Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- So it’s settled then
- Looking at things realistically
- The ‘third party’ whom Rafizi Ramli spoke about
- Can we just have the truth?
- Seeing things from the right perspective
- Claiming credit for other people’s work
| Posted: 08 Jan 2013 07:57 PM PST
Malaya or Malaysia did not attend the conference because Malaya and Malaysia did not exist yet at time. Malaya was created only in 1957 and Malaysia in 1963. Hence Malaya/Malaysia is not a party to that treaty or a recipient of any compensation. The recipient would be Britain, the colonial masters of the non-existent Malaya/Malaysia at that time. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin So it's settled then. Pakatan Rakyat allows non-Muslims to us the Allah word. Barisan Nasional does not allow non-Muslims to use the Allah word. MCA, the lead partner in Barisan Nasional after Umno, has no opinion about the matter. You use or don't use the Allah word they don't care. They are not going to comment about it. MIC does not want to comment whether they are going to comment. They are just going to maintain an elegant silence. So you do not know whether MIC agrees or does not agree to non-Muslims using the Allah word. And MIC will soon be known as MINC, the acronym for 'May I Not Comment'. His Highness the Sultan of Selangor does not agree to non-Muslims using the Allah word. The Church does not agree to His Highness the Sultan not agreeing to non-Muslims using the Allah word. Some people in Pakatan Rakyat agree with Pakatan Rakyat's stand. Some people in Pakatan Rakyat do not agree with Pakatan Rakyat's stand. Some people in Pakatan Rakyat do not want to take a stand regarding Pakatan Rakyat's stand. Some people in Barisan Nasional agree with Barisan Nasional's stand. Some people in Barisan Nasional do not agree with Barisan Nasional's stand. Some people in Barisan Nasional do not want to take a stand regarding Barisan Nasional's stand. So it's settled then. Malaysian politics can no longer be divided between Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional. Because there are supporters, opposers and abstainers from both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional, Malaysian politics must now be divided between the pro-Allah word and the anti-Allah word grouping. Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional plus their 13 or so component party members will need to be disbanded and a new grouping of pro-Allah word and anti-Allah word be created to face the coming general election. The voters will then be able to vote along the lines of whether they support or oppose the use of the Allah word. Once either the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping wins the general election and gets to form the new federal government, Malaysians can expect to see brighter days ahead of them. Maybe corruption, abuse of power and wastage of public funds will still be a problem and we will still not see transparency, accountability and good governance, but at least Malaysians would have resolved one extremely important issue -- whether the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping gets to run the country. With either the pro-Allah word or the anti-Allah word grouping running the country, foreign investors will flock to Malaysia and will pour billions into the country. More jobs will be created and no Malaysian will face unemployment. There will, in fact, be a huge problem of labour shortage, which will allow a few million Indonesians to migrate to Malaysia to fill up the many job vacancies. These Indonesians can then be given Malaysian citizenship and they will be able to vote in future Malaysian general elections. Malaysia can then increase the minimum wage to RM1,500 a month, as what some people want, which can be further increased by 10% a year so that Malaysians can be ahead of the inflation rate and not find it hard to make ends meet. In time, Malaysia's minimum wage can match that of the UK, which is roughly RM35 an hour. Then the one million Malaysians living and working overseas can return to Malaysia and seek employment at home since Malaysia is facing a shortage of workers and is paying high wages, comparable to that of the UK. Malaysia's political culture would also see a revolutionary change that it much needs. No longer will politics be about who makes a better Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak or Anwar Ibrahim. It will also no longer be about Ketuanan Melayu, the New Economic Policy, Article 153, Bahasa Malaysia, Malaysia's poor education system and poor health service, etc. It will be about whether you support or oppose the use of the Allah word. Malaysians of all races and religions will no longer be divided like they are now. Malaysians of whatever race and religion will be united under one of two umbrellas. And these umbrellas would be either you support or you oppose the use of the Allah word. Now, on the second issue of the so-called RM207 billion from Japan, the Treaty of San Francisco or the San Francisco Peace Treaty between Japan and the Allied Powers was officially signed by 48 nations on 8th September 1951 at the War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco, United States. It came into force on 28th April 1952. The countries that attended the Conference were Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Japan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Saudi Arabia, the Soviet Union, Sri Lanka, South Africa, Syria, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Vietnam. This treaty served to officially end World War II, to formally end Japan's position as an imperial power, and to allocate compensation to Allied civilians and former prisoners of war who had suffered Japanese war crimes. This treaty made extensive use of the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to enunciate the Allies' goals. Malaya or Malaysia did not attend the conference because Malaya and Malaysia did not exist yet at time. Malaya was created only in 1957 and Malaysia in 1963. Hence Malaya/Malaysia is not a party to that treaty or a recipient of any compensation. The recipient would be Britain, the colonial masters of the non-existent Malaya/Malaysia at that time. So that is also settled then, just like the use of the Allah word has been settled. And the Japanese Embassy has just confirmed that the RM207 billion does not exist just like Malaya/Malaysia did not exist when the treaty was signed. So now Malaysians can get back to the business of choosing their next government in the coming general election. And you will choose your government not on whether you support Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional but on whether you support or oppose the use of the Allah word. And once the election is over and the winning grouping gets to form the next government, Malaysia is going to prosper and is going to grow in leaps and bounds and in no time at all Malaysia is going to move from the bottom of the list of ASEAN countries to the top of the list, beating even Singapore and Indonesia, who are yet to resolve the issue of whether non-Muslims can or cannot use the Allah word. Malaysia is going to be remembered as the first of almost 200 countries all over the world that has officially decided on the matter of whether non-Muslims can or cannot use the Allah word. Malaysia has made history and in time will be hailed as a world leader poised to take over the leadership of the United Nations. Malaysians who used to be ashamed of their country will now be proud to be Malaysian. The United Nations may even consider shifting its headquarters from New York to Putrajaya in honour of the great progress the country has made in resolving the issue of the use of the Allah word. PROUD TO BE MALAYSIAN mAV7OM7jVac SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAV7OM7jVac |
| Looking at things realistically Posted: 07 Jan 2013 04:53 PM PST
Hence with 10 seats in the FT, 10 in Johor, 25 in East Malaysia, 11 in Kedah, 12 in Kelantan, 11 in Penang, 18 in Perak, 17 in Selangor, 1 in Terengganu, 1 in Melaka, 3 in Negeri Sembilan, 5 in Pahang and 0 in Perlis, Pakatan Rakyat can just scrape through with the majority that it needs to form the new federal government -- 124 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 98 seats for Barisan Nasional. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin In the March 2008 general election, Pakatan Rakyat won 80 Parliament seats in Peninsular Malaysia and only two in East Malaysia -- one each in Sabah and Sarawak. Barisan Nasional won 140 Parliament seats in total. Let's say this time around Pakatan Rakyat manages to retain its 80 Parliament seats in Peninsular Malaysia. It does not lose any of its seats and neither does it increase its seats in Peninsular Malaysia. That would mean Pakatan Rakyat would need to win at least 32 seats from East Malaysia (or an increase of 30 seats from the current two) to form the new federal government. The first question would be: would an increase from two to 32 be a realistic aim? Is that not too large a jump to expect? Nevertheless, 32 seats from East Malaysia would give Pakatan Rakyat a mere two-seat majority -- 112 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 110 for Barisan Nasional. That is too risky, as Barisan Nasional needs to buy over only one Pakatan Rakyat Member of Parliament to trigger a hung Parliament -- or two Pakatan Rakyat MPs to take over the government. Hence Pakatan Rakyat needs more than just an additional 32 seats. Preferably it should be at least 42 seats to make it safe for Pakatan Rakyat so that Pakatan Rakyat wins 122 Parliament seats versus 100 for Barisan Nasional. However, East Malaysia has only 56 Parliament seats -- 25 in Sabah and 31 in Sarawak. So 42 seats would not be a realistic target. At best Pakatan Rakyat may be able to win between 3-8 Parliament seats in Sabah and 7-11 in Sarawak. That would give Pakatan Rakyat only 10 to 19 Parliament seats in total -- far short of the 32-42 that Pakatan Rakyat needs to form the new federal government (or form the new federal government with a safe majority of 22 seats). Let's average those worst (11) and best (19) case scenarios for East Malaysia and put it as 15 seats in total. Added to the 80 seats from Peninsular Malaysia, that would give Pakatan Rakyat only 95 seats. And that would mean Barisan Nasional would still form the federal government with 127 Parliament seats. Hence 11-19 seats from East Malaysia are not enough. From the total of 56 seats for East Malaysia, Pakatan Rakyat must win at least 25. And this would mean Pakatan Rakyat must cooperate with other East Malaysian parties because on its own Pakatan Rakyat can never win 25 of the 56 seats from East Malaysia. On top of that, Pakatan Rakyat would need to win an additional 15 seats from Peninsular Malaysia from its current 80. I am assuming, of course, that Pakatan Rakyat can retain every single one of its 80 seats from Peninsular Malaysia. This would then give Pakatan Rakyat a total of 120 Parliament seats versus only 102 for Barisan Nasional. We are, of course, working on the assumption that Pakatan Rakyat can retain all its 80 Parliament seats from Peninsular Malaysia and then it wins an additional (new) 15 seats from Peninsular Malaysia plus 25 seats from East Malaysia (which would include some 'joint venture' arrangements with other non-Pakatan Rakyat parties). If not then it will not work. But where are these seats going to come from? Well, in the 2008 general election, Pakatan Rakyat won only 1 seat in Johor from the 26 seats in total. Hence Pakatan Rakyat would have to increase its seats in Johor to at least 10. In Pahang, Pakatan Rakyat won only 2 of the 14 seats. It would need to win at least 5 seats this time around. In the Federal Territory, Kedah, Penang and Selangor, Pakatan Rakyat may have already peaked. Hence it needs to look at Perak where it won only 13 of the 24 seats and try to increase this to 18 -- or an additional 5 seats. Hence with 10 seats in the FT, 10 in Johor, 25 in East Malaysia, 11 in Kedah, 12 in Kelantan, 11 in Penang, 18 in Perak, 17 in Selangor, 1 in Terengganu, 1 in Melaka, 3 in Negeri Sembilan, 5 in Pahang and 0 in Perlis, Pakatan Rakyat can just scrape through with the majority that it needs to form the new federal government -- 124 Parliament seats for Pakatan Rakyat versus 98 seats for Barisan Nasional. Of course, if Pakatan Rakyat can win 1 seat in Perlis, 2 in Melaka, and 3 in Terengganu, then it will sail in with 128 seats versus Barisan Nasional's 94. The earlier question I asked was: but where are these seats going to come from? The next question to ask, I suppose, is: can this be done? Pakatan Rakyat is confident that it can win at least 122-127 seats, leaving Barisan Nasional with only 95-100 seats. Barisan Nasional, on the other hand, is confident it can win 130-135 seats, leaving Pakatan Rakyat with only 90 or so seats. Only one can be right. Both cannot be right. Hence the other must be wrong. Which one do you think is right? |
| The ‘third party’ whom Rafizi Ramli spoke about Posted: 06 Jan 2013 12:00 AM PST
So Rafizi did not lie, and neither did Deepak. Rafizi admitted that Deepak did not give him any documents, as what Deepak claims. And that is because the documents came from Datuk Ravi, Anwar's Shaman, the man who decides on auspicious dates for Anwar to make his moves, although 16th September 2008 did not quite happen the way it was supposed to have gone. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin Four years ago, on 1st January 2009, Malaysia Today published a story regarding Datuk Ravi Dharan, which was lifted from The Malaysian Insider. Unfortunately, not many people took much notice of this story. Hence we are publishing it again, which you can read below. Now, recently, Rafizi Ramli spoke about a 'third party' giving him some documents regarding the alleged RM13 million jewellery that Deepak Jaikishan was supposed to have bought for First Lady Rosmah Mansor. Rafizi never named this third party, though, who is Datuk Ravi Dharan. If you refer to Deepak's latest interview of a month ago, which is on Youtube (SEE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWWgqWpYRIw), he mentioned that he is related to Datuk Ravi by marriage and was, in fact, introduced to Anwar Ibrahim through Datuk Ravi. Datuk Ravi has been acting as the secret 'adviser' of Anwar since way back before the party was formed in 1999. In fact, the party headquarters at Phileo Damansara is owned by Datuk Ravi -- a man who made his millions through Samy Vellu in the days when he was a Barisan Nasional crony-businessman. Datuk Ravi, who has a panel of bomohs (witch doctors) on his payroll, is in a way Anwar's 'spiritual adviser'. He advises Anwar on 'auspicious' dates (based on feedback from the bomohs). And one such auspicious date was 16th September 2008, the day Anwar was supposed to have taken over the federal government. Within PKR circles Datuk Ravi is known as 'Shaman' and the PKR leaders know that Anwar will never embark on anything unless first armed with advise from Datuk Ravi's bomohs. And what Rafizi refused to mention is that Datuk Ravi is the man who gave him the documents and hence what Deepak said is true -- that he never met Rafizi or gave him any documents. Datuk Ravi is on the Malaysian government's 'watch list'. The Malaysian government suspects that Datuk Ravi, who has links to the very top in the Indonesian government, is instrumental in the 'bad blood' between the Indonesia and Malaysian governments that seems to have become worse of late. So Rafizi did not lie, and neither did Deepak. Rafizi admitted that Deepak did not give him any documents, as what Deepak claims. And that is because the documents came from Datuk Ravi, Anwar's Shaman, the man who decides on auspicious dates for Anwar to make his moves, although 16th September 2008 did not quite happen the way it was supposed to have gone. ****************************************************** As Hindraf spat worsens, a new Anwar ally emerges First published in Malaysia Today on 1st January 2009 When the bushfire of Indian dissatisfaction in the PKR threatened to turn into an inferno, party supremo Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, holidaying in the Middle East, called from Dubai and urged a man he trusted to investigate what was really going on, how big it was and why it was happening.
Shadowy businessman Datuk Ravi Dharan (picture above), chairman of the Daya group of companies, has always been in the shadows of the PKR, serving only Anwar before and after the March 8 polls and during the run-up to the abortive September 16th plan to topple the Barisan Nasional government via defections. He was close to Anwar when the latter was the finance minister and like other tycoons in Anwar's circle, he suffered after Anwar was sacked and jailed in 1998. Ravi, 59, went abroad and soon settled down in Indonesia where he has interests in several areas, including coal mining in Kalimantan.
Raja Petra Kamarudin, Datuk Ravi and Gus Dur However, unlike Anwar's other former friend Datuk K.S. Nallakaruppan, Ravi remained loyal to the former and was a big supporter — personally and financially — of the opposition leader during the March 8 general election campaign. Anwar has now become worried that Indian dissatisfaction with his party, centred on the resignation of Kapar MP S. Manikavasagam as the party's Selangor deputy chief, will flare up, and he has sought out Ravi to quell the rebellion. This will be the political coming out for Ravi who had always remained in the shadows. It is significant that Anwar did not task any of the more senior party leaders such as deputy president Dr Syed Husin Ali, vice-president S. Sivarasa, seen as the nominal Indian head of the party, Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, Selangor exco member Dr Xavier Jeyakumar or even PKR Padang Serai MP M. Gobalakrishnan. "It was to Ravi that Anwar turned too," said a PKR insider, adding that Anwar was worried that a "hidden hand" was manipulating the "rebellion" and splitting the party especially in light of speculation reported in online news website Malaysiakini that PKR rebels together with Hindraf leader P. Uthayakumar and chairman P. Waythamoorthy were in alliance with MIC rebels to oust embattled MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu. Manikavasagam's relationship with Sivarasa and Dr Xavier and possibly Khalid, whom he has accused of betraying the people's trust by not fulfilling election promises, is now beyond repair, PKR insiders said. Under these circumstances Anwar relied on Ravi as a trusted ally, in the same role once played by Nallakaruppan before their dramatic falling out, to help contain or extinguish the Manikavasagam fire. Ravi attended a meeting of over 100 Indian supporters of Hindraf/Makkal Sakthi yesterday that discussed the problems raised by Manikavasagam and former PKR deputy secretary-general P. Jenapala.
Datuk Ravi settling the 'Indian problem' Both Manikavasagam and Jenapala also attended the closed-door meeting. "Ravi listened carefully, watched their body language and never uttered a single word," said a PKR supporter who attended the meeting. Later at the press conference Ravi moved in to take charge, admitting there were differences over issues among the PKR leaders. "This is a democratic process, we meet, we discuss, tell our differences and we seek consensus," Ravi told The Malaysian Insider after the meeting. "We all have one aim — to make Anwar prime minister — and until then we should remain committed and united," said Ravi.
Datuk Ravi's aim, to make Anwar Ibrahim the Prime Minister He was worried PKR's political enemies would exploit the differences. "We should not give them that opportunity," he told the people gathered. "I don't think there is a hidden hand behind the open airing of differences in PKR." The meeting resolved that Manikavasagam and others would meet Anwar on his return and lay their unhappiness at his feet for a resolution of the differences. Nevertheless the discontent is too fundamental to be resolved without upsetting the PKR's delicate racial balance. The animosity between Manikavasagam and the rest of the PKR Indian leadership cannot be ignored. The others — Sivarasa, Dr Xavier, Khalid and others — control Selangor PKR and are big names in the PKR setup although at the Makkal Sakthi grassroots level they are lightweights compared with Manikavasagam. While Manikavasagam sees himself as a Makkal Sakthi founder, he accepts Uthayakumar and Waythamoorthy as his real mentors, and he also has the highest regards for Anwar. It is left to Anwar to see how best to balance the demands of the big names in the PKR who are all for sacking Manikavasagam and satisfying the Makkal Sakthi grassroots who have adopted PKR as their new political home but want a bigger slice of the largesse. What Ravi recommends to Anwar will play a crucial role in the balancing act. |
| Posted: 05 Jan 2013 06:52 PM PST
Although the 'loss' of this RM207 billion is a good election issue and very favourable to the opposition, the opposition faces the danger that if this allegation is, in fact, true and if the government were to release information or documents to prove that Anwar had a hand in the matter or had knowledge of what happened to the money and yet he chose to remain silent then this issue could backfire badly on the opposition. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin Ex-Health Minister Chua Jui Meng has raised a very pertinent point in his letter/statement published in Free Malaysia Today (which you can read below). What happened to the RM207 billion that Japan paid Malaysia back in the 1990s? As what Lim Kit Siang, the Opposition Leader in Parliament in the 1990s said, both the Finance Minister as well as the Prime Minister need to be accountable for any wrongdoings and transgressions. This statement is consistent with the call by the opposition that Tun Daim Zainuddin, the one-time Finance Minister of Malaysia, should be held accountable for wrongdoings and transgressions during his watch and he can't just wash his hands and shift the blame solely to the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. As what Lim Kit Siang said in Parliament in 1994, Anwar Ibrahim, the Finance Minister from 1991 to 1998, has to be accountable for whatever happened during his watch. Prior to that, from 1984 to 1991, Tun Daim was the Finance Minister and was reappointed Finance Minister in 1998 after Anwar was sacked. Hence three people would be privy to what happened to the RM207 billion -- Dr Mahathir, Daim and Anwar. Hence, also, one of these three people must explain what happened to this RM207 billion. The question of who authorised the 'mismanagement' of this money is one issue. The more important question is: does any of the three -- Dr Mahathir, Daim and Anwar -- have knowledge about the matter? Anwar can settle this easily by stating that he has absolutely no knowledge of this matter or, if he does, that the money was 'hijacked' at the behest of Dr Mahathir and that the matter was totally beyond his control although he was the Finance Minister. Although the 'loss' of this RM207 billion is a good election issue and very favourable to the opposition, the opposition faces the danger that if this allegation is, in fact, true and if the government were to release information or documents to prove that Anwar had a hand in the matter or had knowledge of what happened to the money and yet he chose to remain silent then this issue could backfire badly on the opposition. From my dealings with the Finance Ministry since 1977 -- soon after Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah became the Finance Minister in 1976 -- I am aware that the Finance Ministry has certain autonomy and has been known to override the wishes of the Prime Minister. Maybe Ku Li can confirm this because he knows what I am talking about (and he was once the President of the Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry). I remember back in the days when I was a central committee member of the Malay Chamber of Commerce and we had a meeting with Dr Mahathir to complain about Bank Negara. We felt that certain policies of Bank Negara were not favourable to the Bumiputera businessmen and actually dampened the investment climate. Dr Mahathir replied that the Bank Negara Governor then, who was Dr Mahathir's brother-in-law, never listens to him and reports to the Finance Minister and not to the Prime Minister. Hence the PM was having a big 'headache' with Bank Negara. Dr Mahathir then suggested we meet up with the Finance Minister and try to get them to make Bank Negara more receptive to the Malay Chamber of Commerce. In one meeting we had with the Secretary General of the Finance Ministry, the Sec-Gen related the story of a meeting he and the Governor had with Dr Mahathir where the Governor 'scolded' the Prime Minister regarding certain policies that were not favourable to the country. My personal experience in dealing with the Prime Minister's Department, the Finance Ministry, and Bank Negara, back in the 1980s was that each unit was very protective of its turf and they were very careful about infringing each other's territory. In the many meetings we had in the late 1980s to thrash out the Tabung Pemulihan Usahawan (TPU), it was clear that Bank Negara was quite independent of the Prime Minister's Department (by virtue of the 'strength' of the Governor) and the Finance Ministry would override certain things that the Prime Minister wanted. In one meeting that we had with the Prime Minister where we raised certain displeasures concerning government policies, Dr Mahathir was exasperated and told us to go meet the Finance Minister because this was a Finance Ministry decision and he cannot interfere in the matter. I am speaking from my 20 years experience in dealing with the government as a businessman and central committee member of the Malay Chamber of Commerce. Our frustration was about after meeting the Prime Minister and getting him to agree to a certain matter, the Finance Minister would not 'play ball'. We had to, again, try to get the Finance Minister to agree to what we wanted although the Prime Minister had already agreed to the matter. Our experience with Tun Daim was even worse. While Anwar was a politician and would be more diplomatic in how he handled us, Tun Daim, who was not a politician, would tell us that if the Prime Minister had agreed to it then ask the PM to approve it because he refuses to do so. In one meeting we had with Tun Daim, he pulled out a letter from his drawer and waved it in front of us. "This is my pre-signed and undated resignation letter," he told us. "If the PM is not happy with me he can have my resignation." That was a clear message that the Finance Minister decides and he will not take instructions from the Prime Minister and if the PM is not happy with that he (Tun Daim) is prepared to resign. We even met the Prime Minister to complain about this but Dr Mahathir told us that we had to sort it out with Tun Daim. In another meeting that we had with Tun Daim where we raised a certain issue and told him that Dr Mahathir does not agree to what we want, Tun Daim phoned Dr Mahathir in front of us and told the PM that he has agreed to what the Malay Chamber of Commerce wanted. Tun Daim overrode Dr Mahathir and not the other way around. In one meeting that we had with Anwar, who was by then the Finance Minister, Anwar phoned Tun Daim in our presence to ask Tun Daim to inform Dr Mahathir that he has agreed to what we wanted. From my personal experience, the relationship of the Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Economic Adviser to the government, and Bank Negara Governor, was a very complicated relationship and we never knew at each point of time who we should be talking to if we wanted things done. One thing that was very clear, though, was that each was the boss of his own turf. And Chua Jui Meng and Anwar Ibrahim both know this and hence should go public on this so that Malaysians can get to the truth of the matter because RM207 billion is a lot of money and the truth should not remain hidden. ******************************************* Who hijacked the Death Railway money? The money - RM207 billion - is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. What has happened to it? By Chua Jui Meng, Free Malaysia Today Is Dr Mahathir Mohamad going to take the same "silence is golden" stand as Najib Tun Razak and his infamous diamond-loving wife Rosmah Mansor when cornered by an issue? The revelation by the Japanese Embassy that it had paid compensation to the Malaysian government for families of victims of the so-called "Death Railway" project in the 1940s is shocking. The sum of RM207 billion or whatever the amount must be revealed by Mahathir. He was close to the Japanese government and corporate sector when he promoted his Look East Policy aimed at enhancing trade with Japan. The money, believed to be amounting to RM207 billion, was meant to be distributed to some 30,000 Malaysians who had been recruited as forced labourers by the Japanese to build the Thai-Burma rail link. This means each affected family is entitled to receive between RM2.8 million and RM3 million as compensation. The stinking part of the Umno-led Barisan Nasional federal government is that the public is today unaware of the compensation payment by the Japanese. We would have thought Mahathir would have brought the money back from Japan in triumph, like a victorious Roman general. Umno would have organised a huge gathering of the victims or their families and distributed the money. No, it was all covered in secrecy. National probe needed The money rightfully belongs to the victims of the "Death Railway" project and their families and to rob them is despicable. The money is believed to have been transferred by the Japanese government to Malaysia in the 1990s. This means it happened during Mahathir's 22-year reign. Who then has hijacked or stolen the money? It is no small sum and surely Mahathir cannot expect us to accept his infamous "I cannot remember" or "I am unaware of such compensation money from Japan"? This time, Malaysians cannot accept his "selective loss of memory" or "selective amnesia". Whoever stole the money from the 30,000 dead Malaysians is/are worse than animals, hitting the depths of greed. The government must immediately set up a national probe team to track down the thief/thieves to recover the money and for prosecution. Surely there are paper trails, beginning with the transfer/s from the Japanese to the Malaysian government. Meanwhile, Japan can do further justice to the 30,000 Malaysian forced labourers who died in the "Death Railway" project by revealing their identities so that their families are traced. Ultimate danger And, as for Mahathir who said five years of Pakatan Rakyat-rule is dangerous because BN will have no chance to return to power, I say, "Good riddance". After 55 years of misrule, it is time to retire Umno permanently. With mounting and rising federal debts at RM620 billion or 74% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), meaning the BN is operating way above the 55% federal debt ceiling, that is more dangerous to Malaysians and the country. If, for some reason, our oil wells suddenly run dry, we will immediately be deemed a bankrupt nation and untold misery would befall all Malaysians. Also, a point to show why Pakatan is more dependable is that the financial management of the Pakatan states, debuting in 2008, has been acknowledged by the Auditor-General as more superior than the states governed by the BN. And Mahathir's silence over reports of his allegedly US$44 billion (more than RM132 billion) in accumulated wealth is even more dangerous. And with him now seemingly trying to engineer his son, Mukhriz, to rise as prime minister by or before the 14th general election, it is the ultimate danger for Malaysians and Malaysia. |
| Seeing things from the right perspective Posted: 02 Jan 2013 07:42 PM PST
Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party -- although he also appears to be reluctant to do so. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin Over the last few days I have read a few comments calling Rafizi Ramli a liar and accusing him of politicising the Deepak Jaikishan issue. First of all, so what if Rafizi is politicising issues? Is that not what politicians are supposed to do? You mean all those others in Pakatan Rakyat are not also politicising issues? You mean all those Umno and Barisan Nasional people are not also politicising issues? Accusing Rafizi of politicising issues is so stupid. It is like accusing a fox that is hanging around the chicken run of trying to whack the chickens. That is why God made foxes, to whack chickens. Whacking chickens is in the job specification of foxes. Why else do you think God made foxes? Do you think God made foxes so that sugar daddies can buy a fox fur coat for their mistresses?
Foxes were created so that they can whack chickens. And politicians were created so that they can politicise issues. And all this talk that politicians are the result of anal sex is utter bullshit and very unfair because you cannot get pregnant from anal sex and for sure no one can get born through the arsehole. Politicians are born just like you and me, the normal way, and politics is a career just like any other career. In fact, politics allows postmen and railway crossing guards attain career heights that postmen and railway crossing guards could never attain if they did not become politicians. It is like going to America, the land of opportunity. Where else can simple farmers or descendants of slaves become 'big people' if not in America? And if you can't migrate to America to become a 'big person' then you become a politician and get called Yang Berhormat or The Respected One. We must remember that everything in Malaysia is politicised. Even the Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnibenevolent, etc., God is politicised. Even with all that power that God possesses He cannot prevent his name from being politicised. And if the all-powerful God cannot stop his name from being politicised do you think Deepak Jaikishan can prevent his name from being politicised even if he imagines himself as a Sex God? Now, why do you say that Rafizi Ramli lied? What did he say that makes you come to a conclusion that he lied? Did Rafizi say he was there, say, when Deepak Jaikishan was alleged to have bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for First Lady Rosmah Mansor? Did Rafizi say he personally saw the jewellery and/or held them in his hand? He never said that. What he said was he has seen the documents and the documents were handed to him by someone he personally knows. He apparently trusts this person and probably has a relationship of sorts with this person. And this person handed him some documents that were supposed to be evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah. So, based on this, he held a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and that these documents are evidence that Deepak had bought RM13 million worth of jewellery for Rosmah. And the purpose Rafizi held that press conference to reveal the existence of these documents is so that the MACC or PDRM can investigate the matter and find out whether all this is true or false. It could be true or it could be false. But Rafizi would not know whether it is true or false. He can only hold a press conference to reveal the existence of these documents and leave it to the authorities to authenticate the documents and tell us whether the allegations are true or not.
Some of you ask: why hold a press conference? Why not make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration instead? If you are really sincere about seeing justice done then you should make a police report or sign a Statutory Declaration. Holding a press conference makes it appear like all you want to do is to politicise the issue. True, a police report or Statutory Declaration would be better than a press conference. A police report or Statutory Declaration looks less political than a press conference. But maybe you have forgotten that back in 1998 Anwar Ibrahim made a police report and he ended up getting arrested and was sent to jail for a long time. Ten years later, in 2008, I signed a Statutory Declaration and I too was arrested and charged for that. I was also detained without trial. So, do you really think a police report or Statutory Declaration is wise? So far no one has been arrested and sent to jail for holding a press conference. At worse you may be subjected to a civil suit. However, since the press conference is a party press conference, then when you get sued the party will come out with the money to pay for a lawyer to represent you in court. Can you remember that I was sued by many people -- UUM V.C. Nordin Kardi, Umno lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Lt Col Abdul Aziz Buyong and Lt Col Norhayati Hassan, etc. And I was sued because I made allegations against them. Now I have been declared bankrupt and yet still more civil suits are piling up against me. Has any Malaysian from 28 million Malaysians offered to help me out financially? When you write bad things about the government or about those who walk in the corridors of power everyone will clap and cheer you on. But when you get sued you have to carry that problem all by yourself. No one from all those people who clapped and cheered you on is going to come forward to volunteer to help you out financially. I am fortunate that I have some friends who are lawyers who volunteered to help represent me free of charge. In the Nordin Kardi case, however, no one came forward to help me out. So the court awarded him an uncontested win and I now have to pay Nordin Kardi RM2.5 million. But I do not have RM2.5 million and can't pay that amount. So I have to be declared a bankrupt, as I was in the earlier case involving an Umno Minister where the court asked me to pay RM1.3 million. Actually, it is now no longer worth anything to help me out unless you can afford to pay RM60 million, which is what I have hanging over my head -- and which is increasing every time I lose a case. Do you know I recently had to pay the government RM215,000 to get my house released? In the end, with tax and legal fees included, I had to pay about RM250,000 or else I would lose my house. And none of those people who clapped and cheered when I whacked the government came forward to help me settle that RM250,000. So my daughter had to go to the bank to borrow the money to help me out. Luckily I have a daughter who can qualify for a bank loan of RM250,000 or else my house would be gone. So you face a great risk when you whack the government. No doubt people will clap and cheer when you whack the government. But that is all you receive -- claps and cheers. If you make a police report, sign a Statutory Declaration, or write an article in your Blog, you will get arrested and will get sent to jail. And you not only get arrested but will get sued as well and then will be hit with millions in damages. Hence the safest thing to do would be to do what Rafizi Ramli did -- hold a press conference in the party's name. So I think you have to be a bit fair with Rafizi. He has no choice but to politicise the issues so that he can get the protection of the party when people sue him. If not Rafizi would end up like me if he does things outside the party. And he did not lie. He never said he was there or that he saw everything. What he said was that he was reliably informed, like what I said on my Statutory Declaration.
And I know it appears like Rafizi has done a U-turn. Yesterday he never said that the information or documents he received came from a third party. But now that Deepak has denied meeting him and/or denied giving him any documents, Rafizi turns around and says that the evidence came from a third party. Actually I know who that third party is but I am not sure whether I should reveal his name. What happens if that person sues me? No one is going to help pay for my legal costs and if I lose the case no one is going to help pay for whatever damages the court awards to the person suing me. So I have to think carefully whether to help Rafizi out by revealing the name of the person. Since Rafizi has the party behind him maybe I should leave it to him to reveal the name of this third party -- although he also appears to be reluctant to do so. Maybe Rafizi is worried that if he declares that he was not actually a witness but that the evidence was given to him by a third party then people will accuse him of doing a U-turn. Rafizi knows that that happened to me when I explained during my TV3 interview that I was not a witness but was informed about the matter by a third party. Everyone accused me of doing a U-turn even though I did not. Hence, understandably, Rafizi needs to be very careful here or else he will suffer the same fate that befell me. Rafizi is not only a product of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK). He is also a product of a UK university education. That makes him very clever. Most MCKK cum UK educated people are very clever. And, being very clever, he would most certainly be aware that most Malaysians are not very bright. In fact, some Malaysians -- those not from MCKK and a UK education -- can sometimes be downright stupid. Hence Rafizi has to be very careful with what he says. People will even accuse him of saying what he never said -- unless you are from MCKK and armed with a UK education (then you will not be stupid enough to accuse people of saying what they did not say). I am sorry if I sound like I am defending Rafizi. Even if I am defending Rafizi so what? Is it a crime to defend someone from your alma mater? Yes, I am defending Rafizi. I do not deny that and I am not apologetic or embarrassed about it. When someone deserves defending then you must defend that person. And if you are not happy with that then sue me. It is, after all, a free country. Anyone can sue anyone. Even the Christians are free to sue the government for not allowing them to use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat comes out with a statement next week also agreeing that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible then the Christians should sue Pakatan Rakyat as well. But wait first until next week and see what Pakatan Rakyat has to say because they will be meeting only next week to make a decision as to whether Christians can use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible. And if Pakatan Rakyat were to agree with the government that Christians should not use the name Allah in the Bahasa Malaysia Bible only then sue them. But I am confident Pakatan Rakyat will not agree with the government. |
| Claiming credit for other people’s work Posted: 31 Dec 2012 07:18 PM PST
Sure, we fight for freedom of speech. And that is one of the reasons why we oppose Umno and Barisan Nasional -- because we want freedom of speech. But freedom of speech means you are free to talk about what we like but should not talk about what we don't like. And PAS talks about Islam, which is something we don't like. Hence we are angry with PAS for talking about what we don't like even if under freedom of speech they have a right to talk about whatever they want to talk about. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin JAIP nabs 13 couples for 'khalwat' in New Year's Eve (Bernama) - The Enforcement Division of the Pahang Islamic Religious Department (JAIP) caught 13 unmarried couples between 18 and 25 years old in a Syariah crime prevention operation after the 2013 New Year Eve celebrations. JAIP chief enforcement officer Mohd Raffli Abd Malik said the couples were nabbed for committing khalwat at several budget hotels in town from 9pm Monday to 6.30am Tuesday. "Most of the couples were between 18 and 25 and were picked up from budget hotels around town where they had checked in after the New Year celebrations." "They will be charged under the Islamic Religious Administration and Pahang Malay Customs 1982 Enactment," he told reporters after the operation. ********************************************* Last night/early this morning, 13 unmarried couples were arrested in the state of Pahang, a state under Barisan Nasional, the same government that is in power at federal level. These unmarried couples were arrested under Islamic laws, also known as Syariah laws. Malaysia, however, is not an Islamic State. It is a Constitutional Monarchy with a Westminster system of government. In other words, Malaysia is almost similar to the UK and considering that our system is a legacy of the British Colonial Government that is not too surprising. Pahang is not only under Barisan Nasional. It is also the state were a Muslim woman was arrested and convicted for drinking beer and was sentenced to a punishment of whipping. Furthermore, Pahang is where a PKR leader who is also an ustaz (religious scholar) was arrested for being alone in a hotel room with a married woman, not his wife obviously. Looking at the track record of Pahang, it appears like Barisan Nasional is more Islamic than Pakatan Rakyat and is very serious about the implementation of the Islamic Syariah laws. None of the other states have sentenced a woman who drinks beer to a punishment of whipping. None of the other states arrested unmarried couples celebrating New Year Eve in a hotel room last night or early this morning. Only the Barisan Nasional run state of Pahang did this. Note that these unmarried couples were arrested under the Islamic Religious Administration and Pahang Malay Customs 1982 Enactment. Yes, it was under a 30-year old law that was passed back in 1982. 1982 was the year I did my first Haj. 1982 was also the year that Anwar Ibrahim left ABIM to join Umno so that, as he himself claimed, he can change Umno from the inside and make it more Islamic. Also very important, 1982 was when the Sixth General Election was held and Barisan Nasional won 132 of the 155 Parliament seats (or 86% of the seats in Parliament) on 61% of the popular votes while DAP won only 9 seats and PAS won 5 seats (with 8 seats going to independent candidates). And that was the law used to arrested these 13 unmarried couples in Pahang last night/early this morning, a law that was passed by the Barisan Nasional government in 1982 soon after Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad took over as Prime Minister and Anwar Ibrahim left ABIM to join Umno so that he can make Umno more Islamic. Many of us are very angry with PAS. We are very angry with PAS because they are trying to make Malaysia more Islamic. We are very angry with PAS because they are trying to remove Malaysia's secular system (or partial secular system) and turn Malaysia into a fully-fledged Islamic State (from the partial Islamic system that we have now). The weird thing is, while PAS talks about making Malaysia more Islamic (and which is the reason of our anger, because they talk about it) none of the PAS run states like Kedah or Kelantan arrested anyone last night or early this morning (and not because no one in Kedah and Kelantan were engaged in 'illicit' sex to usher in the new year, mind you). It is a Barisan Nasional state like Pahang that arrested unmarried Muslims for checking into a hotel room. What is of special interest to me is that this law that they used to arrest these unmarried couples is a 1982 law. And in 1982 Dr Mahathir had just become the Prime Minister and Anwar joined Umno to make it more Islamic. And in 1982 the Malaysian voters gave Barisan Nasional a resounding win in the Sixth General Election while the Islamic party, PAS, won only five seats. I think PAS is a fake. They talk about Islam. However, in states under their control, such as in Kedah and Kelantan, no one was arrested for illicit sex. Those who were arrested were arrested in a Barisan Nasional state like Pahang. And what I find even weirder is that the Menteri Besar of Pahang in 1982 was current Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. I wonder whether we should continue being angry with PAS. It looks like the culprits who 'Islamised' Malaysia were Dr Mahathir, Anwar and Najib. And these laws were enacted in 1982 when Dr Mahathir first became Prime Minister, Anwar left ABIM to join Umno, and Najib was the Menteri Besar of Pahang. Maybe we should just let PAS keep talking about Islam. After all, it is the Barisan Nasional government and not the PAS government that appears to be overzealous about implementing Islam. It is those who do not talk about Islam who appear to be the dangerous ones. In 1982, PAS was not in power in any of the states (not even in Kelantan). In fact, in 1982 PAS won only five Parliament seats. The people in power then were Dr Mahathir and Anwar at federal level and Najib in the State of Pahang. And the 13 unmarried couples arrested last night/early this morning were arrested under a 1982 law that was the product of Dr Mahathir, Anwar and Najib. Well, did I not say that politics is all about perception? And reality and perception are two different animals. We are angry with PAS because they talk too much about Islam. But it is not PAS that arrested these people last night/early this morning. Sure, we fight for freedom of speech. And that is one of the reasons why we oppose Umno and Barisan Nasional -- because we want freedom of speech. But freedom of speech means you are free to talk about what we like but should not talk about what we don't like. And PAS talks about Islam, which is something we don't like. Hence we are angry with PAS for talking about what we don't like even if under freedom of speech they have a right to talk about whatever they want to talk about. Or maybe PAS should stop talking about Islam. After all, last night/early this morning it was not the PAS run states but a Barisan Nasional run state that arrested 13 unmarried couples for celebrating New Year's Eve in a hotel room. And this law that they used to arrest these people was a law that was enacted in 1982 when Dr Mahathir first became Prime Minister and Anwar left ABIM to join Umno and Najib was the Menteri Besar of Pahang. Hence how can PAS claim credit for something that other people did back in 1982 when PAS was not running even a single state in Malaysia and won only five seats in Parliament? |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)
PKR certainly needs to think more non-communally. More than that, it should recognise that its real niche is not to bridge the divide between PAS and the DAP but to enable the articulation of so-called communal issues by the "ethnic others", as 
PAS
