Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Home Ministry wants standard manual on firearms use
Unravelling the culture of patronage
Lynas and the Malaysian Green movement — Kua Kia Soong
True Folk vs. Good Folk
BUDGET 2012 : Pakatan Rakyat VS Pakatan Rakyat

Home Ministry wants standard manual on firearms use

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 05:53 PM PDT

By Marhalim Abas, The Sun

The Home Ministry is mulling the introduction of a standard manual on the use of firearms for its agencies that issue weapons for its personnel.

The proposed manual will cover all aspects of firearms handling from training and standard operating procedures to the rules of engagement.

With the manual, personnel issued with firearms will have to strictly follow the rules and regulations or find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

TheSun learnt that the ministry is considering the move even as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is set to introduce its own firearm manual for its officers.

The MACC manual, among others, emphasises that firearms issued to personnel is strictly for self-defence purposes only.

The MACC will likely be the first law enforcement agency in the country to come up with such a manual as even the police have yet to have a comprehensive written SOP as it mostly relies on the Inspector-General of Police's Standing Order (IGSO).

TheSun was informed that the police is however expected to be exempted from adopting the proposed SOP as its rules of engagement and the use of lethal force are different from the other agencies in the ministry.

Apart from the police, other agencies within the Home Ministry which issues firearms to its personnel are tje Immigration, Rela and Prisons departments.

Sources informed theSun that the MACC manual was formulated last year when the commission started issuing Glock G26 semi-automatic pistols for its officers.

The G26 pistol, popularly known as the 'Baby Glock' because of its small dimensions, can take a 10-round magazine and is easily concealed under the clothing.

It was however unclear why the MACC has delayed adopting the manual but it was believed that some of the provisions had legal implications.

It was however understood that the manual was formulated after the MACC found that its officers had not been trained properly to use the pistols for self-defence scenarios as their initial training is conducted by the police and the military.

"Although the police and military trainers were competent, their skill sets are not relevant for the MACC officers as policemen and soldiers uses firearms offensively and their rules of engagement are different for those using weapons for self-defence only," a source said.

The source said this is because while policemen and soldiers are trained for " kill or be killed situations," MACC personnel are not expected "to shoot their way in to catch a suspect".

Hence, he said more important than good marksmanship and safe gun handling, their training must underscore the self-defence concept.

It is learnt that under the new SOP, MACC officers must go through a qualification process to show he or she, is able to handle a gun competently and safely before the pistol is issued.

Those issued with firearms need to re-qualify annually to continue using their weapons. Those who failed the re-qualification will have to return firearms, until he or she regains qualification.

Annual re-qualification for firearms are routine for international law enforcement agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), UK police and the US Secret Service.

TheSun learnt that currently, handgun training for MACC officers take five days during which the officers are briefed on the technical details of the Glock pistol, and are taught to fire it from various positions -- standing, sitting, on the knees and prone.

Unravelling the culture of patronage

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 05:51 PM PDT

By Halimah Mohd Said via The Sun

FOR the MACC alone to crusade against bribery and corruption is an impossible task. To successfully enforce anti-corruption laws, the cooperation of the police and the Attorney-General's Office is indispensable. With the undivided commitment of the three agencies, there will be some success in hauling the sharks and ikan tenggiri guilty of corruption at the higher levels of authority in the public and private sectors. The takers and the givers of bribes will face the law and hopefully be found guilty.

For a start there must be complete screening and house-cleaning within these enforcement agencies, among the officers and staff who man anti-bribery and corruption posts. If they themselves are gullible and fall prey to corruption, the credibility of the agencies they serve is diminished. Their anti-corruption crusade becomes meaningless.

However without the support of the Malaysian ikan bilis i.e. the ordinary man in the street, national efforts to wipe out corruption through these agencies will be in vain. When the Malaysian public are, knowingly or unknowingly, cohorts in these acts of corruption, they are guilty of perpetuating the very scourge they abhor. They must admit that they themselves are the bribers who corrupt these officers of the law.

What Malaysians fail to see is that they live in a deeply rooted culture of patronage which encourages the currying and carrying of favours along the social hierarchy. When the social hierarchy discriminates between the haves and have-nots, patronage becomes a way of life as it has always been from the days of feudalism.

In the old feudal structure, from the royal houses right through to the foreign emissaries who court them for trade and commerce and the villagers over whom the ruler and his chieftains exercise their rule, the custom of gift-bearing was the norm.

Whether it came in the form of bunga mas and buah tangan; monetary inducements in the form of coffee money and ang pow; or reward for services rendered in the form of upah, these cultural gestures have been a vital part of our eastern culture. We do it without battering an eyelid because they form the basis of goodwill and harmony in our social relationships.

Unfortunately in this modern era of development, these acts have become contrived and positioned to extract the greatest economic gain. Gifts are given for favours granted and profits projected. And as the business relationships grow in complexity, the favours asked for and given are more wide-ranging. The gestures are less direct and the gifts are camouflaged in subtlety and sophistication.

Malaysians do not realise that the designer handbags and other fashion accessories given to them, their wives and children; the sponsorship of private events and holidays abroad; the granting of tithes and titles are all part of the modern schema of bribery and corruption.

In all of this, one thing must be made clear to distinguish the good, bad and ugly. When people surreptitiously give and gain favours to leverage their own selfish positions to reap huge profits, they are corrupted and are more guilty than the person who offers a policeman a RM50 bribe or the underpaid policeman who takes it.

There is no doubt that to gain the trust of the electorate and win votes in the next general election the government must declare a national blitz against bribery and corruption. This is of the utmost urgency as corruption and abuse of power surface again and again as the two banes in the present government's cap.

There must be an unequivocal statement from the prime minister, endorsed by his cabinet and members of parliament from both sides of the political divide that they are committed to eradicating corruption at all levels of Malaysian society.

For a start there must be the transparent and honest declaration of private assets by the country's political, public and corporate movers and shakers of society, to be updated regularly and open to scrutiny by the relevant authorities. On the ground there must be a concerted effort to educate the people and create awareness among individuals, organisations and the greater community.

The MACC, the AG's office and the police aided by citizen movements must launch a nationwide anti-bribery and corruption blitz to inform people about the complexities, types and forms of this despicable disease of society. Public and private corporations must establish principles of good governance, outline rules and regulations, and organise in-house workshops to educate their workforce on the dos and don'ts of ethical conduct.

It is a war that will, ironically, meet with public apathy and skepticism as Malaysians struggle with their conscience and admit to their own moral failings, but it is a war well-worth waging. It is the Malaysian people who must rise and rally together in the anti-bribery and corruption crusade.

Lynas and the Malaysian Green movement — Kua Kia Soong

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 02:56 PM PDT

By Kua Kia Soong via The Malaysian Insider

The Green Assembly (Himpunan Hijau 109) at dawn at the Kuantan beach yesterday was the harbinger of the Malaysian Green movement that has been a long time coming. Kudos to the organisers of this inspirational event that managed to draw together other green campaigns as well as environmentally conscious Malaysians throughout the country. It was especially heart-warming to see the Orang Asli from nearby Chini taking an active part in the event. There, we pledged our commitment to the Earth Charter and sustainable development and our opposition to projects that are socially disruptive and health-threatening.

Green consciousness in Malaysia has been growing with every toxic project in the country, most noxious has been the processing and storage of radioactive waste. The BN government has always tried to justify their production by saying that "impartial experts" have testified to their safety. In the latest case of the Lynas rare earth plant at Gebeng, near Kuantan, they have invited the IAEA as an afterthought and they say that subject to certain recommendations, the plant should be safe. But the people are not convinced and will continue to oppose this toxic project.

The myth of impartial experts

In 1984, during the controversy over the nuclear dumps of Asian Rare Earth (ARE) at Papan in Perak, I wrote an article in The Star (September 2, 1984) entitled "The Myth of the Impartial Scientist". The government was trying to convince the public that the dumps for the radioactive waste were constructed to the required specifications and scientific experts were carted out to back up their case. But the people of Papan were not impressed and they continued to organise a protracted resistance to the dumps until they won.

The ARE factory had started operating in Bukit Merah New Village in 1982. In February 1985, the Bukit Merah residents filed an application in the Ipoh High Court to stop ARE from operating in the vicinity of their village. The residents turned out in force at the court and their organisation and commitment to the cause of environmental safety was an inspiration for the rest of the country. On April 12, 1987, some 10,000 people marched through Bukit Merah to protest the resumption of operations by ARE after the company had disregarded an injunction to stop operations. They finally won through their sustained campaign and ARE had to pack up and pay them compensation. The people of Papan and Bukit Merah were more concerned about their health and the health of their future generations than they were about the short-term gain of employment that ARE provided.

Today, the people in Kuantan who are opposing the Lynas rare earth plant are displaying the same admirable organisation, commitment to protecting their environment and concern for their health and the health of their future generations and we salute their efforts.

Far from being impartial, the IAEA is deeply involved in promoting nuclear energy. It failed to correctly assess the dangers caused by nuclear disasters at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and recently at Fukushima. For all its "impartiality", it also failed to prevent the Iraq war, when Bush and Blair had insisted that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. It turned out to be an elaborate lie to justify western invasion of Iraq.

Since the key question to allay the fears of the people is that of safety and the effects of the plant on the people's health, one would have expected the government to bring in independent members outside the IAEA with expertise in nuclear safety, public health, environmental protection and other social concerns. Besides the danger of radiation, the Lynas plant also produces large quantities of industrial acids and chemicals which will adversely affect the environment.

The lesson of Bukit Merah should be instructive for the Lynas controversy. The ARE expert there had insisted that their facilities were safe. I remember visiting their premises and the Japanese manager had assured me of the same. When I asked the manager if he would allow his pregnant wife to work in the premises with those drums of radioactive waste around her, he was completely stumped and couldn't answer me. During the Bukit Merah court case, other international experts testified that the adverse health effects on the residents — cancer, congenital deformities, cardiovascular disease, etc — were the direct result of the radioactivity from the waste produced by ARE.

Whatever IAEA may recommend for the Lynas plant, they have no power to regulate or enforce compliance on Lynas. We also know that the Malaysian government's record on monitoring and implementing such environmental safety standards and its maintenance culture are legendary! If not, how did the DOE and the Atomic Energy Licensing Board fail the residents of Bukit Merah?

Neutrality of science is a myth

The lesson from all these controversies is that there is no such thing as a "neutral expert". Science and technology have never been neutral — the neutrality of science is a myth. You can as soon find an expert who will say the project is safe and another who will warn you of its dangers.

READ MORE HERE

True Folk vs. Good Folk

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 04:00 AM PDT

Dear Pete

I saw the following post in MT under your article "So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then!" (inserted by Rev. Thomas on October 07, 2011 at 06:23:42):

"Correction: True Jews and Christians don't believe Allah is God. He is God of the Muslims. To the Jews and Christians He is YAHWEH ELOHIM or the English translation LORD GOD."

I looked hard to see what exactly Rev. Thomas was correcting, but I found nothing. I can only assume he must have been referring to the contents of a deleted post.

Nonetheless, this simple enough two-liner, coupled with the contents of your article and the other comments thereto, just kept bugging me all day long, to the point where I just had to put my thoughts into writing…….

Rev. T starts off his correction by stating that "True Jews and Christians don't believe Allah is God", and so I found myself wondering exactly what that meant. After all, the Christian concept of God as the Trinity, where one of the three is Jesus Christ the Son of God (God in the flesh), is not at all what the Jews believe. The commonality in the God of the Jews and the Christians precedes the concept of the Trinity and lies in the God of Abraham. Now, as it happens (and which you, Pete, know full well), the God of the Muslims is the same as the God of Abraham.

Thus, if the Jews can call that same God "Yahweh Elohim" while the Christians use the term "Lord God", then the Muslims using the name "Allah" does not alter the fact that it is the same God that all three religions are referring to. Any "thinking" Jew or Christian (in my book, one who has an open and enquiring mind) would have to agree that Allah, Yahweh and the Lord God are one and the same entity. So why does Rev. T say that the opposite is true.

Well, Rev. T did not refer to "thinking" Jews and Christians; instead, he used the term "true" to describe them. If the Rev. T means "true" in the sense that "true" Jews and Christians are 100% devoted to their respective religions, then what has that got to do with not readily accepting that the God of Abraham, called Allah by the Muslims, is not the same entity as the God of the Jews or the Christians? Sadly, I can only conclude that Rev. T's comment is the remark of a bigot, which means that he himself cannot therefore be a true Christian.

The next thing I wish to point out is that Rev. T, along with many others, happily ascribes the male gender to God. Why is that? After all, to be male means being a life form of the sexual orientation that cannot have babies. If it is an entity that can reproduce within itself, then it is hermaphrodite. If God could reproduce, even within God's own entity and without outside assistance, then God would presumably create a God replica, thus destroying the "one and only God" concept. This therefore leads to the conclusion that God is probably sexless. That being the case, who decided that God should be endowed with masculine qualities and addressed as a man (i.e. Lord God, instead of Lady God)?

Yes, you were right, Pete. We, personkind (women and men collectively), really don't know the first thing about God, do we?

Warmest Regards,

Wally

BUDGET 2012 : Pakatan Rakyat VS Pakatan Rakyat

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 06:52 PM PDT

Oleh Shen Yee Aun

Masyarakat Malaysia perlu lebih peka terhadap permainan politik yang cuba dimainkan oleh pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat. Hal ini disebabkan tiada bajet yang sempurna di dunia ini dan apa sahaja bajet yang akan dibentangkan oleh Perdana Menteri akan ada juga serangan yang berbeza daripada pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat.

Kini kita lihat bagaimana mereka sebenarnya menyerang antara satu sama lain tanpa disedari mereka.

Percanggahan 1 – Elaun Tambahan Kepada Ahli Parlimen

Haji Mohammad Sabu + Anwar VS Lim Guan Eng

"Elaun untuk ahli Parlimen bukanlah satu keutamaan yang perlu disegerakan tapi yang penting ialah integriti Parlimen, integriti untuk memerangi rasuah dan kelengkapan menyiapkan prasarana Parlimen itu lebih penting sekarang ini," kata beliau yang juga Naib Presiden PAS ketika ditemui di lobi Parlimen siang tadi.

Ahli Parlimen Permatang Pauh, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang juga ketua pembangkang pula berkata, bajet 2012 seharusnya lebih memfokuskan kepada kepentingan rakyat, bukan wakil rakyat.

"Bajet 2012, kita mahu ia lebih fokuskan kepada rakyat, bukan ahli Parlimen itu sendiri," katanya.

VS

Sementara itu, ahli Parlimen Bagan, Lim Guan Eng berkata, sebaiknya elaun dan kemudahan kakitangan Parlimen ditingkatkan.

"Bukan masanya untuk tambah elaun ahli Parlimen sebaliknya lebih perlu tambah elaun staf dan pembantu Parlimen," katanya yang juga Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang.

Satu pihak mengatakan tidak perlu peningkatan elaun untuk ahli Parlimen kerana wang yang berlebihan seharusnya digunakan untuk rakyat tetapi satu pihak lagi mengatakan perlunya pertambahan elaun untuk kakitangan Parlimen.

Lagipun dalam isu ini hanya menandakan Perdana Menteri adil kepada wakil rakyat Pakatan Rakyat. Pertama kali dalam sejarah Negara terdapat lebih daripada 80 ahli parlimen Pakatan Rakyat di Parlimen. Sekirannya kerajaan sudi untuk meningkatkan elaun untuk ahli parlimen keadaan ini hanya menandakan kerajaan mesra kepada ahli parlimen Pakatan Rakyat.'

Kalau benar ikhlas ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat hendak mengutamakan rakyat dan belanjawan negara maka mereka DICABAR supaya tidak mengambil pertambahan elaun tersebut. Kenyataan mereka seharusnya seiring dengan tindakan mereka sekirannya mereka benar – benar berintegriti.

Percanggahan 2 – Belanjawan Defisit

Azmin Ali vs Lim Guan Eng

Timbalan Presiden PKR Mohamed Azmin Ali yang ditemui pada satu program di Shah Alam menjelaskan bajet yang telah diumumkan oleh Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak semalam merupakan satu bajet yang tidak berhemah.

Ramai pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat mengatakan bahawa belanjawan kali ini tidak realistik , terlalu boros dan juga akan menyebabkan belanjawan defisit.

VS

Namun pada masa yang sama Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng pula mencadangkan elaun dan kemudahan kakitangan Parlimen perlu ditingkatkan.

Sana mereka mengatakan belanjawan ini merupakan belanjawan defisit dan sini pula mereka cadangkan pertambahan elaun dan kemudahan kakitangan parlimen perlu ditingkatkan.

Percanggahan 3 – Belanjawan Perdana Menteri Lebih Baik

Mahfuz Omar VS Mahfuz Omar

Semua Pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat mengatakan bahawa belanjawan yang dikemukan oleh Perdana Menteri bukanlah satu belanjawan yang baik.

VS

Ahli Parlimen Pokok Sena itu turut berkata, Datuk Seri Najib Razak dilihat ingin "berlawan" dengan Pakatan Rakyat dengan cuba mempamerkan belanjawan yang lebih baik daripada yang dibentangkan Pakatan, Selasa lalu.

"Kerajaan terdesak kerana ingin menunjukkan belanjawannya lebih baik daripada belanjawan Pakatan.

Kalau benar sekalipun kenyataan Ahli Parlimen Pokok Sena maka kenyataan beliau sudah menggambarkan beliau sudah bersetuju belanjawan Perdana Menteri adalah lebih baik daripada Pakatan Rakyat. Hendak berlawan atau tidak dan terdesak atau tidak bukanlah satu pertikaian yang penting kerana yang penting apa sahaja alasan dan sebab asalkan belanjawan Perdana Menteri lebih baik daripada Pakatan Rakyat sudah berjaya dipamerkan seperti yang dikatakan oleh Ahli Parlimen Pokok Sena.

Percanggahan 4 – Bajet Pilihanraya

Dr Dzulkifly VS Dr Dzulkifly

Ahli Parlimen Kuala Selangor Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad ketika diminta mengulas tentang bajet yang telah diumumkan itu menjelaskan bajet tersebut adalah lebih terjurus kepada gula-gula politik ataupun peruntukkan pilihanraya.

"Bajet yang diumumkan oleh Najib itu hanyalah lebih kepada untuk menghadapi pilihanraya yang akan datang.

VS

Beliau menambah bajet ini adalah mencedok dari apa yang telah di umumkan oleh belanjawan Pakatan Rakyat sebelum ini.

Kenyataan ini hanya menandakan Dr Dzulkifly sendiri bersetuju bahawa bajet Pakatan Rakyat juga merupakan bajet gula – gula politik dan hanyalah menjurus untuk menghadapi pilihanraya kalau benar Perdana Menteri mencedok daripada Pakatan Rakyat.

Percanggahan 5 – Bajet Untuk Kakitangan Awam

Dr Dzulkifly vs Dr Dzulkifly + Salahuddin

"Kita melihat bajet kali ini tidak diletakkan gaji minimum sebagai sasaran mereka dan secara jelas saya katakan Najib cuba mengelak untuk terus ada komitmen dengan pekerja awam mahu pun swasta. - Ahli Parlimen Kuala Selangor Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad

VS

"Najib hanya mengumumkan pemberian bonus dan juga kenaikan gaji pekerja awam mengikut gred-gred tertentu dan apa yang kita lihat setiap kali bonus mahupun gaji dinaikkan maka akan wujud inflasi di negara ini dan ia akan terbeban kepada semua rakyat bukannya kepada mereka yang mendapat faedah, inilah ketidak adilan yang wujud dalam bajet kali ini," ulasnya lagi. - Ahli Parlimen Kuala Selangor Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad

VS

Salahuddin dalam pada itu menyifatkan pengumuman bayaran khas sebanyak RM3,000 kepada bekas anggota serta duda dan balu polis khas dan polis tambahan yang pernah berkhidmat menjaga keselamatan negara semasa zaman darurat sebagai kesedaran yang diperjuangkan Pakatan Rakyat

Pertama beliau mengatakan Najib tidak ada komitmen untuk membantu pekerja awam tetapi pada masa yang sama beliau pula mengatakan Najib mengumumkan pemberian bonus dan juga kenaikan gaji kepada pekerja awam.

Dasar Pakatan Rakyat juga hendak menaikkan gaji kakitangan awam dan sekirannya keadaan ini berlaku maka bukankah kenaikan ini juga akan mengalami inflasi dan semua rakyat akan terbeban seperti yang dikatakan oleh Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad.

Apakah rasional mereka naikkan gaji kakitangan awam maka tidak akan sesekali mengalami inflasi tetapi jika kita melakukannya pula akan mengalami inflasi?

Percanggahan 6 – Bajet Perdana Menteri = Bajet Pakatan Rakyat

Pakatan Rakyat VS Pakatan Rakyat

Semua kenyataan pemimpim Pakatan Rakyat mengenai Bajet 2012 sangat lemah , tidak baik , defisit , boros , tidak realistik dan sebagainya.

VS

Naib Presiden PAS, Salahuddin Ayub berkata, sebanyak 30 peratus bajet itu diambil dari Pakatan Rakyat – buku jingga dan dokumen negara berkebajikan milik PAS.

Sementara itu, TVS melaporkan Ketua Pembangkang Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim juga mengakui bajet 2012 dicedok dari bajet Pakatan Rakyat.

Apakah Pakatan Rakyat kini sendiri hendak memperlekehkan belanjawan mereka sendiri ?

Percanggahan 7 – Bajet 2012 Tidak Realistik

Anwar VS Anwar

Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim menyifatkan Belanjawan 2012 yang baru sahaja dibentangkan sebagai tidak realistik dan merupakan satu lagi helah menjelang pilihan raya umum ke-13.

"Ia tidak realistik. Amat jelas satu helah pilihan raya. Dalam 10 tahun lepas, anggaran pertumbuhan, defisit dan pelaburan asing sentiasa berbeza dengan angka sebenar," kata Anwar.

VS

"Jelas ia merupakan helah pilihan raya," kata ahli parlimen Permatang Pauh itu lagi yang mendakwa sebahagian daripada pengumuman dalam bajet dibentangkan perdana menteri hari ini dicedok daripada bajet Pakatan Rakyat.

Bagaimana kalau bajet yang dikatakan tidak realistik yang hendak dilakukan oleh Perdana Menteri tidak realistik tetapi pada masa yang sama Anwar mengatakan bajet ini dicedok daripada Pakatan Rakyat pula realistik ?

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Isnin, 10 Oktober 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan