

Both Thirumalvalavan and Selvan along with Pantai Putra Sepang branch secretary Rashid Md Gani also questioned the DAP secretary-general, Lim Guan Eng and Selangor DAP chief, Teresa Kok for ignoring the issue even though both Lim and Kok had witnessed the incident on Monday.

 

A tough battle in Lembah Pantai

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 03:47 PM PDT

SHOWDOWN: Barisan Nasional is going all out to wrest the hottest urban seat in Kuala Lumpur back from the opposition, which it won by a narrow margin in the 2008 general election, writes Carisma Kapoor

LEMBAH Pantai, a constituency in Kuala Lumpur held by Parti Keadilan Rakyat's vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar, is considered one of the hot seats in the next  general election. Barisan Nasional will be fighting hard to win it back.

In the 2008 general election, Nurul defeated BN's Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, who had held the seat since 1995, by a relatively narrow margin of 2,895 votes.

Nurul, a first-time elected representative, is expected to defend the constituency with some 56,000 voters, and will likely face Lembah Pantai Umno chief and Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Minister Datuk Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin.

In a recent report, Raja Nong Chik conveyed his intention to contest the Lembah Pantai seat if he was among the candidates selected by BN.

Asked whether it would be a challenge to face Nurul, he said it would be but only because she was an incumbent member of parliament.

As someone who had grown up in the area, Raja Nong Chik, however, welcomed the challenge.

"I am confident of winning the seat based on my service record and relationships established over the past 25 years in the area, starting from my early days as an Umno Youth member," he said.

His years of involvement in the local politics and issues of Lembah Pantai had helped him to understand better the needs of residents.

"I'm contesting so that I can serve the people, not for other interests. I walk the talk, unlike the opposition which criticises and walks away without offering any solutions," he said, adding that even though he was not selected as a candidate in the 2004 general election, he had continued serving the Lembah Pantai residents.

Raja Nong Chik stressed that he had stated several times that the only seat he would like to contest was Lembah Pantai. This, despite being cautioned by some that the seat was "not safe for a minister".

Raja Nong Chik's game plan would include working hard, turun padang (going to the ground), listening to the people's problems, resolving outstanding problems as well as facilitating better living and working conditions for people within and outside Lembah Pantai.

"More importantly, I will try to assist those in the area who have been left behind in developments," he said, referring to the disabled, single mothers, pensioners, traders, low- and medium-cost flat dwellers, the sick and students.

On Nurul's supporters who had spoken out about their preference that she contest in Permatang Pauh, Raja Nong Chik said the suggestion had come about because Nurul had not served her constituency for some time.

"Nurul has only become active recently because the election is coming."

As for BN Lembah Pantai, he said members would fight any opposition candidate and thereafter join their colleagues to help Federal Territories and the rest of the country.

Raja Nong Chik, however, said it was up to the BN leadership to decide on whether to field him.

Nurul claimed that she was not only confident of retaining the Lembah Pantai seat but was also certain that the opposition would take control of Putrajaya.

She said the Election Commission had yet to implement the suggestions by the opposition and their allies for a free and fair election.

Nonetheless, Nurul said, the opposition would continue to participate in the election, highlight abuses and work towards getting at least 75 per cent voter turnout.

Nurul said "phantom busters" had been trained by the opposition to use cameraphones to take note of suspicious voters for legal action.

"We are advocating for international observers to view our electoral process."

On her efforts to "win over" voters in the area, Nurul said apart from relating to the people, she represented their voices in a "new culture of politics", where issues and not individuals drove legislation.

Responding to supporters who had preferred her to contest in Permatang Pauh, a seat held by her father, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the 32-year-old said she would obey her party even though she had indicated that she would like to remain with her supporters in Lembah Pantai. -- (NST)


Does Nazri want to turn Sabah into a Filindo state?

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 03:10 PM PDT

Daniel John Jambun

The comment by Datuk Nazri Aziz that the immigrants in Sabah are under control and are not a threat to the state is another proof that the Federal Government is not interested to solve this mother of all problem. What is painful about this comment is that we can smell a dirty rat, a mala fide (bad intention) and the underlying reality that the Federal Government is actually supporting the presence of illegal immigrants in Sabah as part of some sinister plan to continue changing the demography of the state.

What he said was outrageous and unacceptable and should have been condemned by everyone and every party, including the leaders and parties of the Barisan Nasional. Unfortunately only PBS, through its Secretary General, Datuk Henrynus Amin was daring enough to protest, saying Nazri "was politically insensitive to grassroots sentiment in Sabah, especially their fears and concern for the future wellbeing posed by the huge presence of illegal immigrants" and that the statement fuelled "speculations in the streets as the genuine commitment of the Barisan Nasional Government to resolve the perennial problem of illegal immigrants in the state." He demanded that the minister clarify and correct his statement. The response is still total silence.

What is amazing is Nazri's continuous denial of the problem. How do we get him to behave like a responsible leader? How do we get this stubborn minister to retract his words and change his attitude about the issue? Obviously diplomacy and polite tones like the ones used by the BN component parties do not work. What Nazri needs is outright condemnation in the strongest words to make him realize that the people of Sabah are thirsty and hungry for the defence and protection of the federal government from non-military invasions which continues to this very day. We can't accept that he is ignorant. He is too educated and too well-informed by the various security branches of the police and army to be ignorant of what are really going on in Sabah. Our only reasonable conclusion is that Nazri is purposefully saying his offensive remarks because he is bullying Sabahans, to let us know that he is boss. We can see that he has been telling us indirectly to shut up about this issue, to let it go, to allow the illegals to grow and increase.

Dear Sabahans, please pay attention to the fact that the illegals (Filipinos and Indonesians) are already the majority group in Sabah (27.79%), compared to KDMs which are now only 21.2%. And they are still increasing through continued arrival, and much more rapid birth rate. And in spite of this the federal leaders, including Tun Mahathir are campaigning for them to be legalised, on top of those hundreds of thousands who already have genuine MyKads! Leaders like Nazri must be gloating and laughing in glee to see that this has happened, to see that the KDMs, "the most stubborn people in Malaysia" (bangsa yang paling degil di Malaysia) have been and are being  taught a powerful lesson!

But in case Nazri is actually ignorant, I would like to offer him a free tour of the illegals situation in Sabah, with a package tour including the following: the illegals squatters being allowed by the authorities to spawn and expand in areas KK like Likas, Tebobon, Signal Hill (these are all stealing water and electricity to the tune of millions of ringgits per year); the congested hospital lobbies where a huge proportion of outpatients are illegals; to the Likas Hospital where the maternity wards continues to record that the highest number of births are among Filipino mothers (some of them have three kids within two years!); to the streets of KK where naked children are harassing motorists and pedestrians with begging, and these pests retaliate by hitting cars if not given anything; to the stairways of the Sinsuran and Segama shophouses where foreigners piss and defecate like there is not tomorrow; to the sprawling Filipino handcraft market, the dry and wet fist markets, and open-air restaurants in Sinsuran and Segama in KK, and the smuggled cigarette peddlers in Inanam, and the dirty, dark and smelly tamu in Inanam where Filipinos rule at the blessing of the DBKK and the local YBs; the newspaper reports of crimes committed by illegals (rapes, muggings, thefts, snatching, slashing, drug pushing, murders, etc.); the "free-ports" of the East Coast where illegals can come and in out without much difficulty; to the East Coast towns like Semporna where illegals have outnumbered locals five to one; to even the Interior areas like Keningau, where illegals have gone into the jungle to cut down the trees to start new settlements and plant crops, and so on and so on. But the irony of this offer is that, in case Nazri takes it, he would most likely be smiling and rubbing his hands in glee at the sight of all these because these are what he wants for  his grand scheme to turn Sabah into a Filipino and Indonesian state!

Can Nazri deny that this is his real intention for Sabah? Is his intention to turn Sabah into a new Filipino-Indonesian (Filindo) state?

Now to talk about security, and Nazri continued stupid assertion that the illegals pose no security threat, doesn't he know that all the major cities and towns in Sabah are already surrounded by illegal settlements? Doesn't he know that in the nearby Sulu islands, the tradition among people of power and influence is to keep a lot of weapons (pistols, M16s) in the house, and these weapons can easily be smuggle into Sabah? If these heavily populated settlements launch an attack for some reasons the consequences will be too horrid to describe. Remember the Corregidor Incidence which almost caused a war to erupt between Malaysia and the Philippines. Remember that during the 1970s and later, Sabah was a channel for transfer of weapons to the southern Mindanao. Remember the Philippines' claim on Sabah is still in effect. Remember that the Indonesian government is still very much anti-Malaysia. Remember sukarno's "Ganyang Malaysia," the Ambalat island conflict, the Sebatik boundary argument, and the new ongoing protests against Malaysia's stealing of Indonesian dances.

Nazri needs to be sober up and stop treating Sabahans as if we are idiots.

 

Is Pakatan afraid of its own shadow?

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 02:59 PM PDT

ABOUT-TURN: The opposition's failure to form a shadow cabinet shows the three Pakatan parties don't see eye to eye on many issues

The issue was reignited when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak last week challenged the opposition to form its much-promised shadow cabinet. The Barisan Nasional chairman said the most fundamental thing any opposition should do was to have a shadow cabinet, but Pakatan could not even do this. 

A Jalil Hamid, NST

.

BY definition, a shadow cabinet represents a group of senior opposition figures in the Westminster system of government which forms an alternative cabinet to the government, and whose members "shadow" each  minister to provide a system of checks and balances.

According to Prof Rodney Brazier, a United Kingdom constitutional law expert, the convention of having a shadow cabinet in Britain is not new. Throughout the 19th century, they were simply known as former cabinet ministers. The word "former" was replaced by "shadow" in 1880, hence the shadow cabinet.

Shadow cabinets are the norm in mature parliamentary democracies, such as Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Turkey and many other countries.

In the case of Malaysia, the opposition appears to go against its word or contradicts itself every time the issue of shadow cabinet is raised and debated, raising doubts about its credibility.

Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who went on record for a few times since the March 2008 general election promising a shadow cabinet, now has said there will not be a shadow cabinet.

His latest contention that Pakatan Rakyat does not need a shadow cabinet because it is not a common practice in other countries, such as Indonesia or Thailand, simply does not hold water.

Why a change of heart after all this while?

The issue was reignited when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak last week challenged the opposition to form its much-promised shadow cabinet. The Barisan Nasional chairman said the most fundamental thing any opposition should do was to have a shadow cabinet, but Pakatan could not even do this.

"You must show your team. You must show your cabinet. Don't talk about forming the government, form a shadow cabinet first," he said at the Gerakan annual delegates' conference.

Anwar has now gone against his word. "A shadow cabinet is only practised in the United Kingdom and Australia. Not in the United States, France, Indonesia or Thailand," he responded later.

His excuse in the past was that Pakatan's parliamentary panels had been undertaking some of the functions as a shadow cabinet. But these committees, which are made up of representatives from each party, are not a good substitute for a shadow cabinet.

Perhaps the real reason why Anwar (we are assuming he is the shadow prime minister) refused to unveil his shadow cabinet is because the three Pakatan parties, with widely differing agendas and ideologies, do not see eye to eye on many issues.

There is no real unity in the opposition and there is lack of consensus on issues such as hudud, let alone power-sharing.

If they cannot be transparent on things that matter most to the rakyat, then how can the people have confidence in their leadership?

The cracks between Pas and DAP over the hudud issue certainly reflect the vulnerability of the opposition pact and no amount of smokescreens can camouflage that.

Even with a shadow cabinet, the three parties -- including Anwar's Parti Keadilan Rakyat -- are bound to face a fractious tussle for ministerial positions if they ever win power at the federal level.

We see that happening in Selangor now. A mere mention by PKR vice-president Azmin Ali of the possibility of Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim being promoted to a federal position from being Selangor menteri besar has sparked an uproar within Pakatan.

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has brushed aside an initial list of shadow cabinet ministers purportedly released by PKR.

He instead suggested that should Pakatan form the next Federal Government, each ministerial portfolio would have three members, one each from each party.

"PR is more concerned about policies that benefit the people and not personality or position," he was quoted as saying. "We are not crazy for position."

Does this mean the potential Pakatan cabinet, already littered with political dynasties, will be so unwieldy and cumbersome just to accommodate each party? It must be setting a new world record for cabinet size.

Pakatan leaders know that to cobble together a realistic list of shadow cabinet members now is politically risky as it could start fresh bickering among them and undermine their electoral chances.

So it is better to agree to disagree and sweep the problem under the carpet, at least for now.

Returning to the issue of political dynasties, the Anwar, Karpal and Lim families are set to rule the cabinet if Pakatan ever comes to power. Voters will have to decide then between real democracy and Pakatan's brand of political dynasty.


How parents can unite, where politicians divide

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 02:45 PM PDT

Dr Lee Yu Chuang, The Star

MY grandparents came to Malaysia from Guangdong province in China with the clothes on their backs, and not much else. My paternal grandmother toiled as an itinerant hawker selling lai fun (rice noodles) until she could not work anymore.

In spite of their disadvantages in life, my parents were the first in their families to complete a university education, both graduating as teachers of the Chinese language, which they imparted to generations of students. They both served faithfully in government schools until they retired.

My father and mother decided to bring us up in Penang, where we kids had a simple, happy childhood. We spent the evenings cycling around the neighbourhood with the local kids, having water-pistol fights in the backlanes at night, and kicking the ball around the playground whilst trying to avoid piles of cow pat that littered the field.

Like most first-generation immigrants everywhere, my parents were somewhat ambivalent in their feelings towards their motherland and their adopted land. For instance, when it came to badminton matches, they would vociferously support the Chinese team whenever they played on TV. But they never demanded that we shared their allegiance in sports, and in all other matters, they resolutely put their nose to the grindstone and concentrated on the business of putting food on the table. Most importantly, I never heard them belittle other races or people who were different from us.

Through his actions, I came to learn that my father was a man of principles. Once, while taking a detour through a narrow kampung road, our car hit and killed a goat which strayed into our path. Although it would be more convenient to drive off and avoid any possible confrontations, my father alighted from the car to seek the owner of the cow, to make recompense. My father may not have realised it at the time, but this lesson left a powerful impression on me precisely because it was not meant to instruct.

When it was time to start formal schooling, our neighbour suggested that putting us in an English-medium school would give us a competitive edge in life. And thus, my elder brother and I were enrolled in St Xavier's branch school.

Novel experience

Growing up with an array of friends with names like Porramate, Ahmad Roslan, Surendra, Ronald Nieukey and Hua Ghee, I learnt not to give a hoot about somebody's skin colour but rather, whether they were decent folks and whether we could get along. And if we dropped by each other's houses during festivals, we would not feel any acute social discomfort. Rather, we would look forward to it with child-like anticipation of a novel experience – much like going to a candy store for the first time. I imbibed the pleasure of diversity as naturally as if it were fresh air.

After getting good results and in deference to my parents' wishes, I continued my secondary education at Penang Free School. Although I missed my old friends, I quickly settled into my new surroundings and led a busy life with plenty of activities, especially with the Scouts.

With a never-say-die attitude, my Scouting buddies Hup, Prasert, George and I learnt that although you may need to take the tasks you perform seriously, you never need to take yourself too seriously.

I sat next to a boy named Hussain in Form Four, and apart from sharing the odd Hudson sweet in class (which I would break into two at the edge of our desk to share equally between us), we could also be found sharing the answers to our homework and scribbling all manner of nonsense in our little notebook, all while the teacher was conducting her lesson – oblivious to our shenanigans.

Oh yes, we still keep in touch, most recently for some paediatric advice, the man having been blessed with yet another baby in his ripe old age!

Form Six was memorable, probably because we had girls studying alongside us for the first time. I made many life-long friendships during that phase. When my close buddy Vijay got married later in life, I was deemed good enough to be his best man. And even though Azilah left for further studies in the US after only a few months of sixth form, we nurtured a kinship that continues between her family and mine until today.

Vicky and I got into the same medical school, and now she is my boss when it comes to child neurology.

Being a paediatrician enabled me to be of some use to friends who decided to start their own families, and allows me to remain relevant in their lives, even with the distances that divide us.

With such an assortment of friends in my formative years, I had a mild cultural shock when I entered university and found the student population rather ethnically polarised. I observed that most students preferred to stick to their comfort zones and not venture outside their cultural perimeters. Nonetheless, it was an excellent opportunity to mingle and learn.

I found that beneath the conservative dressing and orthodoxy of my Muslim course-mates, were some really sweet and gentle human beings who would be gracious and generous to a fault. Not that this should be confused with being pliant, I would hasten to point out, for people like Ghazaime and Haseenah could give as good as they got – both in humour and wisdom.

We were bonded by the common task of getting through medical school without burning out. In reflection, perhaps that is what it takes to get people together – a common goal that transcends superficial differences.

Anyway, one thing that I can be sure of: being a doctor is a good way of becoming colour-blind. All doctors and nurses can attest that after you have witnessed enough sickness and death, you cannot help but realise that this is the fate of everyone of us.

Thus, with our scripts already written out and within the time that remains for all of us, how can we justify treating a fellow human being with less than deferential dignity?

When you have seen children battered to death by their parents or molested by trusted religious elders, you awake to the truth that good and evil is present in all of us, regardless of race, religion, gender or any other term we use to divide ourselves.

In the end, we are merely mortal beings with our mortal failings. All we can hope for is the chance to redeem ourselves with acts of kindness towards a fellow human being.

Now that I have children of my own, I pray that I am also imparting the right values and outlook to them. I try to speak of good individuals and good acts, bad individuals and bad acts, and I never use stereotypes.

I want to impress upon them that kindness is the basic tenet of all true religions. I hope they never grow up to speak uncharitably of any group of people by virtue of their external differences.

Our true value

At the most basic level, my children must know that we are all humans in need of the same things. For this reason, I want my children to understand that nobody should feel that they are above the poorest, most wretched people in the street. Nor for that matter should anyone feel that they are beneath the richest, most powerful royalty on earth. All are the same; all are human beings. Only our character will reveal our true value. Neither the colour of our skin nor the depth of our wallets will compensate for any moral deficiency.

Of course, as they grow, my children will bear witness to the disparities and unfairness inherent in society and life, and I will encourage their moral outrage to right these wrongs. They would need to be courageous in dealing with those who try to bully their way through, given that the person who shouts the loudest is not necessarily right. I would want my children to have a humble understanding of the human condition, and thus act with kindness in their dealings with all around them.

As a parent, and learning from other parents and my own, it is clear that our children's prejudices are modelled by and taught by us. If we consistently denigrate others with labels and derogatory words, it is only a matter of time before the poison seeps into our children's hearts, and breeds a generation filled with hatred and discontent. Compounded by the politician's tongue which is skilled but not necessarily wise, we will not only miss the forest for the trees, but in the tragic finale, set fire to our common abode – just to prove who's right.

We must change the only thing that we truly can – ourselves, to be the light that illuminates a better path for our children. We can drop the unproductive attitudes that we grew up with, and choose instead to promote goodwill and kindness in a society where all can win and all who need help will get help, regardless of class, creed or ethnicity.

For all the politicians who have gotten it wrong, we can be parents who say: "No! You will not impose your vile prejudices onto my family, and we will not submit to leaders who do not make us stronger as a nation."

When we accept what true power we hold in our hands – the power to enlighten our children in their perception and thinking – then we will do the right things and say the right things to our children because their future depends on the direction that we set their sails to. It all starts with us.

It is ironic that now, with the passing of the years, and having dealt with thousands of children and their families, I have come to revisit the universal truth: that young children – if left alone – get along splendidly with almost any other young children. They see others with a clear eye and an open heart.

They do not even bother to ask each other's names, only knowing that they delight in each other's company and that they will play to their hearts' content in their limited time together.

Theirs is a truly inclusive brotherhood. Theirs is the wisdom of the innocent. It is the parents who hurrily grab them away, who tell them who they can and cannot play with, and who must be shunned – and thereafter, this child is forever stained with the pockmark of prejudice which is not easy to erase.

In the final analysis, it is clear that if there is one thing children can teach us, it is to strive to see with child-like clarity. For in the kingdom of the coloured, perhaps there is an advantage in being colour-blind.

 

The V-neck battle goes on

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 02:39 PM PDT

Dr Mohd Puad: I don't want to be drawn into the debate of whether it (LGBT) is a lifestyle or natural instinct. That is why we want to bring it out in the open because it can be debated on.

Reiterating the Government's commitment, Dr Mohd Puad stresses that it is crucial for parents to get exposure and knowledge of the LGBT trend so that they can be more vigilant of the signs and tackle the threat early.

The Star

V-neck Day and free Briyani for those in V-neck shirts?

"It should not be a joking matter," Deputy Education Minister Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi bemoans, commenting on some of the reactions to his effort of highlighting the "dangers" posed by the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) phenomenon on the youth in Malaysia.

But Dr Mohd Puad is determined to walk down the unpopular road of curbing the trend of LGBT in schools.

As he puts it, the trend seems to be prevalent in society and popular media, making it imperative for the Government to prevent it from penetrating schools.

"It is not prevalent in school yet but preventive action is needed to ensure that it does not spread among students," he says.

When asked how prevalent the phenomenon is in schools, he says, the ministry does not have any data.

"I don't know because we don't have the facts. We don't have the data to show how serious it is," he tells Sunday Star.

He adds that when the issue "exploded" - specifically the disputed LGBT-symptom guidelines - he received a lot of flak, but it has only made his belief that the LGBT lifestyle is not a healthy way of life.

"There are two reasons: it is the biggest cause of HIV after drugs. It also causes a lot of social problems such as broken marriages. That is why we need to nip it in the bud," he says.

And that is why, Dr Mohd Puad points out, we need to raise parents' awareness.

"They have to be exposed to what it is all about, many parents don't even know what the terms mean; they say that they are confused by the terms."

For those who need a reminder, the deputy minister was slammed last month for purportedly supporting a list spelling out some definitions and identifiable LGBT traits, at a seminar in Penang, aimed at helping parents recognise "symptoms" of LGBT in children.

The seminar, "Parents Handling LGBT Issues", organised by Yayasan Guru Malaysia Berhad and Putrajaya Consultative Council of Parent-Teacher Association, has since been held in Kedah and Trengganu.

Although it is independent of the Education Ministry, the deputy minister had officiated at the seminars.

The list reportedly says that gay men have muscular bodies that they like to show off in V-neck and sleeveless clothes, or tight and light-coloured clothing; and that they like to carry big handbags similar to those used by women.

Lesbians are said to be attracted to women, and like to eat, sleep and hang out in the company of other women and have no affection for men.

Reiterating the Government's commitment, Dr Mohd Puad stresses that it is crucial for parents to get exposure and knowledge of the LGBT trend so that they can be more vigilant of the signs and tackle the threat early.

However, he declines to elaborate on what the Government would do to "correct" or "prevent" LGBT in schools, conceding that the science of it is debatable.

"I don't want to be drawn into the debate of whether it (LGBT) is a lifestyle or natural instinct. That is why we want to bring it out in the open because it can be debated on. However, it is not something that should be joked about," he says.

When pointed out that there are many studies disputing the effectiveness of corrective therapies, Dr Mohd Puad cites the case of "two ex-gays" presented by the seminar.

"If the two can change and become straight, I don't see why others cannot."

When asked about the dangers of discrimination and bullying in school, he declines to answer.

Dr Mohd Puad shares that the ministry is looking at equipping school counsellors with the necessary knowledge and understanding as well as training to deal with LGBT.

However, he denies that the Ministry will be taking a hardline stance - "We are not looking at identifying LGBT students or punishing them," he says.

"We in the Ministry of Education look at this LGBT issue seriously, and all we wish to do is to educate people, parents especially, on how to overcome this issue, how to prevent it as well as early corrective measures," he says.

 

Mustafa hits back at PKR deputy president over Selangor MB remark

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 02:36 PM PDT

(The Star) - PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali has hit back at Azmin Ali, who has stirred controversy with his Selangor Mentri Besar remark, by calling the PKR deputy president as being "too ambitious".

"I don't have to make any comment but as an old man, I understand the feelings and ambitions of a young leader. Let him be," he wrote via an SMS to Utusan Malaysia.

This is the second time in a week that Mustafa had locked horns with Azmin. The first was when he warned Azmin against making statements on matters that had never come up for discussion at the Pakatan Rakyat leadership council.

Azmin had earlier reacted to Mustafa's warning by tweeting: "The age factor has made him confused and shoot his mouth."

The Gombak MP had told a Malay daily that Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim might be made a Federal Minister if Pakatan won Putrajaya in the general election, implying that the state would have a new mentri besar.

His statement had come under fire from his own party members, with PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar describing it as "just an opinion" and Khalid's aide Faekah Husin expressing her disappointment.

Meanwhile, Selangor Barisan Nasional coordinator Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohamed said he expected the infighting in Pakatan to continue, adding that Azmin was keen on displacing Khalid as Mentri Besar.

The infighting, he added, was an "open secret", with many in PKR wanting Azmin to be Mentri Besar, although this move was objected to by DAP and PAS.

With Barisan's strong revival in Selangor, Mohd Zin said there were those in PKR who felt that Khalid was politically not strong enough to defend the state.

Meanwhile, Selangor PKR deputy chief Zuraida Kamaruddin had criticised Faekah for describing Azmin's statement as "not politically smart".

"She should concentrate on improving the political relationship between the MB and party leaders and not cause instability by unnecessarily jumping the gun," said Zuraida, claiming that Azmin had often voiced his support for Khalid's leadership as MB.

 

Stubborn Umno ‘killing’ race relations

Posted: 06 Oct 2012 02:20 PM PDT

Umno's refusal to adapt to the changing socio-political setting in the country is its own doom. 

Umno's approach to 'unity' is something like the Nazi final solution. It thinks it can achieve national unity by pitting one race against one another.

Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz, FMT

The Malaysian people have already shown that they no longer accept the Umno solution.

The coming together of various races during Bersih 3.0 earlier this year sent shivers along the spine of the Umno leadership unless of course they misread or simply refused to read the signals sent by the tens and thousands of participants who voluntarily rallied.

Umno's approach to 'unity' is something like the Nazi final solution. It thinks it can achieve national unity by pitting one race against one another.

Today the Chinese, tomorrow the Indians and later all other non-Malay Malaysians.

Eventually, it will apply the same gas-chambering treatment to the Malays who dared challenge and reject Umno.

The Malays who are opposed and reject Umno are classed as either not having sufficient Malayness or apostates. The majority of us reject this fascism.

The socio-political setting in the country has changed but Umno refuses to adapt.

And those who don't adapt will perish.

As a DAP member, I am also ready to concede that in the long run, DAP will lose its wider relevance if it also refuses to adapt to the new social setting.

The new social setting demands recognition that despite being of different races, heterogeneity does not prevent the sharing of universal and common values.

Different races value the same freedom and economic justice.

Being of different races does not preclude sharing similar ideas about equality or sharing the same idea about a common future.

You think the right thinking Malay is unmoved to see Umno abuse the Malay definition?

The ordinary Malay finds it reprehensible when Umno exploits the Malay name to enrich the elite and selected few among the Malays.

Vilifying the Chinese

Umno commits the fatal mistake of thinking it can justify almost everything by using the Malay name.

Look at the general vilification on Malaysian Chinese who are now more readily associated with DAP.

Let me ask you, who is the closest Malaysian Chinese to the Prime Minister these days?

It's a Malaysian Chinese who just secured a RM1 billion contract to do the Ampang LRT extension works.

In that sense, the Umno president is selling out the Malays.

It is certain now that Najib had interceded on behalf of George Kent to award the Ampang LRT extension project to a Malaysian Chinese.

The company failed the technical and financial pre-qualification requirements but for Najib's intercession, got the project anyway.

Mind you, this is the same Malaysian Chinese who was rumoured to have brokered the contract for the double tracking project for China Harbors.

Additionally, this same Malaysian Chinese was rumoured to have asked US$500 million from the Chinese government allegedly for the benefit of Najib.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved