Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

The fight over fertile lands (WITH CHINESE TRANSLATION)
GE13: A marathon, but a race for ‘sprinters’
GE13: What comes after dissolution?
DAP’s blueprint for Indians is a copy of Hindraf’s
LRT job that’s messy, shoddy and unfriendly
Manifestos must tackle real issues
Will Pakatan sweep KL clean?
From rags to riches
Muhyiddin, the other Prime-Minister-in-Waiting
Suluks next big wave after Hindraf's makkal sakthi
Are Malays now a wounded civilization?
Why we must vote

The fight over fertile lands (WITH CHINESE TRANSLATION)

Posted: 02 Apr 2013 06:57 PM PDT

DAP and PKR both pride themselves as multiracial parties. But in reality, they can only battle in the scarce Chinese-dominated areas to make their grounds. With Gelang Patah given to Lim Keat Siang, DAP has essentially 'conquered' all Chinese-dominated areas (in Johor). As for PKR, who also has to depend on Chinese votes, it has practically been sentenced to death. Hence, how can you believe that there won't be a fight between these two parties?

Original text by Tay Tian Yan, Asst. Chief Editor, SinChew Daily

Translated text by Gilbert Yeoh-Tan

The way I see it, the internal fight between DAP and PKR over Johor is no less vigorous than their external fight with Barisan National.

Johor has 26 parliamentary seats and 56 state seats; and during last election, Pakatan Rakyat had been unable to come up with candidates to fill all those seats.

It puzzles a lot to see that they dig only around the belly button while there are indeed many seats. To quote a Chinese idiom, 'to stick a popsicle in one's belly button ---- pain to the last nerve in one's heart', would be how PR supporters would feel over the fighting.

After all, Johor is PR's unharvested land where many supporters put high hopes on.

According to a PR strategist, if PR can win 35% of Malay votes, 80% of Chinese, and 50% of Indian, they stand a very good chance of securing 20 parliamentary seats. That should be able to push PR to winning 112 seats in total, which will then allow them to march into Putrajaya to form a new government.

Johor's voter structure, in theory, adds advantage to PR. Johor is a typical mixed area that witnesses a more evenly-distributed voter structure than other states: Malay voters contribute to 53.7% of the voting population, Chinese 38.8%, and Indian 6.6%.

Furthermore, the geographical distribution is also an even one. It is true that Selangor and Perak have more Chinese voters, but the percentages of Chinese voters vary marginally among different seats, for example, 82% of Ipoh East voters are Chinese whereas only 6% of Larut voters are Chinese; There are no such cases in Johor.

In theory, DAP and PKR are multiracial parties. With recent PAS's declaration as a 'Party for all races', this combination, in theory (sorry for the repeated usage of the word 'theory'), should perform better in mixed seats as they are able to harness votes from all races.

If the above are true, we can then safely derive that Johor is ready to be the next PR state, and, with 20 parliamentary seats at hand, that PR can also march for Putrajaya to replace BN.

The problem is, theory and reality, they often differ vastly.

Johor is indeed an untouched land. However, as of today, it would appear that the only cultivatable areas for PR are areas with high percentage of Chinese voters.

Among the 26 seats, there are only Kulai, Bakri, and Gelang Patah that have more than 50% of Chinese voters. Kluang comes close to 50%, it has 49.2%. These 4 are PR's winnable seats.

For all other seats, PR has shown lack of confidence. For areas with less than 40% of Chinese voters, PR has practically given up the fights and let BN do as it pleases.

DAP and PKR both pride themselves as multiracial parties. But in reality, they can only battle in the scarce Chinese-dominated areas to make their ground. With Gelang Patah given to Lim Keat Siang, DAP has essentially 'conquered' all Chinese-dominated areas (in Johor). As for PKR, who also has to depend on Chinese votes, it has practically been sentenced to death. How, then, can you believe that there won't be a fight between these two parties?

Undoubtedly, Johor has many seats. But for PR, Malay-dominated area are merely 'barren lands' that they won't consider setting foot on whereas Chinese-dominated are 'fertile lands' that they can win without even the slightest efforts; there are a lot of 'barren lands' that attract little interests, but only a mere handful of 'fertile lands' that evoke brutal fights among allies.

This is the grievance of Malaysia's politics. No matter how loudly a party vows to become 'multiracial', it would end up focusing on one ethnic for its votes.

PR has been preaching on diversity and working together across all races. This is indeed a refreshing new direction that most voters will heed. But, in the end, it is what it is ---- an idea with no concrete action. DAP and PKR should therefore ask themselves: if they are indeed as multiracial as they preach, why then they haven't even the slightest confidence to win even 30% of the Malays' votes?

If they both can practice what they preach, bringing their ideas to the grassroots, backing up their promotions with concrete actions (for example, have more people from other races taking up senior positions or participating in decision-making processes), then they definitely can take one step up and win more votes from all races.

Only by then will they see 'fertile lands' everywhere, and no longer will they have to fight to the death over Chinese seats!

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

鄭丁賢‧肥田和瘦田之爭

以行動黨和公正黨今天在柔州的廝殺情況，慘烈程度不下於和國陣的對壘。

柔州有26個國會，56個州席；上屆大選，很多席位是半夜敲鑼都找不到人出來競選。

議席那麼多，怎麼就是往肚臍眼裡鑽，斗成一團……，不，更傳神的中文諺語說，是肚臍眼裡插冰棒――心寒；很多民聯支持者為此難過。

畢竟，柔佛是民聯的一塊處女地，是支持者寄望之所在。

一位民聯的策略師盤算說，一旦民聯得到35%的馬來選票，80%華人票，50%印人票，那麼，將可以奪下20個國會議席。

他認為，這20個夢幻議席，正好可以把民聯的國席推高到112席以上，直奔布特拉再也，執政中央。

況且，柔佛州的選民結構，理論上對民聯有利。

柔佛是典型的混合選區，各族人民的選票分佈比其它州更加平均；平均數字，馬來選民是53.7%，華人38.8%，印人6.6%。

各族選民的地理分佈相當均勻；雪州和霹靂固然族群比率也相當平均，但馬來選區和華人選區落差很大，譬如，霹州有華人高達82%的怡保東區，也有華人只有6%的拉律，這是柔佛沒有的情況。

理論上（又是理論），民聯3黨之中，行動黨和公正黨都是多元族群政黨，而伊斯蘭黨又打起"全民政黨＂的形象，這種組合，理論上（對不起，又重覆了），最適合套用在混合選區，因為3黨應該獲得不同族群的共同支持。

如此看來，柔州豈非已準備成立下一任民聯州政府，而且20個國會議席也將手到擒來，布城在望？

問題是，理論和現實不符。

柔州固然是處女地，然而，到目前為止，能夠開墾的，看來看去，只有華人票顯著的議席。

26個國席，華人佔50%以上的，只有峇吉里、古來、振林山，勉強加入居鑾（49.2%）；這些是民聯有勝算的議席。

其它華人票低於50%的選區，民聯本身都缺乏信心，至於華人票低於40%的選區，根本不必搶，要的話儘管拿去。

行動黨和公正黨雖然都自認為多元族群政黨，但是，卻都要搶華人選區，在少數議席中尋求棲身之地。

民聯把振林山給了林吉祥，等於行動黨佔據了所有華人選區，同樣必須靠華人票吃糊的公正黨，如今只能喝西北風；於是，兩黨豈能不斗。

的確，柔佛議席很多，問題是，對民聯而言，馬來選區是瘦田，很難開墾，華人選區是肥田，不墾也可能有收獲。瘦田很多，乏人問津；肥田很少，搶成一團。

其實，這也是大馬政治的悲哀。不論政黨如何高喊多元族群政治，然而，大家都要往單元族群裡搶票。

民聯提出多元理念，確實指出一個新的方向，也讓人民多了一重選擇；但是，單有理念是不夠的。行動黨和公正黨都應該自問，既然它們是多元族群政黨，為甚麼連30%的馬來選票都沒有信心？

如果它能夠坐言起行，過去好好在基層推廣它的理念，也用實際行動證明本身的多元性，包括在領導層和組織裡容納更多不同族群，那麼，或許它能更上層樓，獲得多元族群的支持。

如此，肥田處處，又何必在華人選區自相廝殺！

GE13: A marathon, but a race for ‘sprinters’

Posted: 02 Apr 2013 05:13 PM PDT

The writing "was clearly on the wall" the day after GE12 in March 2008. Umno/BN would have to reinvent and position itself as a genuine "centrist" party if it was to "recover lost ground" next time — and certainly if it were to have any serious chance of a convincing victory by 2013.

Clive Kessler, TMI

In two recent published political commentaries, I have drawn two perhaps fanciful comparisons.

First, I remarked that the underlying form or structure of the Malaysian "body politic", beginning with the Constitution, was basically sound.

But, I added, that the body now needed some "good tailoring", a new "suit" of "political clothing" — some new arrangements that might enable that body to appear respectably, and with dignity, in public.

Next I suggested that the predicament of Umno/BN today, on the eve of GE13, is a bit like that of a sailor whose good fortune has recently deserted him.

Like a sailor who has long been accustomed to sailing with the wind behind him, pushing him with its great power in the direction that he wants to go

Suddenly the world has changed, the wind had shifted. Umno/BN now needs to "do things tough". It needs to sail across, and even to learn to "tack" into, the wind.

That is hard sailing.

And that kind of "political sailing" is not something that Umno people know how to do. Nor is it a challenge that they are happy about having to face, a skill that they are eager now to master.

It goes beyond what they know. It is beyond their "comfort zone".

Let me now introduce a third parallel, another "kias", a new "ibarat".

In Australia the great sporting event of the year is the Melbourne Cup. It is a distance race, over two miles. It is a race for stayers, not sprinters.

Everybody hopes that the race "is run truly".

Meaning, that it is a tough and keenly contested race all the way.

If it is, a good stayer wins.

That is how it is supposed to be.

But sometimes it is not.

The horses "loaf along" for a mile and a half, with no horse or rider keen to "make the running".

Then, suddenly, for the last half-mile it is a mad rush.

A mad rush and a disappointing spectacle.

Disappointing because a sprinter, not a tried and proven stayer, will win if the race is competitive only in its concluding stages.

Malaysian elections, and especially this long awaited GE13, are a bit like that.

The nation has been "in election mode" for five years.

But, as it dithered, and as hard-line Malay ethno-supremacist groups like Perkasa seized the initiative, Umno lost its chance to do that.

It flubbed. It "wimped out".

It decided, under that hard-line Malay pressure, to "shore up" its Malay base first.

Moderation could come later, much later — if at all, if ever.

Prudence, inspired by a sense of weakness and fear, not courage prevailed.

And ever since Najib Razak succeeded as prime minister, he has had his "weather eye" keenly focused on whether a favourable moment might present itself for him to call an election: to gain a personal mandate, give his leadership some real popular legitimacy — and to refresh that of Umno at the same time.

But the favourable moment never came.

As it failed to arrive, Najib temporized.

Sure, he launched his alphabetic onslaught to suggest a dynamic agenda, to create the appearance of some genuine momentum.

But it was all stodgy, "top down", prosaically managerialist stuff that did not fire the popular imagination — and could hardly have been expected to do so.

So now we find ourselves five years on from GE12 and almost five years on from when the current parliament first convened.

Its automatic expiry date, its democratic "use-by date", is almost nigh.

At long last, the election has been called.

And now that it has been, it will be a "12-day wonder."

A bit like the English summer. You go to the cinema one afternoon, see a movie, and when you come out you find that you have missed it.

So after being on an election footing under Najib's "watch" for almost four years, we find that the race has yet again become a test not of true political "stayers", not the marathon that it seems, but once again a hectic sprint.

A mad last-minute rush to the line.

A rush that here works massively to the advantage of the contestant who knows when the rush is to begin – because that contestant alone has the ability to trigger it.

So what kind of election will it be?

There are many aspects, many dimensions to note, and different commentators highlight different features.

The dirtiest ever, say some.

The most keenly contested of all time, say others.

The most difficult to fathom, because of the unprecedented role to be played by new voters and new media, say others.

All these ideas and characterizations have merit.

To end this brief comment, I wish to suggest something else — a view or idea that comes from taking "the long view" of modern Malay politics and Malaysian political history.

Back to the stayers' race.

READ MORE HERE

GE13: What comes after dissolution?

Posted: 02 Apr 2013 04:31 PM PDT

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has called for the elections, after the King consented to the dissolution of Parliament. What's next?

Razak Ahmad, The Star

The wait for the dissolution of Parliament is finally over and now, a chain of events will take place within the next 60 days under a fixed timetable that will culminate in polling day at the 13th general election.

According to Article 55(4) of the Federal Constitution, whenever Parliament is dissolved, a general election will be held within 60 days of and Parliament shall be summoned to meet on a date not later than 120 days from that date.

The first step that will now take place following the announcement of the dissolution of Parliament is for the Speaker of Parliament to notify the Election Commission (EC) that a dissolution has occurred and to request that general elections be held.

Similar notices will also be submitted by the respective state legislative assembly Speakers to the Commission to inform the EC of the dissolution of the respective legislatures.

The EC will then announce the date that it will hold a meeting to decide and announce the dates for both parliamentary and state elections.

The dates are for nomination; advance voting for military and police personnel and their spouses; postal balloting both locally for qualified voters such as certain personnel and EC workers as well as Malaysians abroad; followed by polling day for the rest of the country's 13.3 million voters.

With the Dewan Rakyat dissolved Wednesday, a 60-day time limit to polling day would mean that the last date upon which voting must be done is approximately on June 3.

EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof had, however, said earlier that the EC would try to hold parliamentary and state polls simultaenously.

This, he added, would mean that he would try as best as possible to ensure that polling takes place by May 28 which is within the 60-day period following the dissolution of the Negri Sembilan legislative assembly on March 28.

Apart from the 60-day limit, the fixing of dates for nomination and polling is also governed under the Elections (Conduct of Elections) Regulations, 1981.

According to the Regulation, the date of nomination must be no less than four days after a notice of dissolution of Parliament of State Assembly is issued.

The date for advance voting, meanwhile, must be no less than seven days after nomination, while polling day must be no earlier than three days after the date of advance voting.

The whole process from nomination to polling requires 10 days and the EC has said that it would set a campaign period of no shorter than 11 days for the upcoming election.

At the last general election in 2008, the EC held a meeting two days following the dissolution of Parliament on Feb 13 that year and fixed March 8 for polling, giving a period of 25 days between dissolution and polling.

DAP’s blueprint for Indians is a copy of Hindraf’s

Posted: 01 Apr 2013 04:37 PM PDT

Is DAP's declaration for the Indians just intended to create an illusion of action substituting for real action, asks Hindraf advisor N Ganesan.

By N Ganesan, FMT

I am really sad to see DAP go this way. The so-called Gelang Patah Declaration of DAP is no more than a plagiarised version of Hindraf's 5-year blueprint document.

Eleven out of the 14 items in the DAP document are straight out from Hindraf's blueprint.

The fact that their blueprint was revealed on the 21st day of P Waythamoorthy's hunger strike indicates as though DAP was scurrying to cover its behind against charges of abandoning the cause of the Indian poor.

Not one of the DAP leaders had anything to say for all of 20 days about the endorsement of the Hindraf blueprint – which was the key demand of the hunger strike. On the 21st day –they pull this out of their sleeves, and within 24 hours.

Look at the timing of DAP's declarations and actions for the Indian poor – just days before the elections. What were they doing for all the five years up to now? No action in five years and then now a declaration.

The items in this declaration that could easily have been carried out in the DAP Penang state government in all five years of their rule, but which absolutely were not.

Housing for the marginalised – large and numerous developments in Penang have been approved in the last five years span, but hardly any noticeable effort for the marginalised poor.

Alienate land for temples and burial grounds – land is a state matter, they could easily have done this in the state in these last five years instead of talking about it after five full years after, in their declaration just before the next elections. Did this realisation just come to them or is this their standard modus operandus?

Provide land to Tamil primary schools– similarly with land for the Tamil schools. Worse here. Not only did the DAP government not grant land to the 23 partially aided Tamil schools in the state, requests for land for Tamil schools in Penang coming from the PIBGs were ducked using a variety of techniques, were denied outright or the PIBGs were manipulated to avoid causing embarrassment for the state government with such requests.

So, it raises the question – is this declaration just intended to create an illusion of action substituting for real action?

The double speak game

The DAP leaders made a promise to the Kampung Buah Pala folks in 2008 in Penang and they totally reneged on their promise.

That is a precedent for the value of all their promises. This declaration is put forward as a promise.

I wonder how much commitment there is now to this promise. Whatever they did eventually for the Kampung Buah Pala folks, was because of the pressure that was brought to bear on them, it was not out of any obligations to their promises.

The Pakatan argument against Hindraf's blueprint has always been that it is race-based and not need based.

May I ask "what based" is this Gelang Patah Declaration when 11 out of 14 items in it come from a "race-based" document.

This double speak is so typical of what we have been seeing lately with Pakatan.

If you have been following the story – the first Pakatan Manifesto had zero election pledges addressing the problems of the Indian poor. Then after an uproar from the people, they included five items into the revised manifesto (the additional items also came from the Hindraf blueprint).

Then seeing that this was not cutting it enough, now the number of items taken up has gone up to 11.

In 2008 Pakatan hijacked the Hindraf rallying cry 'Makkal Sakthi'. In 2013 they are now attempting to hijack Hindraf's blueprint. It is shameful.

Is this all the intellectual capability the DAP can muster? Is copying the best they can do? It is so shameful for a national party to plagiarise. How much commitment can there be in any effort like this.

We are wondering why this Gelang Patah Declaration did not extend to include the most impactful intervention such as a Felda type of land allocated contract farming proposal. Why was this not copied out as well from Hindraf's blueprint?

DAP supremo Karpal Singh on March 30 called out to Anwar Ibrahim to endorse Hindraf's blueprint. The next day, his son Gobind Singh is in Gelang Patah beside Lim Kit Siang launching this DAP blueprint. What circus is this?

Posted: 01 Apr 2013 01:19 PM PDT

Despite public complaints, work on the LRT extension in the Klang Valley is proceeding with scant regard for safety.

Syed Nadzri, FMT

Our worst fears about the way the construction of the light rapid transit (LRT) extension in the Klang Valley is going on came true last Friday when a motorist was crushed to death by a falling beam.

A Vijayaingam was passing through the construction site on the road leading to Subang Airport when building equipment being hoisted by a crane gave way and fell on his car.

Another car was also badly hit by the falling beams causing its driver to be seriously injured.

Whether the accident could have been averted or whether there had been breach of duty of care is for the courts and the legal experts to decide. But work on the project has been shoddy.

The contractor, according to news reports, has been suspended by Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd, which is undertaking the extension work on behalf of the government.

But what is most worrying to the ordinary folk is the utterly messy work that has been going on, with almost complete disregard to the convenience of others. You hear the complaints every day.

A few days ago, the concrete fencing of a house in SS18, not far from where construction was going on in full swing, collapsed as a result of the vibration of the drilling.

And just hours before last Friday's most unfortunate incident, another lament was heard – from no less than a person about to perform Friday prayers. So do take note, contractor and the authorities.

The person was furious that the contractor, in carrying out his job, had completely sealed off the middle span of Persiaran Jengka, denying pedestrians to cross the street from SS17 to get to Masjid Darul Ehsan in SS15.

He was not alone of course in expressing disgust.

Manifestos must tackle real issues

Posted: 01 Apr 2013 12:19 PM PDT

Focusing on the people's immediate wants and bypassing national issues reflect the BN leadership's lack of vision, wisdom and capabilities.

Awang Abdillah, FMT

A manifesto is a package of offers that a political party promises to deliver if chosen to be the next government.

If the party is elected, then the manifesto should become its action blueprint for the next five years.

We have seen past Barisan Nasional manifestos which made all sorts of promises, but little attention was paid to the nation's real problems.

Take, for instance, the BN's manifesto for the 2008 general election. It promised all kinds of goods and services but failed to win the hearts and minds of the voters and this was visible when it lost its traditional two-thirds majority and five states to Pakatan Rakyat.

Focusing on the people's immediate wants and bypassing national issues reflect the BN leadership's lack of vision, wisdom and capabilities.

The 2008 BN manifesto, while setting the feel-good mood among the voters, did not guarantee BN votes.

The people are now mature enough not to buy lies and stories.

Since taking over the helm of the government in 2009, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has failed to implement the plans and programmes spelt out in BN's 2008 election manifesto.

His best shot now is to dish out instant goodies to the people to get their votes.

His government claims that the ETP (Economic Transformation Programme) and the GTP (Government Transformation Programme) are on track to propel Malaysia to becoming a high-income /developed nation by 2020.

But what have these programmes achieved in relation to the national issues?

Manifesto must include real issues

A true manifesto is one that spells out the current real national issues and measures to tackle them.

Secondly, it must be a manifesto committed to delivering the essential goods and services to all races, and thirdly, to dish out the (instant) goodies to the people subject to the funds available.

The manifesto must focus on the national issues such as the national debt, corruption, floods, security, poverty, oil royalty, development of infrastructure especially highways and roads in Sarawak and Sabah and cost of living.

If these major ills can be tackled, both Pakatan Rakyat and BN need not worry about how much goodies they dish out.

Will Pakatan sweep KL clean?

Posted: 01 Apr 2013 12:16 PM PDT

There are obstacles against the opposition pact's determination to improve on its 2008 performance.

Stanley Koh, FMT

Few political observers doubt that most of the 11 parliamentary seats in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur will go to Pakatan Rakyat in the coming election.

But will the opposition pact do better than it did in 2008 and make a clean sweep? Some would say "Yes", considering the general perception that urban voters have become more anti-Barisan Nasional than they were when the last election was held.

Furthermore, Pakatan needs only to capture one more seat – Setiawangsa – to make it a clean sweep.

Seasoned observers are not so sure. They say there are obstacles standing in the way of Pakatan realising this particular dream, the most onerous being BN's ability, through its collaboration with the Election Commission, to manipulate postal voting.

Indeed, the reason most often given for Pakatan's 2008 defeat in Setiawangsa is that postal ballots account for a large share of the votes in the constituency. According to 2012 figures, they number 12,432 out of 49,958 votes.

Other Kuala Lumpur constituencies with postal votes exceeding 5,000 are Segambut (6,517), Bukit Bintang (5,284) and Bandar Tun Razak (5,175). Batu and Wangsa Maju have 3,400 and 3,220 respectively.

Secondly, according to Cheras MP Tan Kok Wai of DAP, Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) and other authorities tend to sideline Pakatan representatives in consultations regarding the social and economic development of the city.

"Our elected representatives have been marginalised and kept in the dark on infrastructure development in Kuala Lumpur, including the budgetary planning involved," he complained.

He said these authorities were effectively denying the Pakatan MPs the right to represent their constituents.

"Opposition MPs are only accorded a token representation and are denied opportunities of effective representation by both DBKL and the Federal Territory Ministry."

Nevertheless, Tan added, there were encouraging signs from the electorate that inspire the opposition to push hard.

"We are encouraged by the fact that urban voters are now more IT-savvy, more aware than their counterparts in the rural and semi-urban constituencies," he said.

"This is particularly true in areas where the Chinese form the majority of voters, notably Kepong, Seputeh and Cheras.

"But since 2008, the opposition has also made great inroads among urban Malay voters, especially the younger ones.

"I believe the voting trend is continuously changing in the opposition's favour although it is still an uphill task in the coming election.

"KL urbanites are more politically savvy now. They want greater changes in the political landscape. Many want a stronger two-party system. I think the changing political consciousness among the urban Malays is a positive sign."

From rags to riches

Posted: 01 Apr 2013 12:11 PM PDT

THERE is a wide spread belief in this country that many crimes are committed by people of Indian ethnicity. I have been asked this question and it often goes like this, "why are so many Indians involved in crime uh?"

Selvi Gopal, fz.com

Well, I don't really have police statistics on hand or even trust it to give an adequate answer to that question but Hindraf, or Hindu Rights Action Force, has indicated that crime has indeed become a local Indian problem.

According to statistics provided by Hindraf, which was reported by New Delhi based think tank Observer Research Foundation, about 50% of all convicts in prison in 2004 and 41% of beggars in the country were Indians; and 15% of juvenile delinquents are Indians.

They also reported that the percentage of Indian civil servants fell from 40% in 1957 to less than 2% in 2005.

Interesting, the percentage drop in jobs in the civil service is made up by the percentage increase in crime rate.

Anyone who reads the newspapers on a regular basis would know that the crimes committed by members of the local Indian community are visible crimes; the obvious gang related violent crimes, the robberies and burglaries and crimes perpetuated within the community.

But what is often overlooked by those quick to point the finger at this community are the unseen crimes. The crimes committed by the loan sharks, the drug dealers, the vice groups and the human traffickers who force women and children to commit sex crimes.

And let's not forget about white collar crimes committed by corporate figures who rob shareholders and taxpayers through share manipulations and kickbacks.

And then there are industrial zones that are unused and feedlot companies that get such large loans that they don't know what to do all that money so the end up buying luxury cars and condos.

Crime is often associated with the poor and disenfranchised but rarely with the rich and powerful.

Crimes committed by some Indian Malaysians follows a well established path that's paved in poverty and discrimination.

Muhyiddin, the other Prime-Minister-in-Waiting

Posted: 31 Mar 2013 02:12 PM PDT

Don't complain five years later that Muhyiddin is a Prime Minister without popular mandate. This is his election, not Najib's, much like the 2008 poll was Najib's, not Abdullah's.

Wong Chin Huat, fz.com

IN hindsight, the 2008 elections were really a choice between, not Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, but between Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Anwar.

One reason Najib is attacked today for not dissolving parliament early is that he did not win his mandate in 2008, as the BN victory was won in Abdullah's name.

This was however true only if we were completely ignorant of the possibility that Abdullah would be significantly weakened, thanks to his predecessor Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's relentless attack.

If Abdullah could not rein in the warlords in UMNO in 2004 despite a 91% parliamentary majority, how could he survive his party comrades' onslaught after losing the conventional two-thirds majority. And denying Abdullah his two-thirds was what Mahathir, the opposition and a large segment of the public tacitly agreed on.

In that sense, the 2008 elections were Najib's inaugurating elections, just unannounced. Of course, some would cry foul for not being informed explicitly of the built-in succession agenda.

In the same way, the 2013 elections may be Muhyiddin's inaugurating elections but we have no excuse that we are not explicitly informed. For a year or so, many UMNO leaders have been talking aloud of the BN restoring its two-thirds majority, effectively denying Najib his chance of a soft landing – i.e. continuing to rule with a modest majority.

In the past five years, Malaysians have become bolder and bolder in standing up for their rights, and opposing unpopular government policies.

As shown in the Psy concert, they would not even "give face" to the Prime Minister by hiding their rejection.

How likely is it for the BN under Najib to even just do better than when under Abdullah?

In 2008, BN was eight seats away from the super-majority. Based on the outcome of the 2011 Sarawak state election, the ruling coalition will lose at least six more parliamentary seats there to the opposition.

This is before taking into consideration the marginal seats that BN may lose due to the recently released video clip implicating Taib and his relatives in land sale scandals.

Now, out of the 15 seats currently held by MCA, the BN's second largest party, 13 have an electorate with one third or more being Chinese voters.

If the Chinese support for the opposition goes to 80%, MCA must be able to get at least two-thirds of non-Chinese votes to keep these seats.

With MCA chief Chua Soi Lek's sensitive-sounding statements on Islam, it is quite unlikely that MCA can even count on a two-thirds majority amongst the Malay voters.

Even before including a couple of Sabah seats that are expected to be lost, thanks to the Project M and the government's handling of the Sulu incursion, the BN may lose up to 19 more seats alone due to the Sarawak and Chinese discontents.

Now, can UMNO – the strongest party in BN – deliver 19 more seats to just maintain the status quo in 2008, let alone another eight more seats to regain the two-third majority?

Suluks next big wave after Hindraf's makkal sakthi

Posted: 31 Mar 2013 12:58 PM PDT

There are an estimated 800,000 Suluks in Sabah albeit including illegal immigrants. The fear of such a political tsunami is evident in the declaration of the Eastern Sabah Security Command (ESSCOM) and the Eastern Sabah Safety Zone (ESSZONE).

Joe Fernandez

The Suluks are the next big wave in Malaysian politics, indeed a political tsunami, after Hindraf's makkal sakthi (people power in Tamil) in 2008.

Why not?

It may be time to say makkal sakthi in Suluk!

No one can begrudge the right of the Suluks to stand up and be heard separate from the concerns and dictates of Putrajaya in Sabah and Sarawak.

But the Suluk and their Bajau comrades in politics have to keep in mind that they are not Orang Asal (Original People) in Sabah. Sabahans can still point to the ancestral lands of the Suluk and Bajau elsewhere in the Philippines. As long as these two communities remember that, their politics will be more acceptable in Sabah. It would not do to underestimate the Orang Asal of Sabah.

Orang Asal support crucial to Suluk politics

If the Suluks want to have one leg in the Sulu Archipelago and another leg in the east coast of Sabah that's entirely their business. After all the kakas from Kerala who sell rojak in Malaya and the teh tarik mamaks from Tamil Nadu are doing it as well besides the Pakistanis and Banglawallahs in Sabah. Throw in the odd ah pek or two. But just in case anyone gets some funny ideas, they should remember that eastern Sabah is not part of the territory of the Orang Asal in the Sulu Archipelago.

If the Suluks want one of their kind to be Chief Minister of Sabah again, they have to sort it out with the Orang Asal. No one, Orang Asal or non-Orang Asal, can be Chief Minister of Sabah without the support of the Orang Asal. The late Mustapha Harun, the Suluk Chief, learnt it the hard way.

The Chinese will follow wherever the Orang Asal are going, a direction which is by no means clear to most people. This is a synergistic relationship between one group which has unfortunately never learnt to count and another which can buy at a loss and sell at a profit since time immemorial. Granted that many Orang Asal leaders are stooges of Putrajaya's proxies and rogue elements in Sabah but that's a different story.

We have to keep on the safe side and assume that there might be some method in their madness.

It's not always the rice wine -- tuak, lihin or montokou -- talking! That could prove to be deceptive.

One should also note their more sober moments and take the cue from there.

Putrajaya leaders should be hauled before ICC for war crimes

Nur Misuari of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) is also the man to watch if Suluk politics in Sabah is to get anywhere. Poor chap! Everyone is playing him out and his people.

Putrajaya is the Chief Culprit.

They have blood on their hands.

Think of all the thousands of innocent people on both sides who died in vain when they were not maimed for life, and traumatised.

Nur Misuari is right in pointing out that Malaysia is the main stumbling block to peace in the southern Philippines. Right is right and wrong is wrong. He should know what he's talking about. He admits to being trained, armed and financed by Malaysia to wage war against the Manila Government in the southern Philippines under the guise of Muslim Brotherhood, whatever it means.

In fact, there's a case for bringing Putrajaya before the International Criminal Court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing and genocide in southern Philippines. If every tinpot dictator in Africa, the Balkans and elsewhere can be hauled up before the ICC, why not the Malaysia Boleh leaders in Putrajaya committing a multitude of sins under this nefarious label. The involvement of Mustapha should be revisited too although the Suluks would beg to disagree. We can't indulge in selective prosecution.

We can only wish Nur Misuari well at the peace talks in Jakarta but without Malaysia.

Case for a Federation of Sabah and Sulu if Manila gives up Archipelago

However, Suluk politics must accept that Sabahans and Sarawakians will disagree with him saying that Sarawak belonged to his great great grandfather or something to that effect. He's not Orang Asal Sarawak. End of discussion.

The Suluks in Sabah must also accept that defunct Sulu Sultanate also does not have a leg to stand on Sabah or parts of it. It's unthinkable that the Suluks, after having fled the evil of the Manila Government, would want Sabah or parts of it to be awarded to the Philippines. If the Suluks can wrest the Sulu Archipelago away from the Philippines, there might be a case for forming a Federation of Sabah and Sulu, one country, two systems, two immigration systems, and one common market.

The sovereignty of Sabah rests with its people and not the defunct Sulu Sultanate which has long been consigned to the dustbin of history.

True, the Sulu Sultans used to extort tolls at one time from the terrified traffic along the waterways in eastern Sabah. It's best for the Suluks not to make a song and dance act of this and misrepresent this criminal act of a pirate as representing private property rights or as having sovereignty.

By Adat and history, the entire land area of Sabah and Sarawak is NCR (Native Customary Right) and belong to the Orang Asal. Again, the descendents of the heirs to the defunct Sulu Sultanate cannot claim private property rights to Sabah or parts of it.

Nur Misuari, Sulu, Malaya have no business in Sabah, Sarawak

Nevertheless, Malaysia should agree to go to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and settle these matters.

If Sabahans are going to end up as Filipinos, so be it. At least the Filipinos don't endlessly indulge in hysterical talk, as if they are in a trance, about ketuanan Tagalog.

Maybe Jeffrey Kitingan will finally have a chance to get somewhere in his politics as President but of the Philippines.

He may appoint me as the Philippines Ambassador to the UN, the Vatican or Malaysia, not that I am pushing for it. I might even go to Washington which I am told is only as big as Kajang. I have always wanted to visit Washington, New York and the original 13 colonies in the United States. Something happened here to push the US towards greatness.

However, the ICJ is certain to rule that Misuari, Sulu and Malaya have no business to be in Sabah and Sarawak.

Malaysia a plot against Sabah, Sarawak by British sodomists

So, that's why Putrajaya will never agree to go to the ICJ in a million years. They would rather commit hara kiri en masse since so great would be their so-called shame in the eyes of the world. They would stand unmasked for the entire world to see for what they really are and what they are more than capable of doing for narrow, selfish self-serving ends.

Strangely, none of the ketuanan Melayuists in Putrajaya, including Mahathir Mohamad the advocate of the hara kiri culture among Malays, killed themselves when the ICJ ruled that Pulau Batu Putih or Pedra Branca belonged to Singapore by virtue of Malaysia's inaction on the island to maintain sovereignty. Had the ICJ noted that Singapore was unconstitutionally, unlawfully illegally expelled from Malaysia in 1965, Pulau Batu Putih would still be Malaysian territory. The then Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had the doors of Parliament locked until the MPs agreed to vote to expel Singapore.

There was No Referendum on Malaysia in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya. The ketuanan Melayuists in Malaya, like Sulu and Nur Misuari a la the Brunei sultanate, think that Sabah and Sarawak are their grandfather's ancestral property bequeathed to them by the British sodomists, who were only too fond of the Malay boys they kept, as a parting gift to run their own little colonial empire.

The question of a Referendum on Malaysia in Sabah and Sarawak, 50 years too late, does not arise. Sabah and Sarawak should regain their independence of 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963 respectively. In fact, in the case of Sarawak, their independence was restored when the Japanese occupation forces in the country surrendered towards the end of World War II. The British coerced the Rajah of Sarawak to hand over his country to them for their nefarious plan to set up Malaysia.

Mahathir should only have the Right of Reply

The ICJ is certain to rule that the Manila Government has no business to be in the southern Philippines. The internal colonisation issue alone, as in South Sudan, will kill them at The Hague. Nur Misuari should focus on this issue at the UN Security Council. Why lay waste to the homeland through endless armed conflict when the truth is with the people of the southern Philippines?

The Suluks complained well before Lahad Datu about them and the Bajau being marginalised and disenfranchised by the increasing influx of illegal immigrants, especially from Sulawesi. Ironically, the leaders of the Suluk and Bajau communities were the only ones in Sabah to support the formation of Malaysia.

Also, the Suluks in particular complain about them and the Bajau not having any political party to represent them and instead were being submerged under the so-called Muslim Bumiputera label in the electoral rolls and being politically choked to death.

There is also the issue of the Pala'u (sea gypsies or Bajau Laut) being stateless.

The protem United Sabah National Organisation (Usno) of the Sabah Suluks and the State Reform Party (Star), its ally, can be expected to speak up on these major issues in the wake of Lahad Datu and in view of the forthcoming 13th General Election.

Usno does not appear to have its own website to highlight issues.

It posts its material in FaceBook. There might be some websites they can identify to help get a hearing and spread the message. But there are very few who will publish something even if they disagree with it.

Everyone, except Mahathir, has a right to be heard and the right of reply whether we agree or not. Mahathir, as a former PM, should only be seen and not heard but subject to the right of reply.

Not easy for Suluks to get space in the media

The Opposition in Sabah and Sarawak should not get bogged down by the rhetoric and polemics of the politics of disruption and distraction.

Often, this is nothing more than cheap entertainment when not being used as a ploy by cheap publicity seekers or by the media looking at their bottom lines and to collect angpows.

However, it won't be that easy for the Suluks in Sabah to get space in the media.

The media, both mainstream and the great majority of the alternative media, is public enemy number one in Malaysia.

One alternative media owner confided in frustration that the great majority of his people are on the take. He intends to sack the entire lot after the 13th General Election. He can't believe that they are capable of running all the "nonsense" that they are uploading on Sabah and Sarawak in particular.

Many will agree with him on this observation.

Mahathir more confident than PR in handling criticism

The corruption of the media in Malaysia is complete. One needs to beware of the media! Forewarned is forearmed.

It's an uphill battle for any 3rd Force in Malaysia to get a hearing in the Court of Public Opinion.

Both Mahathir and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) are funding the alternative media and various blogs. This amounts to hundreds of millions in ringgit.

Mahathir runs a blog to cover up the fact that he's funding the alternative media and various blogs.

In the case of Mahathir, he just wants his views to be carried and he wants to exercise his Right of Reply. He doesn't mind if others are extended the same privilege because that's one way that he can keep himself in the news and alive. Besides, unlike PR he's confident that he can fend off any criticism against him.

In the case of Pakatan Rakyat, their funding comes with a condition: "Don't carry anything that makes PR look bad. Don't promote a Sabah/Sarawak-based 3rd Force in Malaysian politics." The 3rd Force is routinely criminalised, demonised, dehumanised, neutralised, isolated, and marginalised with a view to exhausting it and therefore that much easier to eliminate and exterminate.

Free media like looking for needle in haystack

However, when it comes to Mahathir, there's nothing that PR can do. He can afford to dole out more money -- a tiny fraction of his reported US$ 44 billion in ill-gotten gains can go a long way -- to the alternative media and blogs than PR. So PR has no choice but live with Mahathir in the alternative media and blogs. As a fallback option, they rely on lawsuits to bankrupt their critics and shut them up. They have tried suing Mahathir too but gave up after he said he's willing to be bankrupted but he won't shut up.

Taib Mahmud of Sarawak relies more on the mainstream media and so the alternative media and bloggers are after his blood simply because he's being tight-fisted with his money when it comes to them. They care two hoots whether he's corrupt or clean.

The people can only hope for a media that does not shut out anyone and gives a hearing to all.

That's like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Joe Fernandez is a graduate mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

Are Malays now a wounded civilization?

Posted: 31 Mar 2013 12:40 PM PDT

Malay unity has suffered owing to the NEP and other factors.

Christopher Fernandez, FMT

Prior to the attainment of Merdeka (Independence) and up to the point and until Tunku Abdul Rahman was the prime minister, Malaysians enjoyed a certain camaraderie till the May 13, 1969 riots caused the shift in power towards Abdul Razak.

When Razak assumed power, he hastily conceived and implemented the New Economic Policy (NEP). He most likely meant well for the Malays and other Bumiputeras, but he failed to gaze into the future to see how the NEP will evolve.

This was the failing of the NEP and Razak, which is to be now blamed as the root causes for the factionalism and strife occurring among the Malays in this country. This is why, since the advent of the NEP till now, the Malays have most likely emerged as a wounded civilization.

Tracing the root causes of the general unhappiness, discontent and strife within the Malay community now is difficult, as this involves the complicated and daunting task of going through seamless and vast decisions that have been made for them since Independence.

But the fact that they are now splintered and disunited is obvious.

While Umno, often labelled as "Uniting Malays Not Over", got down to work to get the Malays to reconcile their differences and be united with a stronger voice in this country, the reality on the ground is that Umno has failed to do so. The Malays are still as disunited as ever.

What is more worrying is that the Malays have caused the disunity among them to fester for so long, which is why they have now become a wounded civilization.

Ironically, it is the well-meaning NEP, an affirmative-action plan to assist Bumiputeras, that can be singled out as the main cause of misery and disunity among the Malays throughout the 30 years of its tenure.

Perhaps if the Malay leaders back then had stuck to the Tunku's ideals and practice of meritocracy and decided to play by the rules of the game, the Malays would have fared much better now.

Still a discontented lot

By dangling the NEP carrot to the Malays – instead of dealing with them with a stick – the community now lacks the resilience and true capability to stand on their own especially in a globalised era.

While Malay leaders of the post-May 13, 1969 era should perhaps not be faulted as they needed to quickly address the situation to bring about racial harmony, the failure on their part to deal with the actual causes of the problem in a fair and just manner is to be blamed.

By being the largest number in terms of race, the Malays, through their leaders, ganged up on the other races: they bullied and cowed them into submission, and all the while thinking that the NEP would work wonders for them.

The Malays failed to adhere to the tenets and obligations of social justice and democracy, and instead took the easy solution. This has backfired on them: today they are incapable of rising up, prompting the government to continue to bail them out.

Why we must vote

Posted: 31 Mar 2013 12:25 PM PDT

Crime and corruption loom large; racial integration is at an all-time low; education woes are unresolved; justice hangs in the balance; equity and equality are miles away. Pointing fingers at the government is easier to do than to admit that the people themselves are creating these perennial problems.

Halimah Mohd Said, The Sun Daily

IN A HUGE way, the procrastination over the timing of the 13th general election has created the perfect opportunity for the rakyat to seriously weigh the good, the bad and the ugly.

For close to a year, we have been inundated with statements and counter statements, attacks and counter attacks from both sides of the political divide. Going by the vigorous campaigning of the opposition parties, it would appear that nothing is going right for Malaysia.

In their eyes, the nation is in a state of near collapse or chaos, all the policies are wrong and their implementation flawed – until they take over.

Yet on the side of the ruling party, we have been exposed to the daily barrage of structural changes and systems transformations; achievement records and policy successes; innovative paradigms and motivating game changes.

There are promises and more promises of what is to come. Indeed, despite what the economic pundits and financial whiz kids warn, the next phase of Malaysia's development will be even brighter according to the official spokespersons.

Then there are the numerous counter-arguments highlighting the national boo-boos and failures. Crime and corruption loom large; racial integration is at an all-time low; education woes are unresolved; justice hangs in the balance; equity and equality are miles away. Pointing fingers at the government is easier to do than to admit that the people themselves are creating these perennial problems.

Those who are able to resist the political blame game see the national dilemma as one of failing ethics and falling moral standards in a society that is growing more materialistic by the day.

Businesses evade regulations to maximise profits; lawyers exploit loopholes in the law to earn big money; politicians dole out ringgit to secure power; the public and private sectors are graft-ridden; enforcement officers and criminals seem to be entangled in bribery cahoots.

It seems as though we have created a culture where money begets money, political and economic power at the expense of sound values and principles.

However, in a country where more than one half the population are still grappling with a low-income status and one quarter are aspiring towards the highest income levels, talk of economic advancements and business opportunities is the crowd puller for the government in power at the state and federal levels.

Public platforms promoting discourse on ethics and decorum, values and principles attract mainly a sprinkling of the urban converted thus leaving out a huge chunk of those that need to be educated in them.

One exception seems to be the congregations in places of worship – mosques, churches and temples. If only the arguments about ethics and morality can be removed from a strictly spiritual perspective and injected with greater relevance for day-to-day living.

Thus when we talk about winnable candidates for the elections and who we should vote for, the question remains as to who is winnable and in whose eyes?

When we talk about who has taken the election integrity oath and who has not, the question remains as to what exactly they have sworn to do or not do? If the pledge requires candidates and their parties not to indulge in money politics, then we have to ask why the BN leaders have readily agreed to take the oath and the opposition parties have not?

It is obvious that Malaysians will vote in the candidates and the party that are winnable in their own eyes. People will choose the candidates/party with a sound track record and with considerable persuasive powers to convince the constituents that they will continue to deliver.

Indeed, when we are faced with the ballot paper we should be looking at candidates who are known in the community and not complete strangers thrust upon us from afar.

Foremost on our mind is whether the person has the capability and the clout to get work done. Our main consideration should be that the candidate is able to work with the authorities to bring about the necessary improvements in the lives of the people.

An overriding concern is whether he or she will be fully committed to the promise of bringing optimal benefits to the people.

We have had ample time to reflect on the type of political leaders we want to lead us into the next phase of the nation's life. Whatever our convictions are about Malaysia's needs for the next five years, we have to exercise the greatest wisdom in selecting the right people to be our state representatives and MPs.

Most will agree that Malaysia needs visionary leaders with the foresight to anticipate and plan for the nation's economic development.

Some will insist the country needs courageous leaders to innovate, implement and enforce strong socio-cultural policies. Some are convinced we need principled leaders to put us back on high moral ground. A few will abstain for reasons best known to them.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Rabu, 3 April 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan