| Najib vs. Anwar: Epic Battle Posted: 22 May 2011 10:50 AM PDT By Asia Sentinel
Hidden in thousands of pages of US diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to Asia Sentinel, is a years-long battle for Malaysian political primacy between Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.
It is a battle that Najib appears to have won, at least for now, having been named prime minister while an embattled Anwar remains in the dock, fighting charges that he sodomized an aide.
The cables, more than 900,000 words long and covering 15 years from 1993 to 2008, depict an Anwar who from the start saw Najib as a danger to him personally. He was in frequent touch with US Embassy officials, warning constantly that Najib was the perpetrator of a long series of corrupt acts in the procurement of defense equipment and that he was a danger to the exercise of democracy.
Equally, the cables depict an American legation determined to avoid becoming ensnared in Malaysian politics by taking sides. Christopher LaFleur, US ambassador from 2004 to 2007, wrote in a July 31, 2007 cable to US Army Gen. George W. Casey that "Malaysia is important to us because it is an economically successful, stable, predominantly Muslim country that, over the longer term, may be able to support us more strongly in places like the Middle East… The overall tone in Malaysian-American relations has improved considerably since Abdullah Badawi became Prime Minister in late-2003, and we seek to translate this into substantive improvements. Bilateral relations eroded under Abdullah's vituperative predecessor Dr Mahathir Mohamad, but Abdullah brought with him a friendlier style and an interest in projecting a more moderate image, both for himself and for his country. "
The embassy, however, watched closely as Anwar forged an unwieldy opposition coalition from the Islamist Parti Islam se-Malaysia, the Chinese Democratic Action Party and Anwar's own Parti Keadilan Rakyat, made up largely of urban Malays.
From the time Anwar was released from prison after a 1999 trial on what were widely seen to be bogus charges of corruption and sexual deviancy, the cables show a United Malays National Organisation paralyzed by inaction and led by an ineffective Abdullah Badawi while opposition forces raise enthusiastic crowds of tens of thousands of cheering spectators demanding political reform.
The need for Anwar's crucial leadership of the awkward coalition is underscored by a Feb. 23, 2007 cable signed by LaFleur. "PAS valued Anwar as the 'bridge' between the non-Malays especially the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and PAS, and as a name-brand figure able to attract voters," La Fleur wrote.
PAS elders, he wrote, found it impossible to communicate with the DAP and other non-Malay parties. He quotes Azizan Abdul Razak of PAS saying that PAS and DAP were "like chickens and ducks, feeding at the same trough, but unable to talk to one another." Anwar was seen as the only one who could blunt the "ruling National Front juggernaut."
Anwar, LaFleur wrote on July 17, 2007, was concentrating his attacks on then Deputy Prime Minister Najib as a way to "open up fissures in UMNO middle ranks that will give him other opportunities."
As pressure continued on the ruling coalition, Anwar led enthusiastic rallies all over the country, culminating in the March 2008 national elections that ended the Barisan Nasional's 50-year two-thirds hold on parliament. The cables in general seem to indicate a sense of growing panic and paralysis on the part of Barisan leaders, particularly in UMNO, and a desire to drive Abdullah Badawi from the premiership to make way for Najib. Anwar compounded the fears by displaying an eight-minute videotape of a prominent lawyer, VK Lingam, apparently telling a Supreme Court judge to fix key appointments in the government's favor, thus spurring a royal inquiry into judicial corruption.
According to Ambassador James Keith, who succeeded LaFleur in July 2007, UMNO leaders worried "about Anwar's drawing power on the streets. That Anwar and other opposition leaders proceeded successfully in the face of PM Abdullah's personal warnings should bolster the opposition's resolve and embolden them to plan further events."
After Anwar returned to politics by taking back his Penang parliamentary seat in a by-election, it was only a matter of time before UMNO replaced a faltering Abdullah Badawi with Najib. As Mahathir goaded Najib to act in April 2007, Anwar was telling the diplomats that his opposition coalition "had a 'realistic' opportunity to topple PM Abdullah's government by bringing over 30 or more BN MPs for a no-confidence vote in Parliament," Keith wrote.
All of that was brought to a halt on June 30, 2008,when former aide Mohamed Saiful Bukhary Azlan, charged that he had been sodomized by Anwar, a case that goes on to this day. The charges brought the opposition's momentum to a halt.
On July 23, 2008, apparently aware that this second sodomy arrest was being viewed skeptically by the international community, Malaysian Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar assembled a flock of foreign diplomats to give them the government's view.
According to a cable on that date signed by Keith, Syed Hamid dismissed claims of conspiracy, defended the police handling of the case and emphasized that Anwar was "being treated fairly."
"The Government of Malaysia is becoming aware of the negative impact the Anwar case has had on its international reputation and is acting to change the negative foreign perceptions," the cable read.
"Today's briefing was an attempt by the GOM to influence the diplomatic community, counter Anwar's own messaging the day before, and work against critical international media attention."
The skeptical tone of the cable is difficult to miss. Syed Hamid, the cable said, "shared no new information with the group as a whole and we doubt the briefing swayed diplomats to change their prior opinions; indeed, we heard a good measure of cynicism from some of the gathered diplomats. The government's decision to hold the event and the Ambassador's discussion with the Home Minister afterward served to reinforce our belief that the Government of Malaysia already has decided to charge Anwar for sodomy, and it will take this next step by mid-August." |
| Gas Price Review Long Overdue Posted: 22 May 2011 10:29 AM PDT (Bernama) - A long-overdue review of the heavily subsidised natural gas price is crucial as demand for cheap gas in Malaysia is far outstripping supply. Analysts said that if this market-distorting situation is not corrected by the government soon, then Malaysia will run out of gas reserves which will jeopardise future generations. As it is now, the government continues to subsidise gas by as much as 71-77 per cent, which means lost opportunities for the country and the economy not being cost efficient. This is because the billions of ringgit used to heavily subsidise gas could have been used for socio-economic development projects such as public amenities, roads, schools and other services. For gas alone, Petronas paid out a massive amount of subsidies amounting to RM131.3 billion between 1997 and 2010. This being the case, there is a need to gradually move gas prices to reflect international market prices as gas prices in Malaysia are among the cheapest in the region and cheaper compared with alternative fuels. As a result, a large number of consumers have shifted their consumption of energy from other fuels such as diesel, liquefied petroleum gas and fuel oil to natural gas. This has resulted in an imbalance with demand outstripping supply at a rapid pace. There is also a misconception among the people that Malaysia has lots of gas reserves to be used for power when the actual situation is that there is real concern over gas reserves as they are finite. Malaysia is now getting 36 per cent of its natural gas supply outside Malaysia at a higher price which continues to increase, but sold to the power and non-power sectors and industries at highly reduced prices. These price distortions to the economy which are taking a toll on the country's finances needs to be rectified soon by rationalising and reducing subsidies as the situation is increasingly untenable. The local supply of natural gas is insufficient as demand has escalated 400 per cent over the past 10 years from 2000 for customers using less than 2.0 million standard cubic feet per day (mmscfd) and about 160 per cent for customers using more than 2.0 mmscfd while the country's gas reserves are fast depleting at an annual rate of 12 per cent. The last gas price revision by the government was in March 2009, at a discount of 50 per cent, the prices ranged from RM15.35 per million British thermal units (mmBtu) to RM10.70 per mmBtu, with the obligation to review every six months but that did not happen. Since the last revision, the price of medium fuel oil (MFO), a reference index from which gas is priced on, had risen over 100 per cent. This has led the government to bear the cost of heavier subsidies as the price of energy continues to increase in global markets. On the local scene, the power sector which has been subsidised since 1997, consumes about 55 per cent of the gas needs and a large part of the balance by the industry which had been subsidised since 2002. The government has subsidised the price of gas to the power sector by as much as 77 per cent or RM10.70 per mmBtu and that to the industries at an average 73 per cent or between RM15.35 to RM11.05. Based on a simple calculation, for every RM10, the government will have to subsidise between RM7.70 to RM7.30, which is already a burden, bearing in mind the fact that imported gas is bought at international market prices. The Malaysian public and industries have been enjoying the benefits of subsidies for so long but the world scenario has changed and the days of cheap energy are gone. From another perspective, Malaysia was subsidising the cost of products of other countries manufactured by their multinational companies based here. The government will now have to adapt to strategies it knows best to sustain the economy and Malaysians must learn to accept changes and ride the global economic storm to be at the forefront of the competition. Like it or not, oil and gas prices have increased and the subsidies which have become a burden to the government are very much due for a relook. Industries have benefitted immensely enjoying double subsidies in the form of cheap gas and subsidised electricity, while receiving other government incentives. Having relied on cheap gas for their production, there is no incentive for companies to adopt and adapt to new technologies and find new ways to become efficient. But a gradual removal of subsidies is expected to induce industries to seek more efficient technologies for their processes. It is understood that some of the industry players do not mind the market rates but expect any move towards that end to be undertaken in a gradual manner. Since 1997, the government had spent RM131 billion in oil and gas subsidies and the amount is increasing since the gas usage gets bigger while higher MFO prices had caused the situation to be not sustainable in the long run. As of now, Malaysia is getting supply of natural gas from the Natuna field in Indonesia, the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development Area (JDA) and also from Vietnam. Malaysia's share of gas supply from Vietnam is almost exhausted, which means an additional on the government to look for new sources. It is understood that Petronas would also be importing liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) by 2012 to cater to increasing demand, which is rather costly at about RM40 per mmBtu. The people have to dispel the misconception that the gas is always there and readily available. In reality, Malaysia is a small player and the country's oil and gas reserves are small. If gas continues to be subsidised, then Malaysia is not optimising its resources when the reserves should be kept for future generations. Ideally, the price of gas should be at market rates which would then attract other potential companies to import gas and liberalise the market. By spurring the gas trade, players could import cheaper gas from abroad compared to the current situation, where players are not willing to come onboard as they would not be making any money competing against subsidised gas. It is understood that Petronas will have its regasification plant ready by 2012 whereby other companies could import LNG and regasify to sell to the industries. Malaysia, eventually, will attract investors who can add higher value to the gas industry and generate greater income and spur the economy in the process.
(Bernama)
|
| Malaysian universities improve ranking on Asian scale Posted: 22 May 2011 10:22 AM PDT By The Malaysian Insider Six out of seven Malaysian universities improved their ranking on the QS Asian University Rankings this year, with Universiti Malaya (UM) climbing three spots to 39th. Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) also jumped 20 slots to 57th out of 200 Asian universities. No Malaysian university entered the top 10 ranks while the National University of Singapore (NUS) retained its third place. QS also said in a statement the Hong Kong University of Science & Technology (HKUST) knocked the University of Hong Kong down to the second spot. The global higher education information specialist noted that Malaysia had seven universities in the top 200 Asian universities compared to Thailand's nine and Indonesia's eight. Japan was the best-represented nation with five universities in the top 10 ranks and 57 in the top 200. In contrast, China had 40, South Korea 35, Taiwan 16, India 11, and Hong Kong had seven universities in the top 200 Asian institutions. The QS Asian University Rankings last year showed that the top Malaysian university was UM at the 42nd spot while Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) was the second best university here at 58th. The ranking of public institutions in Malaysia has dived throughout the past years to the point of dropping out of the top 200 universities in the QS World University Rankings last year. QS noted that the "dynamism" of the Asian region was bolstered by the fact that one out of five universities in the top 50 universities was less than 50 years old. READ MORE HERE. |
| Islamic leaders question non-Muslim rights Posted: 22 May 2011 01:34 AM PDT (The Malaysian Insider) - Several Islamic leaders have questioned the loyalty of non-Muslims in the country, declaring today the community's rights must be re-evaluated if Malaysia is to call itself an Islamic state. Former president of Islamic Da'wah Foundation Malaysia (Yadim), Datuk Nakhaie Ahmad, said treatment of non-Muslims must be based on the social contract agreed and pointed out that the government has been too gracious to the community. "In attempts to get vote and support of non-Muslims, we have been very gracious in giving them their civil rights. Civil rights given to them includes the rights to vote, participation in politics, hold office, involvement in the military and so forth but we cannot just willingly give them everything. "Our offer must be based on religious practices. If we look at the prophet's agreement in the Madinah constitution, civil rights were given to the Jews but the rights must be paid back with responsibility. They must have the responsibility and agree to defend our country and not insult the agreement," he said during a forum here. Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad declared Malaysia an Islamic state a decade ago in a move to counter PAS' growing influence among the country's key Malay Muslim population. The issue cropped up this month when several groups asked for amendments to the Federal Constitution to stipulate only Muslims can be the prime minister after Utusan Malaysia carried an unsubstantiated report of a Christian plot to usurp Islam's position as religion of the federation. Nakhaie stressed that non-Muslims that have broken the social contract must be expelled from the country and asked the government to adopt a tough approach in safeguarding Muslim interest. "If the agreement is broken then actions must be taken against them. If they break our agreement then they are our enemy and must be expelled from the country. We must not compromise with them. We must be stern with them when it comes to the social contract agreed," he said. Nakhaie added it is important that high level government positions not be awarded to non-Muslims for national security. "We cannot give them important government position as it is not allowed for non-Muslims to become ministers in a Islamic state. Head of military must also not be given to non-Muslims. "Without thinking about the future of our country, we are so willing to give them everything. Granting them their civil rights must be balanced with Islamic preaching so they will understand justice in Islam and the Islamic system," said the former PAS member who defected to Umno years ago. He also warned Muslims to unite as non-Muslims will become stronger if the community continues to quarrel among themselves. "They are brave now and are willing to say anything because they are becoming dominant. They (non-muslim political parties) are only working with us to only achieve their goals. It is a marriage of convenience. We know what is their programme. We are already losing economically and now we want to give political rights?" he asked. READ MORE HERE |
| How Len Talif Salleh -”Objective” Civil Servant/BN Politician/Timber Company Boss – ... Posted: 22 May 2011 01:24 AM PDT Sarawak Report In the run up to the recent election the Director of the Forestry Department, which is responsible for handing out Timber Licences, Len Talif Salleh, paraded before the cameras supporting the Chief Minister's laughable claims that 70% of Sarawak's forests remain "primary or intact". Salleh posed as an 'objective' civil servant, the Director of Forests, charged with managing the state's forests in a disinterested manner, unswayed by politics. It was not mentioned, however, that at the same time Len Talif Salleh was already running as a BN candidate in the forthcoming election! In any non-corrupted country a civil servant who was planning to move from being a paid public servant to run for political office would, of course, step down from his post beforehand. However, not only did Len Talif Salleh fail to do that, but unbelievably, according to the Department's own website, the man is still occupying this crucial public job as Director of Forests weeks after the election when he was returned as a BN YB!  Len Talif Salleh has kept his position as Head of the Forests Department even though he has gone into politics and is arguably therefore now his own boss! The conclusion must be that Taib has run so short of yes men that he is placing the same handful of loyalists across all the key public positions, regardless of the vital division between the Civil Service and politics. There can be few men left in Sarawak who would seriously claim that 70% of the jungle remains intact! Salleh was handing timber licences to himself ! But this is not the only conflict of interest to feature in Salleh's career. Our investigations reveal how he has concurrently occupied a staggering number of top posts in forestry, giving him total control over timber management – much in the same way that his own boss Taib has acquired all the main positions of State. In 2008 he was simultaneously Deputy Permanent Secretary Ministry of Planning and Resources Management; Director of Forests; Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer Sarawak Forestry Corporation and the General Manager of the Sarawak Timber Industry Development Corporation (STIDC). Is it fair to assume, therefore, that Salleh was little more than Taib's 'Yes Man' in forestry – we think yes!
READ MORE HERE |
| Zahid expose DAP's plan to name Malay candidates in General Election Posted: 22 May 2011 01:12 AM PDT (Bernama) - Umno vice-president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has exposed a plan by the DAP to name Malay candidates in several states in the next general election. He said DAP was now identifying suitable Malays to contest seats in states like Perak, Melaka and Negeri Sembilan. "They're taking measures to ensure that the candidates (Malays) would be accepted by voters," he told reporters after opening the Masjid Tanah Umno divisional meeting here today. Ahmad Zahid, who is Defence Minister, said DAP planned to name Malay electoral candidates in Perak in hopes of conquering the state and naming one of its own as menteri besar. "This is because the Perak constitution forbids non-Malay from becoming menteri besar. For this reason, the DAP is planning to name a Malay candidate to contest a state seat so that eventually a DAP menteri besar could be sworn in," he said. In other states, he said, DAP was likely to name Malay candidates in Malay-majority constituencies and in areas where Barisan Nasional (BN) fielded non-Malay candidates. Ahmad Zahid described the strategy as something that could be plausibly executed by DAP. He noted that DAP had started a blogsite in Malay after using mainly English and Mandarin to reach out to the people all this while. "We've managed to sniff out the plan which is concocted without the knowledge of PAS and PKR (Parti Keadilan Rakyat). I'd like to remind PAS and PKR not to become a mere tool of the DAP," he said. Ahmad Zahid also reminded members of Umno and other BN component parties to be wary of the DAP's ploy. "We shouldn't remain complacent in the face of DAP's actions. I'd like to urge Malays not to associate themselves with the DAP, whether by becoming their candidates or partners under Pakatan Rakyat," he added. |
| The Perkasa link in the Anwar car sabotage or murder bid Posted: 22 May 2011 01:03 AM PDT Written by Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle Rowdy ultra Malay-rights group Perkasa has been linked to the sabotage of a car used by the wife of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, causing an accident that could have resulted in her death. A police report has already been lodged on the incident, and pending investigations, PKR leaders have maintained an uneasy silence. But few have hesitated to call the accident a murder attempt - aimed more at Anwar than Wan Azizah, who is also their party president. Pointing out the link is Anwar himself, who asked how it was that Perkasa had known and lodged a police report that his car - a Mercedes 350 - would be tampered with months before it occured. "They need to be asked. Now that there is a real accident and a threat on Azizah's life, they have to explain. No, I'm not implying anything (but), how do you expect me to respond to rumours?" Malaysiakini reported Anwar as saying. In February, Perkasa predicted the accident that would happen in April The accident to Anwar's car happened on April 19. It was a serious one but Azizah and her travelling companion escaped harm. The mechanic's report showed that a caliper-guide bolt-pin that support the brake disc had been removed. "I was told that it is impossible for the bolt to come off without someone removing it. Based on what the mechanic told me, there are also elements of sabotage, considering that the vehicle is regularly used by Anwar," his driver of 28 years had said. The 51-year old driver was the one who lodged the police report earlier this month. But way in advance on February 11, Armand Azha Abu Hanifah, then the Perkasa Youth chief, had lodged his own police report claiming a plot by Anwar and PKR leaders to stage an accident so as to gain public sympathy. Armand also said the real purpose of the ruse was to spirit Anwar out of the country to a place where he can seek political asylum. "We feared that he would mobilise and cause chaos in Malaysia from overseas like (ousted Thai leader Thaksin Shinawatra, who was said to have a hand in the bloody demonstrations in Bangkok last year)," said Armand. How credible is Armand's explanation can only be decided by Malaysians themselves. The former Perkasa rabble-rouser is now the PJ Utara Umno youth information chief. Deathly political game Indeed, the links to Umno, or more specifically to the Umno elite and in particular Mahathir Mohamad who is also the Perkasa founder, cannot be denied. There is a clear trend and design to shut out Anwar and his family from the Malaysian political scene. Malaysian politics is both simple and complex at the same time, hinging on the Malay community which forms 60 per cent of the 28 million population. Whether Anwar is now on a politcal upswing or as the Umno insists on the downcycle, he is still the only Malay leader seen as capable of bridging the divide between the community and the other races. Thanks to the policies practised since indepndence from colonial rule in 1957, and especially during the Mahathir era, there have been blatant efforts by the government to keep the races apart. Divide-and-rule was Mahathir's chosen policy, and racial polarization under Prime Minister Najib Razak's watch is now at its worst. Some say that is because the chances are now very real that the Pakatan Rakyat coalition led by Anwar could topple Najib's BN in the coming election. Anwar's daughter, Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah, has also received an SMS threat to kidnap her children if she did not persuade her father to quit politics. Again, like the car sabotage, police reports have been lodged but little action taken by the authorities. "If the allegations are anything that involves something criminal then the police must investigate, there should not be a cover-up," complained Anwar. "Now there is a semblance of a cover-up, for both cases - the accident and the threat to Izzah's daughter. This can be amplified by the manner the investigation is conducted and the statement by the minister of defence. I don't have any issues with Zahid Hamidi. You want to preserve your position in the party and be prepared to go to that extent, where people's lives are being threatened ...". He was referring to Defense Minister Zahid Hamidi, who recently accused Izzah of trying to gain public sympathy. Zahid's callous accusations stirred up a storm of public outrage, but like his Umno colleagues, they conveniently see Anwar and his family as 'fair game'. "This is now what Anwar's enemies are trying to do. To twist the truth and when it can't be twisted anymore, they even try to kill him off. I appeal to the BN or those extremists in BN to stop before we go past the point of no return. Please respect the people's wishes for a government of the people for the people by the people," Beruas MP Ngeh Koo Ham told Malaysia Chronicle. |
| Shazryl Eskay Abdullah tells the US that Malaysia is a terrorist safe haven Posted: 22 May 2011 01:00 AM PDT 
Even on Malaysian soil, Thai Malay militants did not feel safe from possible assassination or kidnapping. On at least one occasion, a Thai bounty hunter had bribed local Malaysian police to abduct a separatist who was in Malaysia. Eskay had intervened to release the target, whom the Malaysian police officer had locked in the trunk of his police car. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin 
S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 03 KUALA LUMPUR 000263 SIPDIS DEPT FOR EAP E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/13/2027 TAGS: PREL, PGOV, PTER, PINR, MOPS, ASEC, TH, MY SUBJECT: HONORARY CONSUL NOTES MALAYSIA AS SAFE HAVEN FOR THAI INSURGENCY, RELEVANCE OF OLD GUARD REF: A. 06 KUALA LUMPUR 1764 - NO TEARS FOR THAKSIN B. 06 KUALA LUMPUR 1976 - SURAYUD'S VISIT 
Classified By: Political Section Chief Mark D. Clark for reasons 1.4 (b and d). Summary 1. (S) The Honorary Thai Consul in Langkawi, Malaysian businessman Shazryl Eskay Abdullah (protect throughout), described Thai Malay separatist use of Malaysian territory as a safe haven and insurgents' views of the conflict during a February 5 meeting with polchief. Eskay, who was a leading Malaysian facilitator of the dialogue with Thai insurgents hosted by former Prime Minister Mahathir, argued that the older generation insurgency leaders, mostly resident in Malaysia, remained relevant as they provided needed support services and safe haven to younger leaders. He identified only one old guard leader as actively ordering attacks, and estimated that criminal gangs and Thai security services were responsible for 70 percent of the recent violence. He said he did not see links yet between the Thai insurgents and regional or international terrorists, but recognized the potential and encouraged the U.S. to keep a close watch. He also noted, however, that the insurgents received financial assistance via Singapore from unknown sources. The now-ended peace initiative by Mahathir produced a ten-page "peace proposal" signed by old guard leaders, but which failed to gain much response from Bangkok. Eskay believed that the February 11-12 visit to Thailand by Prime Minister Abdullah would result in the Malaysian external intelligence organization (MEIO) taking up a "facilitation" role in discussions between Thai intelligence and southern insurgents, though Eskay was pessimistic as to the prospects. Eskay shared a 12-page paper on the insurgency and Thai Malay views, resulting from his interviews with numerous separatist leaders, which he had submitted to MEIO February. End Summary. Honorary Consul as Mediator with Separatists 2. (S) Polchief called on the Honorary Thai Consul in Langkawi, Shazryl Eskay Abdullah, on February 5 as part of a February 5-9 visit to Malaysian states along the border with Thailand (septel). Eskay, a Malaysian businessman of mixed Malaysian-Thai parentage, described his significant "mediator" role in the 2005-2006 dialogue with Thai Malay insurgents, which featured former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, and his frequent interaction with separatists on both sides of the border. Eskay said he carried out his work on the Thai insurgency largely independent of the Thai and Malaysian governments, and maintained direct links with most known Malay separatist leaders resident in Malaysia. To bolster his credentials, he showed polchief video footage he had recorded of various meetings with men he described as elder separatist leaders and younger operators. Old Guard Not Calling the Shots, but Still Relevant 3. (S) Eskay noted that most of the older generation of Malay separatist leaders lived in Malaysia with the Malaysian Government's knowledge and acquiescence. The older generation included those affiliated with the United Pattani Freedom Front (BERSATU), and the constituent groups the National Revolutionary Front (BRN-Congress), the Pattani Mujahiddin Movement (GMP), and the Pattani United Liberation Organization (PULO). In addition, Eskay confirmed that younger generation separatists, including those involved in recent attacks in southern Thailand, frequently entered Malaysia, particularly when the situation became "too hot" and they required safe haven. The GOM was not always aware of the identity and travel of younger separatists. With some exceptions, the older generation did not direct the actions of the younger insurgents. However, Eskay argued that the relevance of the "old guard" should not be underestimated. The older leaders, with well-established networks in Malaysia, constituted the support service for the insurgents, providing shelter and transportation, and arranging jobs, including in Thai restaurants and on rubber estates. Because the older generation provided needed safe haven services, they remained influential and relevant to a potential peace dialogue with Thailand's Malay south. (Comment: Many of our other interlocutors dismissed the Mahathir-led dialogue because it focused on the older Malaysia-based separatists who no longer represent the insurgency on the ground. End Comment.) The Murky Business of Violence 4. (S) Like many other Malaysians we interviewed during our trip to northern Malaysia, Eskay described the Malay insurgency as splintered, with operations currently carried out by very small cells, comprised of two or three persons. "Brokers" would task the cells with orders and money. Often times the affiliation of the brokers would not be clear to the cells, opening the possibility that they represented other parties, but cells would carry out "orders" nonetheless both for monetary gain and for fear that they otherwise would run afoul of other insurgents. The cell members generally were technically unsophisticated and the brokers often provided the improvised explosive devices to be planted and detonated by the cells. Eskay crudely estimated that Malay separatists accounted for only 30 percent of attacks in the south with Thai army, policy and intelligence agency factions, along with criminal gangs, responsible for the balance. Eskay relayed that many insurgent leaders believed deposed Prime Minister Thaksin and Thai Rak Thai party advisor General Chavalit were funding much of the recent violence. Insurgent members had denied association with New Year's Eve bombings in Bangkok. They also disassociated themselves from many of the attacks on schools. The fracturing of the separatist movement and use of small cells added to the complexity and the difficulty in identifying any leaders for dialogue. Eskay named only one old guard leader, BRN-Congress Vice President Abdullah bin Idris, as responsible for ordering some of the ongoing attacks in southern Thailand. Safe Passage 5. (S) In addition to the Mahathir-led dialogue and frequent informal meetings with Thai separatists, Eskay said he had arranged meetings between Malaysian intelligence and various insurgents operating in Thailand, meetings which included an understanding of safe passage within Malaysia. Even on Malaysian soil, Thai Malay militants did not feel safe from possible assassination or kidnapping. On at least one occasion, a Thai bounty hunter had bribed local Malaysian police to abduct a separatist who was in Malaysia. Eskay had intervened to release the target, whom the Malaysian police officer had locked in the trunk of his police car. No International Terror Links...Yet 6. (S) Eskay stated that he had seen no evidence the Malay separatists had linked up with external terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda or Jemaah Islamiyah. He noted, however, that some insurgents received funds from a bank in Singapore (NFI), which passed through money changers in the Malaysian border town of Padang Besar, Perlis state. Eskay did not know the origin of the funds. Though there was in his view a clear potential for a link-up with terrorist groups, Eskay commented that Malaysian intelligence did not pay adequate attention to this risk and he encouraged the U.S. to keep a close watch on developments. February 2006 "Peace Proposal" 7. (S) The Mahathir-led dialogue had resulted in a "peace proposal" in February 2006, signed by old guard leaders of BERSATU, BRN-Congress, GMP, and PULO, Eskay noted. This had met with no substantive response from the Thai Government, but might constitute a good starting point for future dialogue. Eskay provided us with a copy of the ten-page document, which demanded Thai Government actions in eight areas, namely: -- Improvements in "leadership," through appointment of a Muslim Affairs Minister and a Muslim affairs coordinating body. -- Improved government communication and networking with Malay Muslim communities. -- Confidence-building measures, including establishing ethnic Malay quotas for government service and security forces in the south. -- Steps to promote investment and economic development. -- Improvements in the education infrastructure. -- Amnesty, with individual cases approved by a Board of Review. -- Establishment of a tribunal to investigate and try cases of human rights violations. -- Establishment of a monitoring committee to ensure implementation of the above steps. Malaysian External Intelligence May Take the Lead 8. (S) Eskay said the Mahathir initiative was now over, and the Malaysian Government had made clear that the phase of "NGO involvement" in dialogue with Thai Malay separatists had come to an end. The February 11-12 visit to Thailand by Prime Minister Abdullah likely would confirm a role for the Malaysian External Intelligence Organization (MEIO) as a "facilitator" for future informal talks between Malay separatists and Thai Government intelligence. Eskay supported a Malaysian Government mediation role, but he was pessimistic MEIO and its Thai counterparts would make progress. Instead, Eskay anticipated continued violence. The Honorary Thai Consul shared a 12-page "confidential" paper on the insurgency and Thai Malay views, resulting from his interviews with numerous separatist leaders, which he had submitted to MEIO February 1. Eskay requested that we not share the paper and February 2006 "peace proposal" with others (we have forwarded the documents via classified email to EAP/MTS and Embassy Bangkok). Comment 9. (S) Eskay credibly appeared to have contacts with a large pool of old guard leaders, insurgents, and sympathizers from Thailand's Malay south. His views on the insurgency were the most detailed we heard during five days of travel in northern Malaysia and tracked well in many respects with information and opinions from others. His belief in the usefulness of engaging the old guard, however, contradicted the opinion of Malaysian politicians, officials and police who generally dismissed the old timers as irrelevant. Several Malaysians volunteered they were suspicious of Eskay's contacts with Malay separatists and alleged Eskay had been involved in controversial business deals in the past (unrelated to Thailand). Eskay informed us that he had lived some ten years in the United States circa the 1980s. LAFLEUR |
| ‘Malaysians have lost their purchasing power’ Posted: 21 May 2011 07:00 PM PDT The ratio of income against the cost of goods in Malaysia is at an unhealthy level, notes a newly elected assemblyman in Sarawak. (Free Malaysia Today) - Any increase in retail prices, no matter how small, is a heavy burden on the ordinary Malaysian who is already living on an overstretched budget, said newly elected assemblyman Wong King Wei. Fresh off the ballot box, Wong is not alone in his views as more and more consumers are concerned over rising inflation and how far their salaries will go. Bank Negara recently said inflation could double to 3.5% this year. Already it is 3%. For the ordinary man on the street earning RM1,000, a 3.5% inflation would simply mean he would instantaneously see RM35 disappear from his pocket and with no purchases to account for. And if the inflation rate raises to 5%, he would then lose RM50, which could, if used, translate to a provision list of rice, sugar, oil and onions to last a few days for a family. Said Wong: "The government cannot keep lying about the situation… removing subsidies will affect the ordinary man everything from travel to eating out and marketing. "We are not getting value for money spent. The ratio of income and the cost of goods for Malaysians is currently at a very unhealthy level." According to Wong, the DAP Padungan rep, the spiralling prices of consumer goods has made Malaysians lose their purchasing power. "We're lagging behind many countries now. Even people in Kuala Lumpur who used to have the highest purchasing power compared to other Malaysians are feeling the pinch. "It's all there in the 2010 Prices and Wages Report," he said alluding to the Swiss financial conglomerate UBS AG's revealing fact that Malaysians are lagging behind their global counterparts in terms of purchase power. Citing South Korea, Wong said 40 years ago, the republic was on par economically with Malaysia, but today the citizens enjoyed a purchasing power which was 17% higher than Malaysians. Corruption and cronyism
According to the report, the purchasing power of KL-ites was only 33.8% that of New Yorkers while Londoners have 42% purchase power. The report noted that although the price of goods in these places were twice that of KL, the purchasing power in Kuala Lumpur was still more than twice lesser. Blaming the weaker purchasing power on the gap between income earned and cost of goods, Wong said there was a 'significant disparity' in wages in Malaysia. Compounding the situation is the fact that Malaysians had to deal with 'corruption and cronyism.' READ MORE HERE |
| Kronologi kejadian tanah runtuh di negara ini Posted: 21 May 2011 06:29 PM PDT Menteri Kerja Raya Datuk Shaziman Mansor dilaporkan berkata bahawa kawasan itu dipercayai telah beberapa kali mengalami kejadian tanah runtuh namun tidak dilaporkan. Bernama Highland Towers dan Bukit Antarabangsa — itu adalah antara dua kejadian tanah runtuh yang mengorbankan nyawa di negara ini, dan semalam satu lagi kejadian tanah runtuh berlaku mengorbankan 16 nyawa. Kejadian kali ini membabitkan Rumah Anak-anak Yatim dan Anak-anak Hidayah Madrasah Al-Taqwa di Batu 14, Hulu Langat dan dalam kejadian pada pukul 2.30 petang itu, seramai 25 orang terdiri daripada anak yatim, penuntut, warden dan kakitangan rumah anak yatim itu tertimbus. Ketika kejadian, mereka berada di bawah sebuah khemah yang dipasang untuk persiapan satu majlis yang dijadual berlangsung pukul 5 petang. Runtuhan tanah dari bukit berdekatan kawasan rumah anak yatim itu dikatakan menimbus keseluruhan khemah yang dipasang berhampiran dewan di lereng bukit. Pasukan mencari dan menyelamat mengambil masa hampir 15 jam dalam operasi tanpa henti untuk mengeluarkan semua mangsa yang terperangkap dan mangsa terakhir dikeluarkan pada pukul 5.05 pagi. Kejadian menyayat hati itu mengorbankan 16 orang dan mencederakan sembilan yang lain. Kebanyakan mangsa ialah kanak-kanak yang menghuni rumah itu. Menteri Kerja Raya Datuk Shaziman Mansor dilaporkan berkata bahawa kawasan itu dipercayai telah beberapa kali mengalami kejadian tanah runtuh namun tidak dilaporkan. Menteri Pembangunan Keluarga, Wanita dan Masyarakat Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil pula dilaporkan berkata bahawa rumah anak-anak Yatim itu tidak berdaftar dengan Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat atau mana-mana agensi di bawah kementerian itu. Berikut adalah antara kejadian tanah runtuh yang berlaku di negara ini: * 11 Dis 1993: Satu daripada tiga blok kondominium di Highland Towers, Hulu Klang, Selangor runtuh dan mengorbankan 48 nyawa. Kejadian itu berlaku selepas tanah runtuh berlaku di belakang kondominium itu. * 30 Jun 1995: 21 orang terkorban manakala 23 yang lain cedera dalam kejadian tanah runtuh di jalan susur Genting Highlands. Kejadian itu dipercayai berpunca daripada hujan lebat yang mengakibatkan air turun laju dan menghanyutkan pokok dan tanah berhampiran terowong Karak. * Pada tahun 1996: Kejadian tanah runtuh berlaku pada tahun baru apabila sebahagian Jalan 3/11 Pesiaran Tiga, Bandar Baru Selayang runtuh.Kejadian berhampiran tiga blok flat kawasan perumahan yang didiami 130 keluarga itu tidak mengorbankan nyawa. * 25 Disember 1997: Tanah runtuh di Km17 Lebuhraya Ampang-Hulu Klang, Selangor mengorbankan tiga orang. * 15 Mei 1999: Penduduk kawasan perumahan Bukit Antarabangsa dan Wangsa Ukay, Jalan Hulu Klang terperangkap dalam kejadian tanah runtuh sepanjang 100 meter. Seorang kanak-kanak berusia empat tahun maut. * 2 November 2002: Sebuah banglo di Taman Hillview, Hulu Klang milik bekas panglima Angkatan Tentera, Jen (B) Tan Sri Ismail Omar runtuh selepas dirempuh tanah runtuh dari bukit bersebelahan rumahnya. Dalam kejadian itu, isterinya Puan Sri Azizah Abdul Aziz, anaknya Hijaz, dua menantu dan dua cucu serta pembantu rumah Indonesia terkorban. * 31 Mei 2006: 49 rumah di Kampung Pasir, Hulu Klang musnah akibat runtuhan tanah dan empat sekeluarga terkorban. * 30 November 2008: Dua beradik, Noratirah Roslan, 16, dan Nurul Intan Sarina, 9, terkorban selepas tertimbus dalam kejadian tanah runtuh yang turut meranapkan sebuah banglo di Ulu Yam Perdana, Hulu Selangor. * 6 Disember 2008: Kejadian tanah runtuh di Taman Bukit Mewah, Bukit Antarabangsa, Ampang meragut lima nyawa selain menimbus 14 banglo. * 29 Januari 2011: Tanah runtuh dan banjir kilat akibat hujan berterusan di beberapa penempatan di Sandakan, seperti di perumahan lereng bukit Bandar Ramai-Ramai, Kampung Gelam runtuh dan Kampung Sundang Darat. Kejadian mengorbankan dua orang, seorang warga emas dan remaja perempuan. |
| Martyrs or victims of corruption? Posted: 21 May 2011 06:17 PM PDT 
I think it is time we started appointing women Muftis in Malaysia. After all, if the Muftis do not have any balls what difference does it make if we appoint men or women as Muftis? NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin Anak yatim maut tertimbus syahid SHAH ALAM - Kematian mereka bukan sia-sia. Allah sudah janjikan ganjaran syahid bagi sekumpulan anak yatim terkorban dalam tragedi tanah runtuh di Hulu Langat, petang semalam. Mufti Selangor, Datuk Seri Mohd Tamyes Abdul Wahid berkata, mengikut hukum, Islam yang menemui ajal secara tragis se-perti akibat kebakaran, kemalangan jalan raya atau bencana alam dan mati ketika tidur, dikategorikan sebagai syahid. "Mereka dapat syafaat Allah, itu janjiNya," katanya. Beliau mengulas kematian anak-anak yatim penghuni Rumah Anak-anak Hidayah Madrasah Al-Taqwa di Jalan Sungai Semungkis, Kampung Gahal, Hulu Langat, petang semalam. Bagaimanapun menurut Mohd Tamyes, jenazah mereka masih perlu diurus seperti jenazah mati biasa, iaitu mandi, kafan dan disolatkan. Beliau mengingatkan pengasas rumah kebajikan, termasuk rumah anak yatim di seluruh negara, pastikan bangunan mereka tiada risiko musibah. "Jangan bina di lereng bukit atau berhampiran dekawasan bahaya kepada penghuni," katanya. ******************************* The death of 16 orphans in a landslide in Hulu Langat, outside Kuala Lumpur, yesterday was not in vain (bukan sia-sia), said the Mufti of Selangor. According to Islam, said the Mufti, these orphans died a martyr's death (syahid). And the same goes for anyone who dies in a traffic accident, or whatever tragedy, added the Mufti. I suppose this is one way of looking at it. When someone dies we try to look at the 'positive' side of his or her death. And this is probably the Mufti's way of making us feel good about those deaths. After all, is not Malaysia an expert at the 'feel good' factor? I bet they can even make us feel good about May 13 -- it taught us that racism is bad and can lead to race riots so Malaysians today are no longer racists. Yeah, right! The more fundamentalist Muslim would say that the 16 orphans were fated to die in the landslide yesterday. The time, date, place and manner we will die has already been determined even before we were born. So, yesterday, the 16 orphans merely kept their appointment with death. It was their fate which had already been decided and there was nothing anyone could have done to avoid it. Is that so? What about the reports of the previous incidences of landslips in that area? Wasn't that a sign (from God or whatever) that we have a tragedy in the making? What was done about the many landslips of past that yesterday became a landslide? (Menteri Kerja Raya Datuk Shaziman Mansor dilaporkan berkata bahawa kawasan itu dipercayai telah beberapa kali mengalami kejadian tanah runtuh namun tidak dilaporkan - Bernama). When the Tsunami hit our shores and other Asian countries on 26 December 2004, they said the same thing. Some even said that this is God's punishment for all those sinners. I wonder what sin the babies and children committed to incur God's wrath on them. Actually, the death toll of the 2004 Tsunami could have been reduced had greedy people not cut away (for profit) all the mangrove plants along the coast. The mangrove would have acted as a buffer and the waves would not have gone so far inland and been so destructive. A lot of tragedies could have been avoided. And they could have been avoided if humankind were not so greedy and corrupt. Greed and corruption, not God, causes tragedies. And those who die in tragedies should not be classified as martyrs but as victims of greed and corruption. On a per capita basis Malaysia has ten times more fatal road accidents than Britain. And this is all because of greed and corruption. Those who die in traffic accidents are not martyrs, as the Mufti said. They are victims of greed and corruption. The Muftis have a duty to perform. They must condemn greed and corruption. They must not tell people that 16 orphans dying in a landslide is not in vain, it is okay, it is a good, it means they are going straight to heaven. They must tell the people that this is yet another of the many signs of rampant greed and corruption in Malaysia. Don't tell us that the orphans' deaths are NOT sia-sia. Tell us that their deaths ARE sia-sia. And tell us that their deaths and the deaths of thousands of other Malaysians every year is because of greed and corruption. Are the Muftis scared of doing this? Are they so worried that they will get sacked from their jobs and will lose their comfortable income and lifestyle? Are they not brave enough to teach Malaysians proper Islam, in that we must oppose greed and corruption? I think it is time we started appointing women Muftis in Malaysia. After all, if the Muftis do not have any balls what difference does it make if we appoint men or women as Muftis? |
| In Kedah, a two-horse race with no winners Posted: 21 May 2011 04:57 PM PDT The street poll of 70 Kedahans aged 21 to 70 showed that half of them (50 per cent) want a change in the state government. The sentiment was most pronounced among Malays of whom 60 per cent want change followed by Indians (50 per cent). By Sheridan Mahavera, The Malaysian Insider
Muhammad Najib and his fellow restaurateurs here are seething. The Alor Star City Council (MBAS) wants them to pay extra if they want to put tables and chairs on the five-foot ways in front of their shops. A restaurant with around 15 tables would have to fork out RM600 a month to MBAS. In addition, they will have to pay a one-time RM1,000 application fee and RM10,000 for insurance. "It's either you pay up or they come and take your tables and chairs away," said Muhammad Najib, who requested his name be changed for fear of reprisal. Ordinarily, he said, the way to deal with such a predicament is for restaurants to band together and take their case up with their state assemblyman, who would then plead with the local council. Or escalate their struggle by getting an influential "penaung" (patron) such as the mentri besar or the head of a large political party to help them. But in the post-2008 political landscape, the balance of power in a Pakatan Rakyat (PR) state such as Kedah has diluted the ability of a citizen like Muhammad Najib to use his democratic right to petition the authorities for redress. "If I go to a Barisan Nasional (BN) Adun (state assemblyman) or get a penaung like the state BN chief to help you, the city council won't listen to him because he's considered the current opposition. "If you go to the MB and he helps you, the federal BN will mark you as pro-Pakatan. So if BN comes into power next election, you sure kena (you will be fixed). So in the end, you are trapped." His dilemma of the common man feeling victimised by the endless battle for power by BN and PR is repeated again and again by other Kedahans. The only difference is the players and the arenas. The stakes and the game remain the same — gain influence by any ways necessary even if it means opposing good policy. It boils down to jobs and garbage  Though Alor Star has a new night attraction near its historic Balai Nobat, life in Kedah has pretty much remained the same under the PR administration. to Kedah, a straw poll of residents signalled that they are tired of the game and that a significant number want to change the next state government in the next election. The street poll of 70 Kedahans aged 21 to 70 showed that half of them (50 per cent) want a change in the state government. The sentiment was most pronounced among Malays of whom 60 per cent want change followed by Indians (50 per cent). Only 36 per cent of Chinese respondents wanted change while 28 per cent wanted to keep PR in power. The remaining 36 per cent of Chinese respondents either did not know or did not want to comment. The respondents were a mix of urban and rural residents from Jitra, Alor Star, Sungai Petani and Merbok. Most respondents cited employment issues (28 per cent of respondents) namely the lack of jobs, low salaries and the difficulty of finding workers as the biggest problem affecting Kedah. Respondents said the second biggest problem was poor garbage collection (17 per cent) while lack of economic growth and business opportunities came in third (15 per cent). The poll seemed to buck the views that the young are more likely to support PR or that the old vote for BN. Close to equal numbers of young and old respondents wanted to either change or maintain the state government. However, women respondents were likelier than men to want the state government changed. It's always my race that gets it Just as pertinent as these figures are the myriad views individual respondents volunteered about life in Kedah under PR. Many of those wanting change were frustrated with policies which they felt discriminated against them. Muhammad Najib's above case is not unique. Other respondents complained of new local council rulings which seemed to have sprung up during PR's rule and which they deem "insensible".  The water damage from the floods can still be seen on the houses in Taman Sri Utama near Jitra. Shopkeepers in the Jitra town centre complained of a rule forbidding them from displaying goods on their five foot-ways, while residents of Sungai Petani groaned about steep parking fees. Many of the complaints were tinged with perceptions of ethnic bias. Conversations with Chinese business people invariably bring up the PR government's 50 per cent Bumiputera quota housing policy (link to Chinese sentiment story) Malay shopkeepers felt that local council only targeted Malay businesses. "I have been warned about cleanliness. But I look at the Chinese restaurants behind mine and they haven't been touched. It's like they won't mess with Chinese businesses because they are afraid of losing votes," railed one eatery owner in Alor Star who requested anonymity. This is another version of the perception war that PAS and its PR allies are fighting all over the country, from Selangor to Penang and Perak, that it is bending backwards for non-Muslims at the expense of Muslims. Kedah PAS Youth chief Ahmad Yahya points out that the 50 per cent Bumiputera quota for housing estates (which Chinese business groups have opposed) is meant to help Malays buy more houses. Yet this point was missed by all of the Malay respondents who accused PAS of a non-Muslim bias. READ MORE HERE |
| Anwar Looking Down At The Poor Orang Kampong Posted: 21 May 2011 04:49 PM PDT Hantu Laut There were 1000 strong poor kampong folks in Cheras Baru who listened to Anwar's bullshit about subsidies for the poor and Najib bowing to rich towkays. If the kampong people believe him I don't blame them because they don't know any better but Anwar is certainly a liar and a bigot because he looks down on the poor kampong folks and think they are stupid and can be easily fooled.
Somebody in the crowd should have asked Anwar when he was Finance Minister did he give huge projects and businesses to any poor folk in Cheras Baru or in any other kampong or he gave it to the same kind of people who can do the job properly, help stimulate the economy, generate more jobs for the people and pay more taxes into the government coffers.
Ask him how many people are under his employment as compared to people like Ananda, Bukary, Vincent Tan, Francis Yeo and thousands of other entrepreneurs and businessmen that have contributed to the economy and well being of this country. Ask him how much has he contributed in term of taxes, foreign exchange gains and other economic contributions that have helped put money in our pockets and helped the government to develop the country giving us a better live.
"They give subsidies to poor people and call it opium but when they give it to the rich it is okay although they are the real opium addicts," he said in response to Najib likening petrol subsidies to opium.
At lease Najib is honest and are prepared to bite the bullet and stake his job to take unpopular decision to save the nation from bankruptcy. The present economic situation would bankrupt the nation if the government continue giving out too much subsidies.
Would he like to turn this country into an agrarian nation like what Pol Pot and the Khmer Rogue did in Cambodia many years ago, killed all the intellectuals, the doctors, lawyers, teacher, businessmen and anyone using glasses deemed to be pests and parasites. READ MORE HERE |
| Menjawab tuduhan Khairy Jamaluddin Posted: 21 May 2011 04:42 PM PDT Beliau menuduh Melayu terbela di bawah Umno? Sudah 54 tahun merdeka, keadaan ekonomi jauh terkebelakang berbanding dengan Cina, India. Apa yang Umno lakukan untuk orang Melayu sehingga tertinggal ke belakang. Bukankah 2/3 anggota kabinet orang Melayu? Bukankah pegawai tertinggi orang Melayu. Idris Ahmad, Harakahdaily Khairy Jamaluddin, Ketua Pemuda Umno mendakwa hanya Umno pembela Melayu di negara ini. Lain daripada Umno, bukan pembela Melayu. Persoalannya benarkah Umno pembela Melayu. Tidak malukah Khairy yang mendakwa bahawa Umno pembela orang Melayu, hakikatnya Umno hanya mengguna Melayu untuk membela pemimpin Umno bukan bela Melayu jauh sekali untuk mengangkat agama di tempat yang sepatutnya. Beliau juga menyebut fakta yang tidak betul ketika berucap di Persidangan Perwakilan Pergerakan Pemuda Umno Bahagian Pontian di Dewan Besar Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MSRM) Pontian yang mendakwa PAS ditubuhkan kerana Ustaz Haji Ahmad Fuad kalah menentang Datuk Onn Jaafar di dalam mesyuarat Agung Umno. Faktanya bukan Ustaz Haji Fuad kalah melawan Dato' Onn Jaafar, tetapi tewas dengan dengan Tunku Abdul Rahman merebut jawatan Yang Dipertua Umno. Seorang lagi calon ialah CM Yusuf. Khairy juga salah fakta mengenai perkara tersebut, kerana apa yang berlaku ialah tarikh pertandingan dalam Umno ialah 25 Ogos 1951 sedangkan mesyuarat di kalangan ulamak untuk menubuhkan PAS kali kedua pada 23 Ogos 1951 di Padang Kelab Sultan Sulaiman. Mesyuarat ulamak dahulu daripada tarikh pertandingan Haji Ahmad Fuad dengan Tunku Abdul Rahman. Di manakah fakta beliau dapat? Perlu diingatkan penubuhan PAS bukan kerana kecewa tidak mendapat jawatan dalam Umno, tetapi kerana teguran ulamak mengenai isu agama tidak dipedulikan antaranya isu judi. Ulamak merasakan perlu menubuhkan badan yang bebas untuk memberi tekanan kepada Umno dalam hukum agama. Menjawab tuduhan yang mengatakan penubuhan PAS memecahbelahkan perpaduan Melayu juga ditolak. Sebenarnya penubuhan Umno menyebabkan Melayu berpecah, kerana sebelum Umno sudah ada Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM) yang ditubuhkan pada tahun 1945. Umno ialah parti restu penjajah, sebab itu Umno tidak diharamkan ketika Ordinan Dharurat 1948 walaupun semua parti diharamkan seperti PKMM dan Hizbul Muslimin. Beliau menuduh Melayu terbela di bawah Umno? Sudah 54 tahun merdeka, keadaan ekonomi jauh terkebelakang berbanding dengan Cina, India. Apa yang Umno lakukan untuk orang Melayu sehingga tertinggal ke belakang. Bukankah 2/3 anggota kabinet orang Melayu? Bukankah pegawai tertinggi orang Melayu. Maka jalan pintasnya untuk menutup bangkai gajah, maka Umno menuduh ini angkara bukan melayu dengan meniupkan sentimen kaum. Di sini adalah sebahagian jawapan yang membuktikan Umno gagal membela Melayu. 1. Umno menggunakan konsep "Umno Putera" bukan "Bumiputera", akhirnya yang ketinggalan orang Melayu. 2. Apabila jawatan di dalam Umno untuk mengaut keuntungan bukan untuk bela melayu, akhirnya mereka rebut harta, Melayu merempat merata-rata. 3. Menindas sesama bangsa kerana berlainan ideologi walaupun dari segi merit dan kebolehan ada kepada orang Melayu contohnya dalam soal perniagaan. 4. Menafikan royalti kepada Kelantan walaupun Kelantan negeri majoriti Melayu. 5. Macam mana melayu hendak terbela, minyak yang sepatutnya mendarat di Kelantan sebaliknya dibawa ke pantai Songkla Siam walaupun jaraknya lebih jauh daripada pantai Kelantan. Jarak ke Kelantan hanya 150 kilometer, berbanding ke Songkla Thailand 270 kilometer. 6. Melesapkan RM52 bilion nilai saham bumiputera. Sepatutnya orang Melayu akan memiliki ekuiti bumiputera melebihi 40 peratus jika benar Umno pembela Melayu. 7. Menyekat 118 projek pusat ke Kelantan sejak Rancangan Malaysia Kesembilan (RMK 9). 8. Menggadai tanah rezab Melayu 1.3 juta hektar. Penjajah Inggeris tinggal tanah rezab Melayu seluas 3 juta hektar selepas merdeka. Tahun 1995 tanah rezab Melayu hanya tinggal 1.3 juta hektar. Siapa punya angkara? Adakah ini dalil Umno pembela Melayu. 9. Memperkenalkan sains dan metematik dalam bahasa Inggeris, melibatkan pelajar Melayu luar bandar dizalimi kerana kurang pasarana. 10. Menyalah guna hak keistimewaan orang Melayu untuk mendapat projek, kemudian mengagihkan kekayaan sesama kroni, akhirnya melayu terus ketinggalan dari segi taraf hidup. Ini adalah sebahagian daripada bukti Umno tidak boleh membela Melayu. Maka sampailah masanya PAS Ganti Umno. PAS terbukti dan teruji untuk membela Melayu berbanding dengan Umno. Tuduhan DAP dan PKR mengkhianat Melayu sebagai strategi pencuri menjerit pencuri, supaya orang Melayu emosi untuk terus menyokong Umno walaupun hakikatnya Umno menjaga Melayu seperti serigala menjaga kambing. |
| Bersih rally: PAS promises 100,000 supporters Posted: 21 May 2011 04:30 PM PDT PAS promises to bring 100,000 supporters for the rally, which is scheduled to be held on July 9. (Free Malaysia Today) - PAS has pledged its support and 100,000 supporters for the polls watchdog Bersih 2.0′s rally, dubbed the "Walk for Democracy." This was announced by PAS central committee member Mohamad Sabu and Kuala Krai MP Dr Hatta Ramli at a press conference here this afternoon. "We will mobilise 100,000 members and supporters from PAS alone," said Sabu who is eyeing the party's number two post. He revealed that the rally would be held on July 9 at 2 pm in Kuala Lumpur. Asked on the motive behind the rally, Hatta said the government had not agreed to the demands made in the first rally four years ago. "The Election Commission is trying to curb us. The government also doesn't know how to differentiate whether an action constitutes bribery," he added. In 2007, Bersih, which is made up of more than 60 NGOs, demanded for the use of indelible ink, registered voters roll clean-up, abolition of postal votes and access to the government-controlled print and broadcast media for opposition parties. This time around, the Bersih 2.0 rally would see an addition of two more demands. READ MORE HERE |
| Mahfuz pertahan naib presiden Posted: 21 May 2011 04:28 PM PDT "Saya tidak mahu menggunakan perkataan pertahaan kerana seolah jawatan milik peribadi saya. (Free Malaysia Today) - Datuk Mahfuz Omar mengumumkan bertanding mempertahankan jawatan naib presiden PAS dalam muktamar 3 Jun depan. Beliau telah memenangi jawatan tersebut dalam muktamar lepas yang di adakan di Shah Alam pada 2009. "Saya mengucapkan terima kasih kepada kawasan-kawasan yang telah mencalonkan saya untuk jawatan naib presiden dan AJK. "Atas dasar itu saya menerima pencalonan untuk jawatan naib presiden. "Saya tidak mahu menggunakan perkataan pertahaan kerana seolah jawatan milik peribadi saya. "Jawatan ini milik parti dan semua orang boleh bertanding," katanya dalam sidang media di pejabat agung PAS di sini. Bagaimanapun, ahli parlimen Pokok Sena tidak mahu jumlah sebenar pencalonan yang diperolehinya. Tetapi menurutnya lebih banyak dari 20 pencalonan yang diperolehi pada 2009. READ MORE HERE |
| Something fishy in Bank Islam-Muamalat merger? Posted: 21 May 2011 12:46 PM PDT (Harakah Daily) - KUALA LUMPUR, May 20: Another bailout? This is the question summing up concerns by PAS vice president Salahuddin Ayub over the merger proposal between Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad and Bank Muamalat, involving tax payers' money.
"I am afraid this is another bailout that has been the unhealthy culture in our country and which continues to burden the people," he told the media yesterday.
Salahuddin (pic) argued that the merger idea might be mooted to rescue Bank Muamalat, which was rumoured to be in trouble, at the expense of Bank Islam, adding that his suspicioun was fuelled by absence of any official statements from Bank Muamalat over its woes.
Salahuddin said the merger would not benefit Bank Islam as it was part of BIMB Holding Bhd with Tabung Haji as its biggest share holder at 51 percent.
"What is the point of merging with Bank Muamalat? What are the benefits? Bank Islam already has 115 branches nationwide. What will it get by merging with Bank Muamalat?
"If it has only few branches, one can say it is reasonable, but Bank Islam's network spreads nationwide. Ditto Tabung Haji," stressed Salahuddin, who is also the Kubang Kerian member of parliament.
Salahuddin reiterated that PAS was not 'comfortable' with the proposed merger because it smacked of a bail-out using public funds.
'Don't burden Bank Islam'
Last week, DRB-HICOM, the biggest shareholder in Bank Muamalat, expressed its interest to Bank Islam on the prospect of merger with the Islamic bank, but stopped short of saying whether it would give up controlling stake of 70 percent in Bank Muamalat. The other 30 percent stake is held by Khazanah Nasional Berhad. |
| The day Big Dog demanded RM400 million from Ku Li (UPDATED with Chinese Translation) Posted: 11 May 2011 04:02 PM PDT In that sense Ku Li maintained his principles although after the meeting Big Dog grumbled that Ku Li is so rich but so kedekut (stingy). He could afford RM400 million easily, lamented Big Dog. If he hopes to win the Umno Presidency without paying any money then good luck to him, said Big Dog.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin Pro-Umno blogger Zakhir Mohamad a.k.a. 'Big Dog' a.k.a. 'Christian PM basher' is actually quite a delightful character. Many a time have we met for dinner and drinks together with Sallahuddin Hashim a.k.a. 'A Voice' a.k.a. 'Another Brick in the Wall'. Wow, everyone is using a.k.a.s nowadays. (For the less English proficient readers of Malaysia Today, a.k.a. means 'also known as').
Big Dog is not only a delightful character but highly intelligent as well. And I have this penchant for intelligent people. Whether they are from the opposition or Umno/Barisan Nasional, I enjoy meeting up with them to eat, drink and shoot the breeze. And Big Dog is one such 'enemy' I used to love to meet and spend hours with to stuff our faces and talk about politics and other issues.
Anyway, there was this one fasting month (Ramadhan) when John Pang (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's strategist) phoned me and asked me to arrange a meeting (followed by a buka puasa) with Umno and opposition bloggers and political activists. The number of 30 was agreed on -- the number of people who should be invited.
I then sat down and worked on the invitation list to make up that figure of 30 and passed it to Tengku Razalaigh Hamzah's (a.k.a Ku Li) office for them to invite these people.
Almost everyone we invited came. And it was great to see bloggers and political activists from both sides of the political divide sitting in the same room to discuss how to make Ku Li the next Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Nik Azmi Nik Daud a.k.a. Bulat a.k.a. Bul gave his opinion -- which was actually quite a stupid idea and I could see Ku Li cringe with a 'can you sit down and shut up' look on his face.
I thought Bul's idea was most stupid and it sounded as if he had just learned politics yesterday. No wonder Ku Li has never done well in politics. With Bul as one of his strategists I doubt Ku Li could even win the post of Chief Dog Catcher.
Big Dog then asked Ku Li whether he was prepared to spend RM400 million to win the premiership. That, according to Big Dog, was what it was going to cost Ku Li.
Earlier Big Dog had told me that it is going to cost at least RM400 million to 'buy' 40 Umno divisions if Ku Li wants to become Prime Minister. I said that that was quite a lot of money and Big Dog replied that Ku Li could afford it. He is worth much more than that, said Big Dog.
Ku Li looked hard at Big Dog -- as if he could not believe his ears -- and said that he is not prepared to 'buy' the premiership. If he spends RM10 million to buy each of the 40 Umno Divisions (total RM400 million) just to get 40 nominations so that he can contest the Umno Presidency, then what difference would he be to the other Umno leaders who play 'money politics'?
He wants to become the Umno President and Prime Minister so that he can clean up the party and the government. If he gets in by using bribery, then how can he later clean up the party and the government when he himself is dirty?
So Ku Li rejected Big Dog's proposal, not because he could not afford RM400 million, but because it would not have been ethical to buy the party elections on a platform of trying to get in to rid the party of corruption. You can't get in using corruption and then scream that you are against corruption.
Some of you may remember that I wrote about this some years back. I said then that the task ahead of Ku Li is to get his 40 nominations. If he can get 40 nominations, winning the Presidency is easier. It is getting the 40 nominations which is difficult.
In that sense Ku Li maintained his principles although after the meeting Big Dog grumbled that Ku Li is so rich but so kedekut (stingy). He could afford RM400 million easily, lamented Big Dog. If he hopes to win the Umno Presidency without paying any money then good luck to him, said Big Dog.
Big Dog and I met Ku Li a couple more times, once around midnight in his private residence. But try as we may, we could not get Ku Li to agree to all the different ideas that were bandied about on how he could get his 40 nominations and go on to contest and win the Umno Presidency, which would be the route to becoming the new Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Some ideas were actually quite seditious and treasonous and Ku Li once chided one of the chaps who proposed it and told him that what he was proposing could end up with all of us being charged for treason with a death sentence thrown in. (Yes, some of the ideas were actually quite dangerous and could have ended with us sitting in death row if someone had talked).
Anyway, in the end nothing happened and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi a.k.a. Pak Lah resigned and Najib Tun Razak took over as Prime Minister and Ku Li continued sitting in his house waiting for the day when he would become Prime Minister.
Well, at least he is not RM400 million poorer, which would have happened had he listened to Big Dog.
I must admit that Umno politics is far more interesting compared to opposition politics and I must also admit that I enjoyed myself immensely running with that pack of wolves. Learned a lot as well, which of course we can now use against them. 
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/05/blog-post_14.html |
| Why Pakatan Rakyat is NOT going to form the next federal government (UPDATED with Chinese ... Posted: 10 May 2011 06:48 PM PDT This is not a new subject matter. I have written about this so many times in the past. Some of you may remember my article entitled "Votes do not translate into seats"? Well, today, I have no choice but to repeat what I have already told you before.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin My friend Nat Tan has hit the nail on the head in his article entitled 60pc of vote, 93pc of seats? published in The Malaysian Insider today (which you can read here: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/60pc-of-vote-93pc-of-seats/)
A similar article written by Nia Nymue in his Blog entitled PAP won 90% of seats but only 60% of votes can be read here: http://nianymue.wordpress.com/2011/05/11/pap-won-90-of-seats-but-only-60-of-votes/
They were of course talking about the recent Singapore elections. But they could easily have also been talking about the Malaysian elections. And this is what I want to talk about, again, today -- in spite of sounding like I am repeating myself too many times.
On 11th May 1969 (two days before 'May 13'), the ruling party (then the Alliance Party of Umno, MCA and MIC) won less than 50% of the votes. Yet it managed to form the federal government because it still won more the 50% of the seats in Parliament (66% of the seats to be exact).
In 1974, the newly formed ruling coalition called Barisan Nasional won less than two-thirds of the votes (60.7%) but it still won 88% of the seats in Parliament.
In 1978, the votes for the ruling coalition dropped to 57.2% but it sill won 84% of the seats in Parliament.
In 1982, the votes for the ruling coalition were still below two-thirds (60.5%) but it managed to win 86% of the seats in Parliament.
In 1986, the ruling coalition's votes dropped to 55.8% but it won 84% of the seats in Parliament.
In 1990, the ruling coalition's votes dropped even further to 53.4% but it still won more than two-thirds of the seats (71%).
In 1995, the ruling coalition 'recovered' by winning 65.2% of the votes which gave them 84% of the seats in Parliament.
1999 was a blow to the ruling coalition. That was the era of Reformasi and the Anwar Ibrahim 'Sodomy 1' crisis. In November of that year the ruling coalition won only 56.5% of the votes. Yet it won 77% of the seats in Parliament.
2004 was the best performance in history for the ruling coalition. It won more than 90% of the seats in Parliament. But it managed this on less than two-thirds of the votes (63.9%). So the best Barisan Nasional could do is less than two-thirds of the votes.
Then we come to the 'landmark' March 2008 general election. The ruling coalition did its worse since May 1969. It won only 52.2% of the votes (because of Sabah and Sarawak -- if not then less than 50% like in 1969). And for the first time since May 1969 it lost its two-thirds majority in Parliament when it won only 63% of the seats.
So, 2004 was the best since Merdeka for the ruling party. And 2008 was the worse in history. But can you see what the figures show? And that is Barisan Nasional loses votes but wins seats. And it is the seats that give it the federal government, not votes.
Note this also.
In the first election (Municipal elections) two years before Merdeka in 1955, Umno and its cronies swept the country in a landslide election victory (they lost only one seat to the opposition).
In the second election (the First Parliamentary election) two years after Merdeka in 1959, the ruling coalition went down.
In the third election in 1964 (the Second Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went up.
In the fourth election in 1969 (the Third Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the fifth election in 1974 (the Fourth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went up.
In the sixth election in 1978 (the Fifth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the seventh election in 1982 (the Sixth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went up.
In the eighth election in 1986 (the Seventh Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the ninth election in 1990 (the Eighth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the tenth election in 1995 (the Ninth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went up.
In the eleventh election in 1999 (the Tenth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the twelfth election in 2004 (the Eleventh Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went up.
In the thirteenth election in 2008 (the Twelfth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition went down.
In the fourteenth election, (2011, 2012, or 2013) whenever it may be, (the Thirteenth Parliamentary election), the ruling coalition will go up or down? If according to the 'trend' since 1955 then it must certainly be UP -- unless trends lie.
Now, the two points I want to make is this.
The ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional, can still form the federal government even with a minimum of votes. The question would be whether it is with a two-thirds majority or a simple majority. But it will still form the government nevertheless.
The second point is the ruling coalition yoyos from one election to another. It goes down one election and up the next. 2008 was the 'down' period. Will the next election be 'up' if this trend proves consistent?
Ponder on that. To kick out Barisan Nasional it requires a huge mother of all Earthquake-cum-Tsunami. A slight swing is not enough. Just an Earthquake or just a Tsunami will also not do. It must be a combination of an Earthquake and a Tsunami.
Malaysia Today's readers are experts when it comes to grumbling, bitching, complaining, lamenting, and blowing hot air. Expert cakap banyak. What are YOU going to do about this sorry scenario? Are you prepared to bite the bullet?
Never mind whether Raja Petra Kamarudin has done a U-turn. Never mind if Raja Petra Kamarudin has sold out or gone over to the other side. Forget about Raja Petra. Fuck Raja Petra. Raja Petra is just one man amongst 28 million Malaysians and he is no longer even living in Malaysia. What are YOU doing?
The billion ringgit question is what are YOU going to do about this predicament other than grumble, bitch, complain, lament, blow hot air, cakap banyak and use Raja Petra Kamarudin as a punching bag to vent your frustrations at not even having the balls to reveal your true identity in Malaysia Today?
Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2011/05/blog-post_5707.html |
| 8 fallacies of Malaysia Today’s readers Posted: 09 May 2011 04:53 PM PDT From time to time I need to remind our readers what Malaysia Today (MT) is all about, what was the reason we launched MT in August 2004, and what is our mission, vision and agenda. I have received a lot of comments from readers about what we should and should not be doing. Let me clear up some of these fallacies.
NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin 1. MT is not an online newspaperSome comment that we should be 'careful' about the news that we carry and that we should practice 'proper journalism'.
MT is not an online newspaper. We are a psy-war and black ops outfit. Our job is to counter the spins of the government-controlled mainstream electronic, print and online news agencies. Nevertheless, we do pick up 'third party' news and blog postings from others to publish in MT. We do not generate our own news.
So we are not bound by 'journalistic standards'.
2. MT is a guerrilla outfit
Our job is to 'attack the enemy from behind enemy lines'. And just like in any 'normal' guerrilla operation, we select targets to hit and focus on demolishing these targets. Our aim is to create maximum damage to these targets with a view to cripple the 'other side'.
3. MT accepts collateral damage
Sometimes, when we take out selected targets, some 'non-combatants' may suffer as well. This is the 'collateral damage' that we have to accept. In any guerrilla operation we can't always ensure that innocent bystanders may not invariably get hit as well.
War does not spare the innocent and the objective of the operation is to ensure successful demolition of the target whatever the consequences.
4. MT is not Wikileaks
There are some who say that MT should just publish the evidence/documents of government wrongdoings and allow the readers to form their own opinion like Wikileaks. They say MT should not make comments or write commentaries to influence the readers' opinions.
MT is not Wikileaks. We publish evidence and documents whenever we can get our hands on them but when we can't we shall publish what we are told by Deep Throats and inside sources.
Our key objective is to 'turn around' the readers to our way of thinking. So commentaries and our opinion of things are very crucial in being able to achieve this.
5. MT is not an opposition organ
There are some who feel that MT should focus on highlighting the transgressions, abuses, wrongdoings and violations of the government and not criticise the opposition, which would 'give ammunition' to the government to use against the opposition.
MT is not an opposition organ and we are not obliged to the opposition. Our job is to reveal the transgressions, abuses, wrongdoings and violations of the politicians and leaders and those who walk in the corridors of power at federal and state level.
6. MT is fighting for change
MT wants to see change. And change can be achieved in two ways. One way would be for the government to change (reform) and the other would be to change the government. Either way is fine as far as we are concerned.
Granted it may be almost impossible to expect the government to change after 54 years in power and 54 years of bad habits. So the only option open to us would be to change the government instead. But that is still one of the two options and we will leave both options open and go for the best option in achieving this change.
Currently, that best option appears to be to change the government rather than hope for the government to change.
7. Freedom of speech is not freedom to insult
There are some who feel that MT should not stifle freedom of speech and should not censor comments and postings in MT. MT is of the view that those who do not understand freedom of speech should not be allowed freedom of speech as this is like giving a flower to a monkey.
Even in the UK, which has a high tolerance for freedom of speech, they have zero tolerance for insults and racial slurs. You can get arrested and sent to jail for making racial slurs or for making any statement viewed as an insult to any race or religion.
8. MT is my home
While we invite comments and opinions, we also set the codes and norms for what you can and cannot do in MT. In any society, club, organisation, etc., there are codes and norms that you need to observe and if you violate these rules you would get evicted.
The final authority in deciding what is allowed and disallowed lies with us and we have the liberty to disallow what we would view as anti-social and uncivilised conduct or behaviour.
In your home you can do as you like. In our 'home' we decide what you can and cannot do. MT is not a democracy. There is no voting on how things are done. I own and run MT and my word is final. And if this does not suit you, you are free to take your business elsewhere.
|
| The religions of the book and politics Posted: 08 May 2011 04:31 PM PDT My contention is that, according to the way of Abraham and what the Quran teaches us, all the followers of the way of Abraham (followers of Moses, Jesus plus Muhammad) must get involved in politics to be true submitters. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin My good friend from Umno wrote his latest piece today called Where everybody miss the plot (you can go here to read it http://anotherbrickinwall.blogspot.com/2011/05/where-everybody-miss-plot.html). I really don't know whether today we should talk about politics or religion. Nevertheless, in Malaysia, both come in a package (spiced with race) -- so by talking about one you need to talk about the other. I sometimes joke (or blaspheme, depending on how you see it) that Christianity is Version 2 of Judaism while Islam is Version 3. The 'operating system' of all three remains the same. It is only that some new 'features' are added, or deleted, as the case may be. And these 'features' would be the rituals. The fundamentals do not differ. My Umno friend's contention in his article above is that the Christians are 'playing politics'. Now, before we confirm or deny this, let us rewind a bit. The Quran states that all those followers of Moses (Musa) and followers of Jesus (Isa) who follow the way (Deen) of Abraham (Ibrahim) are the true submitters (Muslims). Note, in that particular verse, the Quran talks about Abraham, Moses and Jesus. There is no mention of Muhammad in that verse. Now, have you noticed that Muslims always argue that Abraham, Moses and Jesus were Muslims? In a way they are not wrong. Muslim merely means submitter -- submit to God. This does not mean they were Muslims according to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia's interpretation of Muslim. But they are submitters nevertheless, as far as the Quran is concerned (as long as they follow the way or deen of Abraham). Now, Islam is not only a religion. It is a way of life or adeen. Every Muslim would tell you this. Islam is not just about rituals. It is also about economics, governing, the legal system, politics, war, foreign affairs, internal security, public order and safety, the welfare system, and much more. In short, Islam is an entire and complete governing system for society. Therefore, for the followers of Moses and the followers of Jesus to be true followers of the way of Abraham, they must not only focus on rituals. Politics is also part of the way or deen of Abraham. This means if the followers of Moses and Jesus steer clear of or refuse to get involved in politics, then they are NOT the true followers of the way of Abraham, as far as the Quran is concerned. Any Jew or Christian who is NOT political is a deviant Jew or Christian. Islam would declare you a murtad or apostate for defying God. Okay, now back to the issue of whether the Christians in Malaysia are or are not getting involved in politics; that is for you to decide. My contention is that, according to the way of Abraham and what the Quran teaches us, all the followers of the way of Abraham (followers of Moses, Jesus plus Muhammad) must get involved in politics to be true submitters. The 'separation of church and state' does not exist in Islam. That is why PAS is not wrong in trying to seek political power. If it is okay for the followers of Muhammad to seek political power based on a religious platform, why is it wrong for the other submitters and followers of the way of Abraham to also seek political power on a religious platform? If only the followers of Muhammad can seek political power on a religious platform, while those followers of Moses and Jesus cannot, then why would the Quran say that the followers of Moses and Jesus who follow the way of Abraham are the true submitters? Note that the followers of Muhammad are allowed to marry women from the followers of Moses and Jesus (Muhammad married a Jewish woman) plus they can eat meat from animals slaughtered by them. So Islam recognises Judaism and Christianity as 'brother-religions'. Therefore, what is allowed for Islam is also allowed for the Jews and Christians. And politics is one such thing that is not only allowed but a must. Okay, let me demonstrate this 'political Islam' in another way by quoting Imam Ghazali. Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, more fondly known as Imam Ghazali, was one of the renowned imams from 11th century Persia. And you can read below what Imam Ghazli said. Would you say that Imam Ghazali was 'playing politics'? Ponder on this before we whack the Christians and deny them their right of 'political Christianity'. Would we tolerate a Christian or Jew telling us that Islam must be separated from politics? We will riot and lynch any Christian or Jew who tries to deny us our 'political Islam'. 
|
| Out of the box Posted: 07 May 2011 05:35 PM PDT Can you see that these people are ready to abandon Umno and BN but they are looking at Anwar as the alternative to Umno and BN. Why can't they see beyond Anwar? Why can't they see that the alternative to Umno and BN is Pakatan Rakyat and not Anwar? NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin My 'habit' when writing my articles is to puff on my cigar while listening to my favourite music channel, http://player.magic.co.uk/. Unfortunately, in some parts of the world, you may not be able to tune in to this channel (as it is blocked) but for those who can please switch on your speakers and listen to the greatest of the great music, my kind of music, while you read this article. And for those who can't tune in to this channel, migrate to England where you can. There are some who still do not get what I was trying to say in yesterday's article: Bridge over troubled water. I suppose this is what we would call 'mental block', a syndrome of our brain being programmed to think only one way and where we are not capable of thinking any other way. Malays call this 'katak bawah tempurung' -- translated as 'frog under a coconut shell'. The English would say 'boiling a frog slowly'. Today, I am going to talk about thinking and doing things 'out of the box'. You could also say this is like getting the frog to break out from the confines of the coconut shell -- or getting the frog to jump out of the water before it reaches boiling point. Basically, what this means is we need to break out of the mould and not allow ourselves to think and do things the way the government or Barisan Nasional wants us to think and do things. We need, as what Freddy Mercury said, to break free. Let me give you an example of one issue, the issue of the church thing in Penang. DAP has been accused of hosting a gathering of Christians where they allegedly swore an oath to make Christianity the official religion of Malaysia so that a non-Muslim can become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Now, have you noticed how deafening the silence was? PKR and PAS maintained an eerie silence other than accuse Utusan Malaysia of propagating Umno's agenda and asking the government to take action against this Umno controlled newspaper. Is that the best PAS and PKR can do in coming to DAP's defence? It is almost like they are washing their hands of the matter and are leaving DAP to handle this matter all by itself. Why did Pakatan Rakyat not remind the rakyat that Malaysia is a secular state and that Islam is only the official religion of Malaysia and that Malaysia is not an Islamic State? No one, not even if they control more than two-thirds majority in Parliament, can remove Islam as the official religion. Only the Rulers can do this and we have ten Rulers (one Agong, one Yam Tuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan, one Raja of Perlis and seven Sultans). So, even if DAP controls more than 148 out of 222 seats in Parliament, they can't remove Islam as the official religion of Malaysia and install Christianity as the new official religion. Anyway, how can DAP control more than 148 seats in Parliament when it contests less than 80 seats? Even if DAP contests 100 seats and wins all the 100 it contests (which is not possible plus PKR will not allow it to contest more than one-third the seats) it is still short of 148 seats. Why did Pakatan Rakyat not argue this and use this argument to defend DAP? So there you have it. There is no way DAP can make a deal with the church to remove Islam as the official religion and make Christianity the new official religion of Malaysia. Even if PAS and PKR agree to this (which they will not) it still can't be done because the power lies with the ten Rulers with whom Islam comes under. And you can't amend the Constitution to change this. This is the absolute power (kuasa mutlak) of the Rulers. And if you try to illegally amend the Constitution to remove the powers of the Rulers as far as Islam is concerned, then the Agong, who is Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, can declare an emergency, suspend Parliament, and get the army to 'restore order'. Why did Pakatan Rakyat not argue this and use this argument to defend DAP? Secondly, why would DAP need to remove Islam as the official religion and make Christianity the new official religion to be able to install a non-Muslim prime minister? Don't you remember what Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said? He said that there is nothing in the Federal Constitution that says the prime minister must be a Malay-Muslim. In short, there is nothing illegal if a non-Malay-non-Muslim becomes prime minister of Malaysia. The Constitution only says that the Agong shall appoint a prime minister who has the majority confidence of the house, that's all. So why the need to remove Islam as the official religion? We can have a non-Malay-non-Muslim prime minister even if Islam is the official religion of Malaysia. Why did Pakatan Rakyat not argue this and use this argument to defend DAP? Okay, next example, the issue of Anwar Ibrahim's porn video. PAS is being very careful about taking a stand on this matter and they are leaving it to the court to decide. Why must the court decide this? PAS must state its stand, period. Pakatan Rakyat is playing right into Umno's hands. They are being very cleverly divided on this issue. They are worried that if they express support for Anwar and it turns out that it is really Anwar in that video then they are all going to end up with egg on their face. Why do we need the court to decide this matter? Is sex with another woman who is not your wife a crime? If it is then Chua Soi Lek should be in jail instead of being made the President of MCA. And Chua Soi Lek admitted that it is he in that video, mind you. You might say it is a crime as far as Islam is concerned. Okay, then take this issue to the Shariah court. Can the Shariah court take action against Anwar? The answer is of course 'no', not unless Anwar admits to the 'crime' or there are four witnesses to the crime. The bottom line is the Shariah court can't do a damn thing, and neither can the common law court. So what is the issue here? If based just on allegations then many more people, especially those in Umno, would be behind bars. The issue is not whether it is or is not Anwar in that video but whether Anwar is able to run this country and do a better job than the government we currently have. Anwar's sex life is not going to determine the future of Malaysia and the future of our children and grandchildren. That is what we should focus on. Let me go to a third example. Many people say that 'if not Anwar then who?' In other words, they see only Anwar as the suitable candidate to lead the opposition. I normally oppose this statement and of course they view this as my 'anti-Anwar' stance. Actually, this has nothing to do with my anti-Anwar stance as much as my 'anti-not out of the box' stance. We need to think out of the box. We need to break free. If we close our minds and think that only Anwar and no one else can lead the opposition, what would we do if something happens to Anwar? We would panic. The opposition would disintegrate. Everything that we worked for would come to an end. So we need to psyche ourselves in that there IS life after Anwar. If something happens to Anwar life would go on. The opposition would not collapse. The cause can go on with or without Anwar. In the old days, wars centred on the leaders. So when you take out the leaders all resistance would end. If the leaders were killed the army would surrender. No one had the spirit to fight on. Why do you think Umno is so bent on destroying Anwar? They know that many in the opposition look to Anwar and only Anwar as the opposition leader. So if Umno can destroy Anwar then the opposition can be destroyed. That is why I am opposed to this 'if not Anwar then who' doctrine. We need to show Umno that there are many Anwar Ibrahims in the opposition. They can destroy Anwar and ten Anwars will emerge in his place. Destroy these ten Anwars as well and another 100 Anwar's will rise up. Those who scream 'if not Anwar then who?' are actually signing Anwar's death warrant. You are the reason why Umno wants to destroy Anwar. Remove Anwar as the crucial factor and Umno will find there is no longer any value in destroying Anwar. We used to say 'if not Ustaz Fadzil Noor then who?' Then Ustaz Fadzil died and we panicked. But then we found that there is life for PAS after all even with the death of Fadzil Noor. And today we say even if Ustaz Hadi Awang goes PAS will not die. There are many more in PAS who can replace Hadi and maybe even do a better job. The same goes for DAP. You mean without Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh DAP is dead? There are many in DAP who are ready to take over and may even bring DAP to new heights. Lim Guan Eng is one name that comes to mind. That is what I call thinking out of the box, breaking free, looking at things from a different perspective. You might think you are doing Anwar a favour by making him indispensible. Actually you are giving him a death sentence. Anwar becomes more valuable dead than alive. It's as simple as that. Another reason I oppose this 'if not Anwar then who?' doctrine is because this same doctrine is used in the 'if not BN then who?' argument. Many people feel that only BN can run Malaysia. They feel that without BN the country would be in trouble. And I find that the people who argue 'if not Anwar then who?' are the same people who would say 'if not BN then who?' So it is all about Anwar versus BN. It is either Anwar or BN. And that is dangerous because if something were to happen to Anwar, or these people lose confidence in Anwar, then they would all go back to BN. I have many friends who say that they are fed up with Umno and BN but they have no confidence that Anwar can do better. Why compare BN to Anwar? Why not compare BN to PR? Can you see that these people are ready to abandon Umno and BN but they are looking at Anwar as the alternative to Umno and BN. Why can't they see beyond Anwar? Why can't they see that the alternative to Umno and BN is Pakatan Rakyat and not Anwar? This is going to be the problem the opposition is going to face come next election. The voters are going to evaluate Anwar and will overlook what good Pakatan Rakyat can bring to Malaysia. It is okay if they see the good in Anwar. But if they don't like what they see in Anwar then Pakatan Rakyat is in deep shit. When friends ask me 'if not Anwar then who?', I reply Nurul Izzah. There is a moment of stunned silence before they reply: Nurul is too young, Nurul is not ready yet, Nurul needs more time, and so on. "Okay, so who then?" I ask them. They reply that they do not see anyone other than Anwar. "Okay, what happens if they put a bullet in Anwar's head?" I ask them. They have no reply. What is this? Are we all a group of young chicks who will die if the mother hen dies? Come on! There are 28 million Malaysians out there and four million are in the opposition. You mean there is no one who can lead the opposition if they assassinate Anwar? You mean we close down Pakatan Rakyat the day they place Anwar in his coffin and put him in the ground? The more you say 'if not Anwar then who?' the more determined they will be in destroying Anwar. But if we say to hell with Anwar because there are 100 other Anwar's who can take over then Umno will be at a loss. They can kill one Anwar but they can't kill 100 Anwars. Get it? Think out of the box for a change. Break free. Try to start looking at things from another perspective. eM8Ss28zjcE SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM8Ss28zjcE |
| Bridge over troubled water Posted: 06 May 2011 05:47 PM PDT So you see, while the opposition and alternative media train their guns on MCLM, Malaysia Today and RPK, the mainstream media attacks from the rear and play up the Ketuanan Christianity, Islam under siege, and the Malay rights and privileges issues. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Divide and rule By Elijah M, Lim Kit Siang's Blog This is Umno's strategy to remain in power in Malaysia: make the Malays feel like the Chinese and Christian communities are threatening their hold on power and position of Islam. They need the Malays to come out in force at the coming elections and vote for Umno candidates in a big way. But in their calculation for that to happen, they must have an imaginary enemy for the Malays/Muslims. Given than the Chinese have generally deserted the corrupt and self-serving MCA and Gerakan and by extension, BN, they qualify as a prime bogeyman. They are portrayed as slavish supporters of Chinese-based DAP and harbour ambitions of taking over political power from the Malays. Now the Christians following their support for Pakatan Rakyat in the Sarawak and their refusal to be submissive to a government, which has molested their religious rights, are also being lumped by Utusan Malaysia and pro-Umno bloggers as enemies of Islam in Malaysia. Such is the stupidity of these guys that they portray a prayer session in Penang with a few DAP politicians as oath-taking. Just a pointer: the only oath that Christians take is to our Lord and Saviour. Therefore, we obey God and not men. The bloggers hope to persuade Malay/Muslims that Christians are working with DAP to push for a Christian prime minister. I suppose these blinkered souls forgot about the Federal Constitution. They also forgot to tell their readers that Chinese or Christians (who by the way are mostly non-Malay bumiputeras) are not interested in political power but are interested in good governance, fairness, integrity, rule of law and equal opportunities. And before we believe that this strategy of divide and rule has not got the blessings of the top Umno leadership, we should think again. The policy of hammering Chinese/Christians and demonising DAP is state-sponsored. Just listen to Muhyiddin Yassin and other Umno leaders. Of course, Najib Razak plays the good cop but he has stayed silent as Utusan Malaysia slams Chinese. Instead of worrying what kind of a country he will lead, he has chosen to look the other way as Chinese and Christians are painted as usurpers of power. One lesson I suppose we can take from this is that Umno does not want or need the support of Chinese or Christians. So much for the Rukun Negara or 1 Malaysia. ************************************* This is the hard truth. Pakatan Rakyat is in trouble, serious trouble. Barisan Nasional is winning the perception war. And everything that Pakatan Rakyat does just makes it worse. The more they dig in and hold their ground, the deeper they get bogged down into the rut. And this is because Pakatan Rakyat has amateur numbskulls in charge of its perception war. Politics is not about the truth. It is about perception. Never mind what is true and what is false. It is what people perceive that counts. And currently what they perceive, whether it is true or not, does not favour Pakatan Rakyat. Lib Dem learned this the hard way two days ago on Thursday. This is what Nick Clegg said today in his letter to the party members: I think it is clear that we need to do more to show people in the party and beyond what we are doing in Government and, perhaps more importantly, why. Because we are achieving a great deal. The BBC estimates that we are implementing 75% of the policies of in our manifesto, compared to just 60% of the Conservative manifesto. Of course, as Liberal Democrats, we are all bitterly disappointed that the referendum on the Alternative Vote has been lost. We will always remain passionate supporters of reform. But we must respect the will of the British people. This time, we were unable to convince them of the merits of this particular change. Lib Dem did not lose Thursday's elections because it had not performed. In fact, it had. But it failed to convince the voters as Nick Clegg said "of the merits of this particular change". Lib Dem depends on the younger voters. That was how it got in a year ago. But barely a year in office and the young turned on the party -- my daughter included who demonstrated in London against the government after voting Lib Dem in the recent general election. Just a few months after voting for the party, she turned and demonstrated against the party (even my wife and son voted against Lib Dem....sigh....). Barisan Nasional knows that it needs the Malay votes. It can afford to lose all the non-Malay votes but as long as it retains the Malay votes it will always be in power. So it needs to turn the Malays against the opposition. And this is the game plan. Now, I say Barisan Nasional, not Umno. Of course, Umno is the mastermind. But Umno can't do it alone. MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PPP and the many Sabah and Sarawak parties also need to play the game. And they do. First, the Chinese members of Barisan Nasional frighten the Chinese Diaspora by telling them that if the opposition comes to power then PAS would be in charge and Islam would be imposed on all Malaysians, Islamic laws included. Then the Malay members of Barisan Nasional frighten the Malay Diaspora by telling them that if the opposition comes to power then DAP would be in charge and Christianity would be imposed on all Malaysians and Christianity would become the official religion of Malaysia. That is the issue of religion. Further to that the Malays are told that if the opposition come to power then the special rights and privileges of the Malays would erode and the Malays would be reduced to second-class citizens in their own country. Then we have the sodomy allegation and the sex videotapes of Anwar Ibrahim issue. This is supposed to paint a scenario that Anwar is not as Islamic as he pretends to be but is actually quite an immoral person, meaning he is a munafiq or hypocrite. The Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) and Malaysia Today are not spared either. MCLM is being touted as a spoiler who is splitting the opposition votes by triggering three-corner fights. So now MCLM and Pakatan Rakyat are working parallel to each other but not in concert. The way things are going MCLM and Pakatan Rakyat may never be able to work together to face the next general election. There is of course one solution to this. MCLM can close down and not bother to contribute to the next election. That would solve the problem of the perception that MCLM is a liability to the opposition. And that is what many would like to see happen, even those from Pakatan Rakyat. But will this help the opposition cause? MCLM stayed out of the recent Sarawak state election. Did this help the opposition? Did they do well? Were three-corner fights avoided? That did not solve the problem did it? Now Malaysia Today, and I personally, are under attack from friends and foes alike. Here again the theory of 'never mind what is true but what is being perceived is what matters' rings true. Both the mainstream media as well as the alternative media have succeeded in propagating the 'Raja Petra has made a U-turn' story. I can understand the government-controlled mainstream media doing this. That is their job. What I can't understand is why is the opposition-aligned alternative media also propagating the lies of the mainstream media? The alternative media appears to have become an extension of the mainstream media. So you see, while the opposition and alternative media train their guns on MCLM, Malaysia Today and RPK, the mainstream media attacks from the rear and play up the Ketuanan Christianity, Islam under siege, and the Malay rights and privileges issues. In short, MCLM, Malaysia Today and RPK, are bogged down in trying to fight off 'friendly fire' while the opposition gets machine-gunned good and proper. Did none of these idiots from Pakatan Rakyat read Sun Tsu or what? Losers! Now we are fighting three fronts -- the enemy plus each other. This is like trying to build a bridge over troubled waters. UVDg8fVC4EQ SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVDg8fVC4EQ |
| The honeymoon is over Posted: 05 May 2011 04:32 PM PDT
Never underestimate the people. You make false promises to the voters and they will punish you the next time around. And, today, we are seeing this happen in the UK. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin Just a year in office and the honeymoon is over. Even my wife and son voted against my party, LibDem. While I voted LibDem, my wife voted Conservative and my son voted Labour. And no, I did not divorce my wife or disown my son like what would happen in many parts of Malaysia (I have seen this with my own eyes happen in Terengganu). So there you have it. People's Power! It shows what your vote can do. It also shows that the darling of the voters barely a year ago can be the pariah today. So where does that place Pakatan Rakyat? Pakatan Rakyat was the darling of the voters three years ago. Is it a pariah today? If the 13th General Election were to be called later this year can it retain its 80 plus seats in Parliament, retain the four states it presently commands, and win back Perak, or will it drop to 50 Parliament seats and two states (Penang and Kelantan)? Never underestimate the people. You make false promises to the voters and they will punish you the next time around. And, today, we are seeing this happen in the UK. That's why I just love the UK. In the UK the government works for us. The politicians are our servants. And if they screw up we can screw them back good and proper. Okaylah, I know. I have heard all your arguments before. Malaysia different, Britain different. In the UK the people are civilised, matured and educated. In Malaysia we are mostly barbarians. In England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland you use your brains. In Malaysia we use our emotions and racial and religious sentiments. The British can't be bribed, they have principles. Malaysians can be bought with just RM100 and they will let you screw their daughter or wife for a mere few thousand. As I said, I have heard all these arguments before so no need to post them again in the comments section below. And I accept without dispute your argument that most Malaysians are prostitutes and will prostitute themselves to Barisan Nasional for any small amount of money. I am convinced so no need to convince me any further. Hey, the fact that the PKR leaders are telling everyone that I have been bought just proves what is always in the minds of Malaysians. It is always about being bought. Nothing but about being bought. That is the only thing in their minds. Well, let me show you how WE British do things. Read the news reports below. ****************************************** Vote 2011 Live: Lib Dems routed at polls in Greater Manchester council elections Furious Liberal Democrats rounded on Nick Clegg as the party suffered a hammering in Greater Manchester. A string of shock results saw the Lib Dems lose control of their long-term stronghold of Stockport. They also suffered a complete wipeout in Manchester – failing to win a single seat and losing their group leader Simon Ashley. Voters across the region appeared to be expressing anger at swingeing government cuts to town hall budgets that have seen the urban north hit harder than the rural south. Read more here: http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/politics/s/1419977_vote-2011-live-lib-dems-routed-at-polls-in-greater-manchester-council-elections Vote 2011: Labour wins all 33 seats in Manchester as Lib Dems are wiped out Manchester's Liberal Democrats suffered a wipeout in a sensational night for the city's ruling Labour group. The Lib Dems lost all the seats they were defending on a shocking night for the party at Manchester Central. It proved a momentous count for Labour – which won all 33 seats up for grabs, boosting its majority to the highest level in more than a quarter of a century. Read more here: http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/politics/s/1419998_vote-2011-labour-wins-all-33-seats-in-manchester-as-lib-dems-are-wiped-out Election results show collapse in support for Lib Dems Nick Clegg suffered a humiliating reverse in his Sheffield backyard when the Liberal Democrats were ejected from power in the city, amid heavy losses for the party across northern England. As voters punished the Lib Dems for their performance after a year in government, the party blamed a "decapitation strategy" by Labour and the unions which saw it lose power in Hull and suffer big losses in Manchester and Liverpool. Read more here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/06/election-results-collapse-lib-dems Poll bloodbath for Lib Dems Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg suffered a massive blow to his authority today as his Liberal Democrat party fell victim to a bloodbath in elections in England, Scotland and Wales - and probable defeat on the totemic issue of electoral reform. The Lib Dems lost swathes of seats in former council strongholds in the north of England to Labour, while haemorrhaging support to the Scottish National Party north of the border. Read more here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/av/poll-bloodbath-for-lib-dems-2279970.html Clegg suffers double blow and faces party backlash Nick Clegg was heading for a humiliating double defeat early today in the English council elections and the referendum on the voting system. There were signs of a backlash against Mr Clegg from some of his MPs and councillors as the first local authority results emerged in the early hours of this morning. Lib Dem officials conceded they would suffer a bloody nose in the North of England, where Labour mounted a fightback in its traditional strongholds. Read more here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/av/clegg-suffers-double-blow-and-faces-party-backlash-2279854.html |
| What does this all mean? Posted: 04 May 2011 05:45 PM PDT What is the difference between the government and the opposition then? Only one difference! The government has laws to use to impose its will while the opposition does not yet have laws to use to impose its will. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Freedom of the press By LIM SUE GOAN Translated by Soong Phui Jee, Sin Chew Daily Malaysia has dropped from 141 to 143 out of 196 countries surveyed worldwide in the Freedom of the Press Index released by US-based Freedom House. It is categorised as "not free". It shows that despite the efforts of several decades, Malaysia has not much improved in terms of press freedom. After the national independence, freedom of the press has never been included in the government's plan of improvement due to political, racial and religious sensitivities. If there is a ranking for different fields, politics would top the list, followed by economy while freedom of the press would be ranked the bottom. During the administration of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the press lacked freedom and not much improvement had been made in Tun Abdullah Badawi's era. We thought that policies would be relaxed after the 2008 general election but freedom of the press has not been included in the Key Performance Index (KPI), National Key Results Areas (NKRA), Government Transformation Plan (GTP) and Economic Transformation Programme (ETP). Our ranking is inconsistent with the status of a middle-income country. It is indeed shameful that Malaysia has been ranked below East Timor (77), the Philippines (93), Indonesia (108) and Cambodia (141) with relatively weaker economies. There are three criteria to assess a country's freedom of the press: 1. Law and control: if there are many laws to control and restrain the media, the space of coverage will shrink. Media practitioners will naturally self-filter as they are fear of breaking the laws. The government plans to amend the Printing Press and Publication Act but no action has yet been taken. However, the revised publications guidelines might control various information circulating on the Internet. If the law is tightened instead of relaxed, our ranking is likely to drop further next year. If the Home and Information Communication and Culture Ministries plan to establish a national media advisory council so that the government is empowered to lead and restrain the media, the outlook for press freedom will be more gloomy. 2. The status of the media: in a country with a high degree of press freedom, the constitution, courts and government will protect the media and therefore, the media enjoy a high status. For example, President Richard Nixon was prompted to resign during the 1972 Watergate scandal. In Malaysia, the mainstream media are controversial. They might be accused of being intervened by politics or becoming a racial camp, and lose their credibility and status. It is a tragedy on the Press Freedom Day when National Union of Journalists (NUJ) President Hata Wahari was dismissed by the Utusan Melayu. 3. The quality of news: if the media become a day-book reporting only what people have said, it will be empty in terms of value. The Los Angeles Times won the Pulitzer Prize gold medal for public service this year for revealing official corruption in Bell. In Malaysia, instead of corruption revealing reports, award winning reports are general news. Who is responsible for such a situation? If Malaysia wishes to become an advanced high-income country in 2020, freedom of the press is absolutely essential. Without freedom of the press, we will never be categorised as a developed country and social justice will drift further and further away. ****************************************** That was what MySinchew wrote today. While I agree with what they said, I feel this matter needs to be looked at on a broader perspective. For example, in the UK, we are not just talking about electoral reforms (by the way, later today I am going out to vote on a referendum to change the voting system), we are talking about political reforms. It is not enough to reform just the electoral system. The entire British political system needs reforming. And this was why I joined the LibDem, to fight for political reforms (which means I am no longer eligible to join any Malaysian political party since they do not allow dual-party membership). The same goes for 'freedom of the press'. Our fight should not be just about freedom of the press but freedom of expression/speech, association, assembly and so on. Within this comes, of course, freedom of the press, one aspect of freedom of expression/speech, association, assembly and so on. In short, freedom of the press is the result of freedom of expression/speech, association, assembly and so on. And that is what we do not have in Malaysia. Neither the government nor the opposition allows and respects freedom of expression/speech, association, assembly and so on. We have so many laws that stifle all these freedoms. And the government enforces these laws with zeal. Of course, dissidents and those opposed to the government are on the receiving end of these laws. But this does not mean that those in the opposition are innocent victims of this repression and persecution. The opposition too does not tolerate what the government does not tolerate. And this is where we see the hypocrisy of the whole thing. While we know that the government is bad and it does not pretend to be good (the excuse they give to stifle our freedoms is that Malaysians are not ready for absolute democracy and therefore must only be allowed 'guided' democracy to ensure we prevent further race riots), the opposition screams, rants and raves about not being allowed freedom of expression/speech, association, assembly and so on but will condemn those who do not agree with them. What is the difference between the government and the opposition then? Only one difference! The government has laws to use to impose its will while the opposition does not yet have laws to use to impose its will. I have given numerous interviews and talks over the last thirteen years since 1998. And I have given interviews and talks locally as well as overseas. I have spoken in universities, and to newspapers, radio stations and TV stations. And what I have said has been consistent to what I have written since the mid-1990s when Anwar Ibrahim was still in government and was the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister of Malaysia. When I say anything unfavourable to the government that is hailed as my right to criticise an unfair, unjust and corrupt government. But when I say anything unfavourable to the opposition, that is vilified as an act of a Trojan horse, of someone who has been bought off, or that I am doing this because I have been bribed to do so by the government. The bottom line is: say bad things about the government and you are an angel. Say bad things about the opposition and you are the devil. That is the opposition understanding of freedom of expression/speech. And because of my TV3 interview I have lost many friends. They have turned against me because of my 'crime' of talking to TV3, never mind what I said to TV3 was the same thing as what I have been saying for ten years or more. I suppose if these are my 'friends' then they were never real friends in the first place. They were 'fair weather' friends. So I doubt I have lost anything. Oh, by the way, did you see the football game at Old Trafford last night? My wife and I were jumping up and down, cheering Manchester United on. (Manchester United 4 Schalke 1). We will certainly be watching the finals at Wembley on 28th May. Actually, I was never interested in football when I used to live in Malaysia. Now that I live in Manchester I go to the Old Trafford to watch my team in action. Do you really think my TV3 interview was so that I can return to Malaysia? How stupid can you be! Hey, I may even give up my Malaysian citizenship just to prove I have no interest in returning to Malaysia, even if Pakatan Rakyat takes over the government. What do you have to say about that now? |
| Good versus bad Posted: 04 May 2011 03:03 PM PDT If you want to form the federal government there are five states you need to conquer – Selangor (22), Perak (24), Johor (26), Sabah (25) and Sarawak (31). These five states control 128 seats in Parliament while the balance eight states control less than 100 seats (94 to be exact). NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin Chua Soi Lek is a bad Chinese. That is not because he was caught on video having sex with a woman who is not his wife. It is because he is a leader of the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional. And anyone from Barisan Nasional is automatically bad. If they were good they would never be in Barisan Nasional. Chua Jui Meng is a good Chinese. Although he was once a very corrupt health minister in the Barisan Nasional government, he has since left the ruling coalition and is now with the opposition PKR. Anyone from Barisan Nasional who leaves the ruling coalition to join the opposition is a good person even if he or she happens to be a corrupt Chinese. Chua Jui Meng is said to be a Born Again Christian. This means he 'died' and got reborn. Muslims become 'Born Again Muslims' by going to Mekah to perform the Haj. When a Muslim completes the Haj it is as if he or she died and was reborn. Chua Jui Meng may have become a Born Again Christian. But he is not returning the 'under-the table' money he took while he was yet to be 'Born Again' and was still with Barisan Nasiional. That means, only from now on he will be good. The bad he did before he became 'Born Again' and all the illegal money he took before that is not part of the arrangement. The money stays with him. He does not have to make up for that sin by returning the money. No wonder many MCA Chinese I know (including certain people in The Star) become Born Again Christians. It is a form of money laundering. All their old sins are erased and at the same time all the corrupted money they make is theirs to keep. Funny people these Born Again Christians. They are almost like carbon copies of the 'Born Again' Muslims. Anyway, that is not my main concern. What is my concern is the fact that Chua Jui Meng may not really be as 'Born Again' as he pretends to be. Did he really see the light? Did he really reform? Did he join the opposition because he has now seen the truth? Or is there more to this whole thing? When he first joined PKR there were parties and celebrations all over. A big fish from MCA has finally come to his realisation. Chua Jui Meng will be pitted against Chua Soi Lek in Johor. Now, take note, if you want to form the federal government there are five states you need to conquer – Selangor (22), Perak (24), Johor (26), Sabah (25) and Sarawak (31). These five states control 128 seats in Parliament while the balance eight states control less than 100 seats (94 to be exact). This is the same with the Umno elections. You need to conquer the 'big' states to win the Umno party elections. So, Perak, Selangor and Johor are crucial, as is Sabah (there is no Umno in Sarawak yet but should be very soon). Chua Jui Meng will therefore have to make sure he defeats Chua Soi Lek in Johore. But the problem is: Chua Soi Lek is more popular than Chua Jui Meng. Even the people in the ministry of health and the doctors/nurses in the government hospitals condemn Chua Jui Meng and sing Chua Soi Lek's praises. So how is Chua Jui Meng going to deliver Johor? That is one problem. The other more pressing problem is: is Chua Jui Meng a Trojan horse? I sometimes wonder. Chua Jui Meng was part of the team that hammered out and agreed on the PKR Sabah 'peace treaty'. The PKR Sabah crisis had been settled and those who were going to leave PKR to form a new party together with Dr Jeffery Kitingan agreed to abort that plan and stay with the party. Then someone in the party HQ did a U-turn (a favourite phrase nowadays). They denied the existence of the peace treaty and instead took disciplinary action against the dissidents. That smashed all hopes of PKR being able to take over Sabah. But Chua Jui Meng was there. He was privy to what happened. Why did he remain mum and not speak up and instead allowed the matter to deteriorate beyond repair? Did Chua Jui Meng do a U-turn? Did he suddenly lose his balls? Was he told to shut up? Or did he intentionally remain silent so that the matter could explode? Chui Jui Meng could have said something to prevent this matter from going beyond the point of no return. But now it is too late. PKR Sabah is now in deep shit. And looking at the results of the recent Sarawak state election, it appears like PKR Sarawak is also in deep shit. Johor, also, does not appear any better. So that leaves only Selangor and Perak. Can the opposition do well in Selangor and Perak? I really hope so. But even if they do that is not good enough. That is only two of the states. They also need the other three states. Let us look at the opposition track record. It did well in 1990. It went down in 1994. It did better in 1999. It got massacred in 2004. It excelled in 2008. What can we expect the opposition to perform in the next election? That is certainly something to ponder on. The opposition has never done well two elections in a row. It is always one up election and down the next. And this is what I fear we might see if we are not careful. |
| The arguments by narrow-minded Muslims Posted: 03 May 2011 07:58 PM PDT Yusri Mohamad, a product of the International Islamic University, ABIM and Pembela, and onetime personal aid to PKR President Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, claims that Islam is under attack. And should we be surprised when Muslims make a mockery of Islam? Anyway, this "Islam under attack" is all in the narrow minds of Muslims. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin Islam's position under siege in M'sia, warns Pembela (Malaysiakini) - The Coalition of Muslim Organisations (Pembela) has claimed that the position of Islam in Malaysia is under siege. Speaking to reporters today, spokesperson Yusri Mohamad said this is particularly in relation to recent developments in Islam-Christian affairs. Specifically, he cited the designation of a non-Muslim affairs exco in Penang and the 'pseudo-appointment' of Christian Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Idris Jala to handle issues pertaining the Malay-language Bible as threatening Islam's position as the official religion. He claimed there is no provision in the federal constitution for any official non-Muslim affairs body, and that making Idris the go-to minister for Christian affairs is thus unconstitutional. "There is a (threat). These sorts of threats come in seasons but now have become more serious and are putting a lot of pressure on the way we deal with issues pertaining to Islam," he said. "Islam is the official religion and is a pillar of our nation, but attempts are being made to make its position equal to other religions. "Followers of other religions are portrayed as marginalised and oppressed... Islam and Muslims are dressed in an ugly mask and is made to seem guilty so that they give in (to demands)." The fact that Idris was appointed to handle the Al Kitab issue was also wrong, he said, since Idris cannot be said to be non-partisan because he is Christian. "He says he is non-partisan politically but this is a religious issue, and he is partisan. As we understand it, the (10-point proposal) was produced without consultation with the Fatwa Council, religious scholars and Muslim NGOs," he said. Instead, he said the matter should have been handled by two ministers in the Prime Minister's Department - Jamil Khir Baharom who is in charge of Islamic affairs, and Koh Tsu Koon who is in charge of national harmony. "We feel that the government can act within their powers...but Christian groups are now using terms like 'deface' and 'desecration' which is pushing the issue ... out of hand," he said. As such, Pembela, a coalition of about 80 NGOs, will be hosting a conference on Saturday to discuss the issue of the sovereignty of Islam in Malaysia. Themed 'Islam under siege: What will we do?', the event will be open to all Muslim NGOs and will feature a forum on the topic. Among the topics to be discussed are the Al Kitab, conversions to Islam, religious freedom and the way such matters are handled by the government. "We hope to then take the outcome of our discussion to the cabinet, prime minister, Rulers Council, political parties and mufti," he said. Pembela not 'extremist' Commenting on a police report recently lodged by a Christian against Pembela, Yusri said said the coalition is not an extremist group as perceived. "We feel that the police report was a way to blow up the issue. Pembela has been around for a while and anyone who does a background check will find that we are not an extremist group," he said. Pembela has never officially said it is willing to 'shed blood against Christians', as stated in the police report, he said. "But perhaps during the peaceful demonstrations there were harsh words said, which is normal in a demonstration. You can't expect us to berbalas pantun. "It is wrong to say that our movement is a threat to our non-Muslim friends," he said. He added that police had contacted Pembela a week after the report to ask for recordings and materials distributed during the demonstration in March to assist in their investigation. "No member (has been) called for questioning," he added. zDac5GXjLMo
Or watch at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDac5GXjLMo |
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
