Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Dr M, in India we have bad roads but true democracy
Year that was for the protester
How much is too much democracy?
Behold the Perkasa fatwa on indelible ink!
So, this is Malay leadership
Umno bloggers gunning Ku Li
Don't forget they cheered Chamberlain's 'victory' too
DAP’s Bollywood drama
Cowgate: Talk straight please, MACC!
Only Ku Li can put M’sia on right footing
Najib, Father of ‘Spin’

Dr M, in India we have bad roads but true democracy

Posted: 20 Dec 2011 04:26 PM PST

Last week, Dr Mahathir gave a speech in India which stirred one Indian activist to retort in an open letter to the doctor.

We want to become a nation with a system that treats all its citizens as equal unlike your country that officially accords special rights to Malay Muslims calling them first-class citizens while relegating thousands of people of Tamil, Chinese and other ethnic origins.

By Siddharthya Swapan Roy, Free Malaysia Today

Dear Dr Mahathir,

A couple of days back I woke up to newspaper reports which quoted you as saying that India's democracy is a hindrance to its development and, if we did away with the nuisance of democracy, we will become developed.

Well, sir, it is heartening to see your concern about India's future, especially now that our own elected government has orphaned us. To read that someone from the outside cares about our development sounds so very nice.

But you see, sir, your (apparently) good intentions notwithstanding, your advice to Indians is, well how should I put it… ill-advised.

I'm not really sure if you know much about the history of our nation. Don't get me wrong.

Going by facts like the general absence of news from Malaysian newspapers; the absence of anything but song and dance in your electronic media; the absence of bookstores that sell knowledgeable books (for example, ones from which you can learn about history and not how to get rich in six steps); the abundance of malls and the stark absence of libraries; the abundance of coaching centres that can make masseurs, air hostesses and a host of quick-fix technicians and the relative absence of centres of higher learning especially in the social sciences; and, above all, the fact that this insanely consumerist and hedonist Malaysia was made under your tutelage, makes me doubt your knowledge of the history of India or any nation for that matter.

So allow me to apprise you of the story of our independence.

We won independence from colonial rulers waging a long and tortuous battle. A battle that sought to replace a discriminatory, unjust and violent regime that had enslaved huge populations with one which was based on the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity.

India was home then, as is now and as will always be, to an immense diversity of people who spoke different tongues, prayed to different Gods, wore different clothes and had different political beliefs. These diverse people said to each other that – we, despite our differences, will strive to live and flourish together and make a sovereign nation which will be democratic, socialist and secular.

We did not anywhere say that we want to be Malaysia or for that matter China or the US.

In India, no one is above the law

Despite the fact that they have known no other land than Malaysia as their own, you denigrate them with the tag of being second-class citizens.

We try to work towards having a system wherein a person will grow according to his merit and hard work earning what she or he has rightfully earned.

You may be surprised to know that here in India making cartels based on identity, even if under the name of a holy cow called "Bumipuetra" or son of the soil is looked down upon by most of us.

Here, promoting the selective interests of one's self or that of his kin is called corruption and nepotism and not, as you call it, development.

We are in fact fighting tooth and nail to arrest the scourge of corruption and (you'll be shocked to know) get the guilty punished.

Here in India no one is above the law and many a times powerful public figures go to jail for being corrupt or subverting the law.

Now that we are at it, sir, I'm sure it would be interesting to know what the minorities of your country have to say – especially the jailed and beaten ones – about the development-democracy debate.

In fact, sir, your idea of development is largely at odds with many of us here.

Development is no substitute for values

What you did to the tropical forests and water bodies of Malaysia (that is, raze vast acres of them into oblivion to make way for big-buck oil palm plantations and piggeries and so on) would cause huge outrage among many of us who are looking for sustainable development.

We are yet to be unanimously convinced that making cemented roads – however broad, lining them with buildings, even if glass-covered and glossy, and putting cars on them, however fast – is a substitute for our valued bio-diversity.

Many of us are very convinced that displacing huge populations of native people for useless things like racing tracks is a blot on the word "development".

There are many of us who find it a shameful and cruel hypocrisy that while your country has abundant and openly advertised sex tourism, it still whips women for being licentious!

READ MORE HERE

Year that was for the protester

Posted: 20 Dec 2011 11:01 AM PST

The silly season is already on us and no doubt will be a fractious and prolonged one going into 2012.

While the Government responded to the Bersih demands by establishing the Parliamentary Special Committee on electoral reforms, at the same time the so-called Peaceful Assembly Act – aimed at curbing any other rallies like Bersih – was passed.

Marina Mahathir, The Star

IT'S the end of the year and, like everyone else, I'm going to try and summarise what made it an interesting year indeed.

Time magazine named The Protester as its Person of the Year in 2011.

I couldn't agree more, because really few people have made an impact on society than protesters this year.

From the protesters in Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Libya and Syria to the Occupy Wall Street protesters and its many offshoots, these largely peaceful protests have forced things to change in their societies.

In the Middle East, corrupt and authoritarian leaders have been forced to step down. In some, it's still an ongoing battle.

Of course, these steps towards democracy are not perfect. Nor are the results.

But that's democracy for you.

Just because people don't know what they want is no reason to dismiss democracy.

It is the fact that they finally have choices is the triumph, after so many years of not having any.

For those who insist on equating the London riots with the Arab Spring, do get your facts right.

The former was not about changing an authoritarian government for a more democratic one, nor was it meant to be peaceful.

The latter was a peaceful demand for change; the violence came from the government response.

If you want to equate the London riots with the Syrian government's response, perhaps it would be more accurate.

Time magazine has mostly recognised the Arab, Spanish and American protesters in their essay.

But perhaps they should have also looked eastwards.

I think the Bersih rally goers, protesting peacefully for clean and fair elections, are also deserving of the award.

For the first time, ordinary Malaysians went out to demand what should be their right, to be able to vote fairly.

Young and old of all races and religions, Malaysians marched to protect this basic human right. And were demonised because of it.

In any case, it is delusional to think that curbing protests will curb rebellious thoughts. These will continue to thrive in 2012, that's for sure.

Perhaps 2011 was also the year of the Strong Woman.

On the international scene, not one but three women won the Nobel Peace Prize this year: President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, Leymah Gbowee, also of Liberia, and Tawakkol Karman of Yemen, the youngest-ever recipient.

It's interesting that all of these women are rebellious women, who refused to accept the established, and patriarchal, way of doing things.

Instead, they found their own way, and worked for peace in their countries.

Malaysia, too, has its share of strong women. Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan is the prime example of someone who has had to withstand personal attacks from all quarters like no other person has had to in our country, yet still carries on with her strong principles.

Let it never be said that she lacks courage.

For women to get ahead, it really is imperative that they have the sort of integrity and display the sort of ethical behaviour that we often find lacking in men.

This year is, of course, also the year of the Obedient Wives Club, hardly a great leap forward for womankind.

Nevertheless, the OWC knew exactly how to get publicity for their causes.

And, I suspect, despite the sniggers over their sex manual, there are many who actually agree with their basic premise, that a good wife is one who blindly obeys her husband even when she doesn't feel like it.

Finally, this year has been a bad year for justice and equality.

Children born less than six months after their parents married are considered illegitimate, thus forcing them to bear the sins of their parents.

Even if legitimate, children can be married off at even 10 years old, surely a blight on our society if we are to consider ourselves progressive.

Muslim women still don't have the same rights as their non-Muslim sisters when it comes to marriage, property and inheritance.

And people of different sexual orientations are not regarded as full citizens.

I'd like to be optimistic about 2012 but that does not look likely.

The silly season is already on us and no doubt will be a fractious and prolonged one.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, folks!

How much is too much democracy?

Posted: 20 Dec 2011 09:59 AM PST

Mahatir Mohammed's prescription for India, with respect may, paradoxically enough, turn out to be a remedy worse than the disease. Indeed, it may prove fatal for the health of our federal democracy.

Ashok Kapur, The Times of India

Ashok Kapur Mahathir Mohammed, the respected former Prime Minister of Malaysia and now an elder Asian statesman diagnosed some of the ills that seemingly afflict democracy in India. He recently addressed a gathering of national leaders, leading citizens, intellectuals and media personalities in the capital at a Leadership Summit organized by a leading national daily. The deliberations at the summit were broadcast live throughout the country.

He has ascribed most of the current "problems" facing us to the reason that we have "too much democracy". He added that we need a "strong" Central leadership to overcome the present difficulties and restore some "order" so that unhindered progress can take place. The overdose of democracy holds back India from emerging as one of the leading players on the world stage.

Mahathir's diagnosis is negated by recent experience of the modern nation states the world over and the lessons of history. One does not have to delve deep into history to draw the appropriate lessons from it. The last century itself is replete with examples of nations that broke up and disintegrated because they limited the practice of democracy in order to enforce "discipline" and attempted to bring about rapid economic growth.

India is a federal republic with one of the most liberal forms of democracy. The Constitution was aptly described by Pt. Nehru, one of its main architects as a strong federation during normal times but with provision for converting it into a unitary structure in times of emergency. The Founding Fathers were visionaries with great foresight. They realized that for a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-lingual society, a federal structure was the only viable form of government.

A liberal democracy is the bedrock of federalism. The history of twentieth century world that we live in brings home this stark lesson to all of us. Nation upon nation, all federal republics that limited democracy in favour of "strong" central leadership broke apart and could not survive as unified states. Ethnic and linguistic minorities and regions seceded, often violently and at great human cost. Paradoxically, a "strong" central leadership invariably proved counter-productive.

The example of former Soviet Union is a well-known. Also falling in the category of failed states are former Republic of Yugoslavia, Indonesia and nearer home, former East and West Pakistan. All these were federal republics that experimented with variants of democracy. They convinced themselves that somehow too much democracy is not good for their people and it must be limited for people's own sake. The leader knows best what is good for his "subjects".

Thus, both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia practised 'socialist democracy' or 'democratic centralism'. Admittedly, the ideology was suffused with idealism, all in the name of "the people" and their beloved fatherland. Full guarantees were extended to all minorities and regions-but only on paper. Believe it or not, the Constitution of the former Soviet Union had conceded even the right of "secession" to the various ethnic regions.

Indonesia similarly experimented with "guided democracy". The central leadership imposed their will on far-flung islands comprising several dozen major linguistic and tribal groups, with deadpan uniformity. They had virtually no voice, not to talk of role in governance. They were completely alienated from the central leadership. One cannot say with certainty if the final act in the Indonesian tragedy has played itself out. It may yet break up further.

Pakistan's case is all too well known to merit detailed analysis. The Army Generals who overthrew a civilian government experimented with "basic democracy" as they felt that universal adult franchise was a luxury that Pakistan could ill-afford. Democracy was limited to selected individuals who were supposed to be literate in the 3Rs. The federal unit of East Pakistan was reduced to the status of a poor cousin. Like Indonesia, Pakistan's tragedy may be still unfolding, looking to the situation in the federal unit of Baluchistan and other federal provinces.

A "strong" central leadership is the soul mate of limited democracy. And such leadership almost invariably passes on to the armed forces of the modern nation state. The generals and the air marshals assume charge in the name of "order and discipline". They have an in-built disdain for the "bureaucratic state" and the "bumbling democracy". They buy themselves a one-way ticket to power till such time as the state collapses under their heavy boots.

The aforesaid are but some of the few examples of large federal states that experimented with limited democracy and failed. The malady does not discriminate, and seems to afflict smaller states as well. It appears to be endemic to the region. Sri Lanka has just survived a brutal civil war and is barely intact. Afghanistan is a house divided against itself between the Pashtuns and the Uzbecks, held together for the time being against the common threat from Taliban.

Burma is apparently a paper entity and a geographical fiction as a nation. Some of the longest civil wars of the last century, largely forgotten by the outside world have spilled over to the present century. The state is fighting its own minorities who have, de facto, carved out for themselves their own sub states-the Kachins, the Karens and the Shans. Their respective territories are 'no go' zones save for the Burmese military in large numbers.

Among these disintegrated and disintegrating states one can witness the solitary splendour of a standing and functioning federation with a liberal democracy. There are no prizes for guessing the right name. And this has been possible as the basic democratic structure of the state has not been disturbed, whatever the provocation. Not that we have not been afflicted with our own set of centrifugal forces. But we have contained them through dialogue and discussion. A liberal democracy is the most resilient form of government.

Unity in Diversity is the lofty principle of the Indian society and a federal democracy is its actual form. A limited democracy and its counterpart of "strong" leadership is the antidote. The latter tries to impose a certain Uniformity in Diversity which has proved to be a recipe for disaster. This is the abiding lesson of the history of the last century.

Much is made of the fact that Indian democracy is much too "noisy" for orderly progress and a marketable brand. But the argument overlooks the fact that debate and discussion are the essence of good governance, as conflicting ideas and varying opinions get churned and what emerges is often the optimum solution. As someone rightly said, what may sound noise today is the music of democracy in the long run. Solzhenitsyn was right-the only alternative to debate and discussion is the Gulag.

Mahatir Mohammed's prescription for India, with respect may, paradoxically enough, turn out to be a remedy worse than the disease. Indeed, it may prove fatal for the health of our federal democracy.

(The author is a retired IAS officer)

Behold the Perkasa fatwa on indelible ink!

Posted: 20 Dec 2011 06:43 AM PST

Mr Syed hints that the indelible ink is un-Islamic, despite it being used in populous Muslim democracies such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, or more recently in Tunisia, or even in the seat of Islamic learning, Egypt, where the first fairly transparent elections were recently held and saw the strong support of Islamist parties. Perhaps now, the halal-ness of the Islamists' victory is questionable.

Abdar Rahman Koya, Harakah Daily

UMNO's right-wing offshoot Perkasa never fails to live up to its image, providing yet another comic relief.

Last July, the group threatened to disrupt the huge Bersih rally for electoral reforms in the capital, only to admit that dozens, perhaps less than a dozen, of its members turned up to loiter around the Lake Gardens.

This time, the group is incensed by the decision of the Election Commission to implement the indelible ink rule on voters at the coming polls.

While not a single Muslim ulama, not even the bearded and "nur (light)-upon-thy-face"-type UMNO young ulama, had ever questioned the permissibility of the ink being applied on Muslim fingers, Perkasa has come up with what is perhaps the first 'fatwa' to suggest that the ink is not permitted under Islamic laws.

The Islamic background of its secretary general Syed Hasan Syed Ali is unclear, other than the fact that his name carries the title 'Syed' usually reserved for the Prophet's lineage, though one can never tell on which side of the Quraysh clan (to which the Prophet belonged) this particular gentleman hails from. After all, some of the Prophet's strongest adversaries had been his own blood relatives. That said, here in Malaysia there are many "Friday Syeds", you know, those born on a Friday and therefore a 'Syed'!

Mr Syed (left) hints that the indelible ink is un-Islamic, despite it being used in populous Muslim democracies such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, or more recently in Tunisia, or even in the seat of Islamic learning, Egypt, where the first fairly transparent elections were recently held and saw the strong support of Islamist parties. Perhaps now, the halal-ness of the Islamists' victory is questionable.

Says Mr Syed: "It is a disgrace that a more advanced country than these developing countries wants to use indelible ink in the general election.

"We are not like Somalia, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Cambodia and other backward nations that do not have sophisticated identification, that only use handwritten papers as their identity documents. What a shame," fumes the 'First World' born Mr Syed.

Interestingly, Mr Syed makes this derogatory view of his Muslim brethren on the same day the Malaysian parliament passes a bill that restricts any attempt by citizens to gather peacefully, unlike their counterparts in the more advanced countries for which Mr Syed has taken pains to become a part of.

The latest fatwa by Perkasa, meanwhile, to be fair, is not a "do-what-I-command" type of edict. It shows that Perkasa's 'Shariah committee' (from which we presume this opinion by Mr Syed may have been based), is not made up of intolerant and self-righteous Islamic scholars out to impose their interpretation of Islam on others without trying to qualify their edicts with gentle exhortation as required by Islam.

According to Mr Syed, the indelible ink rule is a conspiracy to discourage Malay-Muslims from coming out to cast their ballots.

"There is a big possibility that I myself will not come out to vote if the indelible ink ruling is implemented," says Mr Syed, walking the talk and showing leadership by example. So far, his Islamicity remains as solid as the rock at Bukit Malawati.

"And there is a possibility that a big number of Perkasa members will not come out to vote. Who will be the loser when Perkasa and Malays refused to vote?" he asks.

Valid question. Let's see. Judging by Perkasa's own claim of its membership, that would either mean hundreds of thousands of pious Malay-Muslims out to defend their race and religion not lining up at polling centres, or a dozen or so prefering to spend polling day at the Lake Gardens.

Meanwhile, Perkasa has spoken.

The ulama of the Muslim world should now wake up from their slumber. From the universities of Madinah through the study halls of Qom to the ivory towers of Al-Azhar, it looks like Perkasa is set to be the talk among Islamic scholars, thinkers and intellectuals.

Lo and behold! The coming days and weeks will tell us whether the ulama of the Muslim world are ready to admit their mistakes, confess their sins, and seek forgiveness from the global Muslim Ummah for not questioning the indelible ink and for allowing millions of Muslim voters to have the devil's paint on their fingers.

So, this is Malay leadership

Posted: 19 Dec 2011 09:52 AM PST

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: not all Malays deserve to get the help that the NEP brings. I would hazard a guess that most Malays who live in exclusive neighbourhoods in KL do not need the Bumiputera housing discount, or government scholarships for their offspring.

Farah Fahmy, The Malaysian Insider

If our politicians are to be believed, the Malays are under threat these days. Our religion, culture and power are steadily under attack from all and sundry. Everyone has it in for us, from Christians to the Chinese. We are even warned about a so-called "Malaysian Spring" being orchestrated by "anasir-anasir Barat" (and quite possibly, the Jews, who of course, have always had it in for us).

"We won't surrender an inch," said the Melayu champion-in-chief (who also finds the time to be our prime minister) during a speech to Pekida recently. Malays, we were told, will never be oppressed in our own land so long as Umno is in power.

Well, glory be. I'm sure there are many others who can sleep more soundly at night knowing that there are so many out there making sure we Malays are not stripped of our position and power in our land.

But ... hang on a minute.

The last time I checked we Malays, along with the other Bumiputeras, make up about 60-odd per cent of our country's population. Islam is not just our country's official religion, it is also the religion professed by about 60 per cent of our people. Not only are we and our religion in the majority, but let's see, we Malays also make up most of, oh, the civil service, police, army, ruling class and politicians.

Of course, you can say that there are plenty of Malays who still need help. This, I don't dispute. I've seen rural poverty in our country, where people still live without basic amenities like constant water supply and proper toilets. I've also seen urban poverty, with families living in small, low-cost flats in the outskirts of KL making do with the little that they earn.

Yet poor Malays aren't the only ones who need help. There are also plenty of poor people, non-Malays, who deserve help. My brother was once approached by a young Indian man late one evening. He had just arrived from Kulai and asked my brother for help; my brother pointed him in the direction of the nearest kedai mamak.

Are we really throwing away our "power" and "position" if we amended the NEP so that it excluded rich Malays and was open to all of our country's poor, regardless of their race? Yes, Datuk Najib, we've "willingly shared power with the non-Malays" since Merdeka, but why keep harping on the past? Why not share with us your vision for the future?

I should have expected it, but I'm disappointed all the same. Is this what Malay leadership is about? Is there such a dearth of good Malay leaders in Umno that only scare tactics will do? Where is the vision about what the Malays can achieve? Why is no one inspiring us to be better? Why, in fact, is there no Malay leader out there who has the guts to say enough is enough, we Malays will never reach our full potential if we keep harping on about the help that we need? Why is no one honest enough to say that not all Malays are equal, and the haves should no longer receive a handout?

READ MORE HERE

Umno bloggers gunning Ku Li

Posted: 18 Dec 2011 11:29 AM PST

It must be assumed that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah commands allegiance from people within Umno itself, otherwise why would Pakatan Rakyat be keen on him?

Now to me the urgent matter at hand is for the big three in the opposition to sit down and talk about rational seat allocations. But they must first accept their individual limitations and establish the ground rules for negotiations.

Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz, Free Malaysia Today

There is no present or past tense in politics. There's only relevance.

Is Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li) relevant? In my mind, given the manic and xenophobic stage of our politics, we urgently need political sanity.

How do we achieve that? Through a leadership committed to the rule of law, fair play and inclusiveness, and democratic and liberal principles.

Relevance comes with the commitment to immutable principles – a sense of fair play, rule of law, good governance, and jealous adherance to democratic principles.

It's funny to see judgmental stands on this – Razaleigh is old, yet (Dr) Mahathir (Mohamad), who is in his 80s, is waiting in the wings because some people think he is relevant.

I am old, but (Prime Minister) Najib (Tun Razak) and (his deputy) Muhyidin (Yassin) who are older, aren't classified as old.

Hence old, young, or whatever is just management of subjective and very personal numerical perception.

It depends on how you want to angle it. Hence the managed perception has no universal application. It's subjective.

A frequent objection to Razaleigh has been this concerted effort to link him with the infamous (Bumiputra Malaysia Finance) BMF financial scandal (in the 1980s).

As Finance Minister at that point in time, Razaleigh had no involvement at all with the BMF scandal.

BBMB (Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Bhd) was answerable to the PM's office at the time and the person principally responsible over BBMB affairs was Mahathir.

Razaleigh won many defamation cases against international newspapers which attempted to link him with the BMF affair. But these legal victories received scant coverage in local papers controlled by Mahathir.

Set ground rules first

The negotiations should start with each of the big three being given the same number of seats. There are 222 seats so each party gets 74 seats.

After that, all sit down to renegotiate and rescale the numbers.

No party should be fielding a candidate where one of the partners has been given a seat. Ideally it should be a one-to-one fight with the "winnable" BN candidate.

How does Razaleigh fit into the scheme of things?

Posted: 17 Dec 2011 11:34 AM PST

Poor old Archbishop Rowan Williams doesn't really matter much. This is because he's a rather dull mainstream leftist, who talks about politics when he ought to be urging our neo-pagan country to return to Christianity. At the moment we're more interested in shoes and booze than we are in God.

By Peter Hitchens, Mail Online

Sometimes whole countries can get things utterly wrong. This is usually because they prefer soft dreams to the raw truth.

We all know now that Neville Chamberlain made a huge fool of himself when he came back from Munich in September 1938 claiming to have won 'peace for our time' and 'peace with honour', and waving a worthless piece of paper in which Hitler promised that Britain and Germany would never go to war again.

But look at the newspapers of the time and you will find almost all of them crammed with sickly praise for Mr Chamberlain. He was invited on to the balcony of Buckingham Palace by King George VI and was there cheered by a gigantic crowd, many of whom would die in the war that followed.

Taken in: Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain thought he had Hitler under control

They should have booed him - not because of what he had done but because he was fool enough to think that Hitler could be trusted. They applauded him because they did not want to be bothered by the boring details of European politics, and preferred to think that he had in fact bought peace.

Something similar is happening to us. Many people who should know better are still cheering David Cameron for his supposed mighty veto in Brussels on December 9.

They are doing this because they passionately want it to be true. They want Mr Cameron to be a patriotic conservative. But he isn't.

They want Britain to stand up to the EU. But it hasn't.

Mr Cameron did not in fact use the British veto. There was no treaty to veto. France and Germany were quite happy to get what they wanted by other means - France positively wanted to do so, and Jean-David Levitte, a senior aide of President Sarkozy, has described Mr Cameron's action as a 'blessing'.

They were happier still to let Mr Cameron take the blame on the Continent - and the credit among his gullible and simple-minded 'Eurosceptic' backbenchers, who really oughtn't to be allowed out on their own if they are this easy to swindle.

Nor did Mr Cameron save the City of London.

The French, who have never forgiven us either for Trafalgar or for not surrendering in 1940, are still determined to destroy the City. And they can do so - as long as we are idiotic enough to stay in their power by belonging to the EU.

They can and will do this through 'Qualified Majority Voting', under which Britain does not have a veto. Wishful thinking on this scale may not lead to war, as it did in 1938. But it will not help us get out of the EU, or protect us from those who pretend to be our partners, but are in fact our rivals.

Stop cheering. Start booing.

READ MORE HERE

DAP’s Bollywood drama

Posted: 17 Dec 2011 09:55 AM PST

The stand-off between the "warlord" and the "godfather" in Penang is a signal that the DAP will have to grapple with ambitious politicians who will go all out to be picked as candidates for the general election.

The issue was sparked off by a Tamil press report where Dr Ramasamy had reportedly indicated that DAP might field three Indian women in the next general election. It is actually a good idea and might even be a game-changer for the party among Indian voters.

Joceline Tan, The Star

THEY say a picture speaks a thousand words and this could not be truer during the Penang DAP convention.

The "godfather" and the "warlord" barely glanced at each other. The "warlord" Dr P. Ramasamy looked terribly defensive with his arms folded across his broad chest whereas the "godfather" Karpal Singh stared straight ahead like an angry lion.

The "buffer" between them was party secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng who looked rather sheepish and almost like a small boy next to the two defiant and big-sized men.

Guan Eng's new hairstyle has transformed his appearance. It has helped him shed some years off but, as many have pointed out, also makes him look softer and chubbier.

The previous Brylcreem image was outdated but it lent him an air of authority which would have been handy during such hostilities.

Penang DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow who was seated next to Karpal looked even more sheepish and subdued. Lim and Chow are big names in DAP, but when the elephants fight, even the powerful know better than to get in the way.

Dr Ramasamy is also the Deputy Chief Minister and Penang deputy chairman whereas Karpal is the national chairman. But more than that, the two men have big personalities and egos.

Besides, Karpal is not afraid of anyone in the DAP, not even Guan Eng; he has put Guan Eng in his place a few times although not after the latter became Chief Minister.

DAP people have labelled the war of words between Karpal and Dr Ramasamy as a "Bollywood drama" but deep down, they are extremely worried that something like this is happening with a general election around the corner.

"We are wondering why it had escalated to such a public theatre," said Klang MP Charles Santiago.

Santiago had attended a book launch of an Indian social commentator on the day of the Penang DAP convention and the warlord-godfather issue was the top conversation topic among the Indian crowd.

Santiago, who is also Selangor DAP vice-chairman, led a delegation of Indian DAP leaders to Penang to meet with the warring factions a few days ago.

"We appealed to them to get back together or to at least maintain silence. What is happening is affecting us in Selangor and Perak," said Santiago.

Internal party quarrels are not new in DAP and big names have fallen out because of it. Last year, the fallout from the in-fighting between rival camps in the Selangor DAP grew so nasty that the party took the unprecedented step of postponing the national elections.

Internal fights have acquired a greater intensity than ever before because the party is now in power and power does strange things to people.

Previously, it was just about fighting for a party post; now it is also about fighting for what comes with the post.

More than that, many in DAP have convinced themselves that Putrajaya is within their reach and that makes everything more urgent and seductive.

The warlord-godfather dispute was referred to a high-level panel headed by party doyen Dr Chen Man Hin and comprising Guan Eng and his father Kit Siang. They wanted to keep a lid on the issue.

The matter would not have been raised at the central executive committee (CEC) meeting on Tuesday night if not for Selangor vice-chairman Datuk Teng Chang Khim who insisted that it be discussed.

He had apparently said that the same rules should apply to all and the committee could not possibly think of leaving the building without some conclusion on the issue.

Eventually, Kit Siang proposed the special panel and the CEC went along with it even though several people, including Dr Chen and national vice-chairman Tunku Aziz Ibrahim had been in favour of it being handled at the CEC level.

A day later, the party announced that the matter had been resolved.

Dr Ramasamy, known as "Professor" in the party, took a beating at the Penang DAP convention and had to endure a long and rambling lecture by Karpal.

It was very humiliating and he felt his pride and honour had been trampled upon.

The former academic did not appreciate being slammed as a warlord and has indicated that he is prepared to walk away from it all if the party is unhappy with him.

The term warlord carries unsavoury connotations in the DAP. It is associated with MIC politics or what Santiago called "Samy Vellu kind of politics".

Tamil press report

Some even suggested it was Guan Eng himself who had asked him to look out for credible Indian candidates.

But Seri Delima assemblyman and lawyer R.S.N. Rayer did not take well to the report and complained to Karpal. The rest is history.

Rayer, said one Penang professional, is the Indian version of Ng Wei Aik, the hot-tempered and impetuous political secretary to Guan Eng.

But the tall and fierce-looking Rayer had chambered under Karpal, hence the older man's soft spot for him. Rayer takes his Hindu roots seriously and is rarely seen without vibuthi (holy ash) on his forehead.

Seri Delima is one of three state seats under Karpal's Bukit Gelugor parliamentary constituency. It was supposed to have gone to Zulkifli Md Noor, a long-time Malay face of DAP. But Rayer lobbied through Karpal for the seat and had reportedly threatened to stand in Bagan against Guan Eng if he did not get it.

When Karpal's white MPV, that is specially out-fitted for his wheelchair, drove up to the state convention last week, he was greeted by protesters holding banners slamming Rayer although they misspelt his name as "Rayar".

The pro-Ramasamy protesters pointed to Rayer as a troublemaker and demanded that he apologise to Dr Ramasamy.

DAP is used to protesting against other people and it was extremely embarrassing that this demonstration was an instance of DAP versus DAP.

Dr Ramasamy, some said, was not off the mark in referring to Karpal as the godfather. Karpal is an unparalleled figure in the party, almost untouchable because of his long service record and the special relationship he holds with Kit Siang.

Over the years, he has become some sort of rallying point for young, upcoming Indian figures in the party. Dr Ramasamy, who has the ears of Guan Eng, is probably seen as a threat by those around Karpal.

Dr Ramasamy's supporters have reacted by accusing Karpal of trying to position his son Jagdeep Singh Deo as the next Deputy Chief Minister.

Jagdeep has dismissed the claim as "preposterous and malicious" given that he had rejected an offer to join the state executive council after the 2008 election. He wanted to focus on his law career.

It would be a field day for DAP's detractors if that ever happened – Kit Siang's son the Chief Minister and Karpal's son the Deputy Chief Minister.

Dr Ramasamy's problem is that he is a parachute candidate who is only starting to build up a grassroots base.

He was a big catch for the DAP but his phenomenal rise from university lecturer to Deputy Chief Minister has also resulted in envy and jealousy among some people.

The way the speakers at the state convention went for him was terrible. It was as though he had done nothing for the party, which is not exactly true.

There have been allegations of cronyism and MIC-style politics on his part but he is basically a political novice who is struggling to make the transition from academic ideas to the dog-eat-dog world of politics on the ground.

"Dr Ramasamy is an okay person, he has no airs and does not demand special treatment. But Karpal is an urban electorate hero who has earned his stripes and Dr Ramasamy should have watched his words when it comes to Karpal," said social historian Dr Neil Khor.

Different culture

The warlord-godfather issue is far from resolved. There are big egos involved and besides, the Indian faction in DAP poses quite a different culture to the Chinese-dominated culture of DAP.

Guan Eng is probably at a loss on how to handle these two men. But his bigger headache lies ahead.

In essence, the warlord-godfather drama is about the upcoming general election, candidates and seats.

There will be an intense lobby to be candidates and it is going to be fierce among the Indian aspirants because there are far fewer seats allocated to them than for the Chinese candidates.

Unlike in 2008 when DAP had to go around persuading people to contest, this time, they will be fighting off people who want to be candidates.

Aspiring candidates are not just thinking about forming the state government, some of them already see themselves as ministers and deputy ministers. Even Guan Eng is caught up in the Putrajaya dream.

This general election is going to be much more complicated for the DAP leadership than they care to admit.

Apart from the lobbying, there is the question of whether certain leaders should still persist in contesting parliamentary-cum-state seats.

Karpal has been vocal about his one man-one-seat proposal although he has made an exception for Guan Eng on the grounds that as the Chief Minister, he needs access to Parliament.

Given all that, the stand-off between the warlord and the godfather may not be a Bollywood drama as claimed by some but a prelude to the big fight to be candidates in the mother of all battles.

Cowgate: Talk straight please, MACC!

Posted: 16 Dec 2011 03:20 PM PST

Abu Kassim, never mind about your so-called faithfully practiced principle of investigation "without fear or favour", just tell us plain and simple a) whether you agree or disagree that there are elements that justify MACC to move in, and b) whether you have started investigation in earnest.

By Kim Quek

Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) defended its position on Dec 16 with regards to the National Feedlot Center scandal on two fronts: through the issue of a statement and in a press conference given by MACC chief commissioner Abu Kassim Mohamed after the closing ceremony of a MACC program at the Anti-Corruption Academy .

In the statement quoted by Bernama, MACC denied that it had not taken any action. It said that it did scrutinize the complaint from NGOs regarding the abuse of a government loan to purchase luxurious condominiums by National Feedlot Corporation, and found no corruption element, and hence passed the case to the police.

In the press conference, Abu Kassim said that since the scandal was exposed in the 2010 Auditor General's report in October, MACC had already started studying it from corruption point of view., The issue of whether MACC is or is not probing the case does not arise, since MACC's earlier measure to pass the case to police was only a response specifically directed at the particular complaint of irregularity in using the loan to purchase the condos. Since it was a case of misuse of public loan, it was forwarded to police for further investigation.

Abu Kassim further said that the public could have misunderstood MACC, not knowing its working procedure. He stressed that MACC has always practiced the principle of probing corruption without fear or favour, regardless of whether the persons involved are cabinet ministers or ordinary citizens.

We take it from this Abu Kassim statement that the earlier "passing the buck to police" move relates to only the condo purchase incident and not to other aspects of the scandal. Then, can Abu Kassim tells us now whether MACC is investigating the entire NFC debacle?

WHY THE EERIE SILENCE?

And please tell us why MACC has steadfastly kept its eerie silence for the past two months, while the controversy has been raging inside and outside parliament, with numerous press conferences and Internet postings that produced heaps of evidence of corruption, abuse of power, collusion, breach of trust and criminal negligence by ministers and government officials in the award of project and disbursement of loan?

Since this is such a high-profile scandal that affects vital national interests, and the resolution of which will hinge the credibility of the entire Malaysian government, will Abu Kassim please be honest for once and tell the nation what exactly is the status of MACC's investigations with respect to this NFC fiasco. And what has MACC done in the past two months towards seeking out the culprits and restoring some semblance of rule of law to this country?

No more hypocritical rhetoric please; just simple, honest answers.

Only Ku Li can put M’sia on right footing

Posted: 16 Dec 2011 08:01 AM PST

For PKR to survive and for Pakatan Rakyat to stay relevant, they need a leader who is acceptable to the royal houses and who can command the respect of all Malaysians.

There's a practical side also as to why Tengku Razaleigh is the ultimate playmaker for the Pakatan people if the bigger picture is to oust Umno and the BN government. The bigger picture, I repeat once more, is to secure the interest of the country, not to secure the interest of one Anwar Ibrahim.

Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz, Free Malaysia Today

What is Umno's latest weapon now? It's the cultivation of the royal houses in the country.

If PKR isn't blind, they will see where the HRH Sultan of Selangor is going with his majesty's overt political tones.

Umno is now working overtime to drum in this fallacious idea that if others come into power the very future of the royal houses, the symbol of Malay existence, will be wiped out.

How can Pakatan neutralise this powerful move which is also a powerful idea?

By having someone from the royal line to talk to the rulers. Who can talk to the rulers on equal terms other than Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li)?

He's a royalty himself and commands respect and deference among the royal houses.

Tengku Razaleigh will represent the second coming of a Tengku Abdul Rahman figure but this time, putting Malaysia on the right footing.

There's a practical side also as to why Tengku Razaleigh is the ultimate playmaker for the Pakatan people if the bigger picture is to oust Umno and the BN government.

The bigger picture, I repeat once more, is to secure the interest of the country, not to secure the interest of one Anwar Ibrahim.

Pakatan must win over fence-sitters

It's for better and participative democracy, the rule of law, and disciplined and better governance.

Why Tengku Razaleigh? Because it's important for the Pakatan to gain the allegiance and support of the 20 percent fence-sitter voters.

This section of the public has a different psychology. They want to know who the next prime minister is.

Is the next premier going to be more acceptable than the present one?

They want certainty and some confidence in the person. That person must have substance, experience, standing and respect all around.

Furthermore, the fence-sitters will demand to see some clarity.

READ MORE HERE

Najib, Father of ‘Spin’

Posted: 16 Dec 2011 07:47 AM PST

The sixth Malaysian prime minister will go down in history as the master of spin, sloganeering and story-telling.

Najib has totally lost it! Nothing can salvage 1Malaysia now. He has had his chance of implementing genuine political reforms but he blew it. His stand now is to strictly obey the Umno warlords and the ultra-Malays. He has now transformed himself into becoming a barbarian warlord – truly a government transformation programme!

Selena Tay, Free Malaysia Today

At long last, the 1Malaysia slogan has been revealed for what it truly is: the greatest failure of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

What for so long has been bandied about as the keyword for racial harmony and unity has been debunked as a 100 percent failure at the recent Umno general assembly and the one who debunked this mythic 1Malaysia slogan is none other than Najib himself. Poetic justice, you might say.

Thus, the prime minister has proven himself to be the greatest spinner of yarns and tall tales beyond comparison and 1Malaysia is his greatest masterpiece, so to speak, as he has proclaimed that 1Malaysia is his brainchild. It beats out GTP, ETP, NKRA, NKEA and what not.

The sixth Malaysian prime minister will thus go down in history as the master of spin, sloganeering and story-telling. Incredible credentials, indeed, if one were a movie director or producer for sure. But as a prime minister? Naah!

Najib's move of pandering to the demands of the ultra-Malays in order to gain support of the Malays is a crass and lowdown tactic unbecoming of someone who aspires to be a great statesman. What will other world leaders think?

It is time for Najib to wake up to the fact that his words and deeds are watched not only by Malaysians here but also by other world leaders and Malaysians overseas. Still, he has reached the point of no-return and his "movement of moderates" talk is all hype, hot air and hoo-ha over nothing.

As we approach the finishing line towards the dissolution of Parliament, Najib seems desperate to build up what he considers as enough solid support before calling for the 13th general election. And by solid support, he is thinking of the Malay vote.

His desperation shows through clearly as he comes across as a muddled flip-flopper lacking in direction of whether to adopt a policy encompassing all races or only a Malay-only policy.

His party, Umno, is also rudderless and clueless on how to steer the Malaysian economy through unchartered stormy seas next year when the global economic crisis truly hits our shores and we have been forewarned. Instead, Najib and Barisan Nasional leaders are deluding themselves that the Malaysian economy is all fine and hunky-dory.

The Umno general assembly has deteriorated into a barbaric sword and shield-clanging feast as each Umno leader vowed death and destruction to their perceived enemy forces. Nothing on economic or administrative policies for the good of the nation was discussed.

Due to Umno's outright wooing of the Malays, Taiping MP, DAP's Nga Kor Ming, has opined that the 13th general election will be held between two and four weeks after Chinese New Year to lessen the Chinese vote. This is because once the Chinese have taken long leave to go back to their hometown for the Chinese New Year, it will be difficult for them to take leave again to go back to vote.

In 2012, Chinese New Year falls on Jan 23 and thus polling will be between Feb 11 and 26.

Besides, the feel-good factor among the rakyat is still there in February after the distribution of goodies by BN in January when in fact the goodies themselves come from the rakyat's money!

In March, the feel-good factor would have dissipated so BN will want to hold the polls as near as possible to the date of the distribution of the goodies – and February fits the bill.

Another reason why the polls will not be held in March, opined Nga, is that the BN federal government will not want Pakatan Rakyat to remind the people of the political tsunami of March 2008. Therefore, March is out.

However, the government must not think that it can do as it likes by riding rough-shod over the rakyat. The time is coming when the world is changing. In Russia, the opposition and its supporters are already protesting due to widespread fraud and malpractice in the Russian elections.

With Time magazine naming "The Protester" as the Person of the Year for 2011, there are signs that the global movement for change is already at hand as the world's populations are demanding justice and fair play.

The incumbent government must pay heed to the signs of the times and not talk down to the citizens. It must not continue to display arrogance as the oppressed people have shown that they can and will arise to overthrow despotic and dictatorial regimes that are merciless in suppressing the voice of the people.

READ MORE HERE

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Rabu, 21 Disember 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan