Ahad, 9 Oktober 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Iqraq

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:38 PM PDT

The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There are some who say that those who know nothing about a subject matter should not be talking about it. I can agree with that. But then it all depends on what you mean by 'know nothing'.

Maybe there are some who don't know how the Islamic Shariah laws should be applied or interpreted. This is because they are not judges or lawyers. But then, they could be historians and they know their history very well. And because of that, they know the HISTORY of the Shariah. Which means they are certainly qualified to talk about the Shariah from the historical aspect of those laws.

Therefore, to tell a historian to stop talking about the Shariah because he or she is not trained in Islamic laws is not quite correct. If this historian not only knows the history of the Shariah but is also lecturing about it in one of the universities, this makes him or her more than qualified to talk about it.

For Muslims and non-Muslims alike, I would like to recommend you to buy and read just three of the many books I have in my library. These books are:

ISLAM AND THE SECULAR STATE (NEGOTIATING THE FUTURE OF SHARI'A) by Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im (Harvard University Press)

 

THE MANY FACES OF POLITICAL ISLAM (RELIGION AND POLITICS IN THE MUSLIM WORLD) by Mohammed Ayoob  (National University of Singapore)

 

A HISTORY OF ISLAMIC LAW by N. J. Coulson (Edinburgh University Press)

 

These three books will suffice for now to be able to make you an 'expert' on the Shariah. I can recommend another dozen more books if you are still 'hungry' for more knowledge.

The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above.

 

 

Not talking about the budget

Posted: 07 Oct 2011 05:20 PM PDT

So, we will eventually lose these people when Malaysia is no longer lucrative. And we have already lost many Malaysian citizens who have sent their money overseas to invest in other countries. And this is not only of late but has been happening over the last 20 to 30 years, but has become more critical over the last five years or so.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

No, I am not going to talk about the budget. So many others have analysed the budget in detail so you can read what they have to say.

What I do want to talk about is: how is Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak (or even Anwar Ibrahim for that matter, if he happens to become the next Prime Minister) going to stop Malaysia from continuing down the slippery slope?

First we had the brain drain. More than one million Malaysians, the majority of them non-Bumiputeras, of course, live and work overseas. These are people with education, qualifications, and/or skills/abilities (and in many cases, money as well).

I met many waiters/waitresses and restaurant workers all over the UK (all Chinese, of course) who were from Ipoh, Penang, Sungai Siput, Bukit Bintang, Jalan Ipoh, and so on. And now they work all over London and in Nottingham, Manchester, Liverpool, etc.

And you know what? The minute I walk into the restaurant they start whispering. Then, one by one, they come over to our table to talk to me. They recognised me the minute I walked into the restaurant -- and this is because they read Malaysia Today.

Yes, they may be merely waiters/waitresses or restaurant workers, but they are internet-savvy and loyal Malaysia Today readers -- even though you may think they are merely 'labourers'.

And they are not here in the UK working in restaurants because they are stupid, unqualified, uneducated, etc. It is because they have lost confidence in Malaysia -- plus they get more money working in the UK than in Malaysia.

You may think that the cost of living in the UK is higher. Maybe it is higher in some areas but not in everything. You can buy a house for 100,000 pounds (which will cost RM1 million or more in Malaysia for the same type of house) and a car for 8,000 pounds (which will cost more than RM150,000 in Malaysia for the same car).

You earn ten times or more in the UK than what you earn in Malaysia for the same job but the cost of living is not ten times higher, especially outside London.

Anyway, we have more than one million talented Malaysians serving foreign countries when they could be serving their mother country instead. And they spend their money here. They don't send it home to Malaysia. How are we going to convince them to come home to Malaysia and serve Malaysia?

Then we replace these one million Malaysians with four million 'imported' workers. For every one 'quality' Malaysian we have lost we replace him or her with four 'lower quality' foreign workers.

Is this a good exchange, quality for quantity?

Then these four million foreign workers (many now given citizenship so that they can vote for Barisan Nasional) send more than half their earnings home. They don't spend their money in Malaysia. So Malaysians don't get to see any trickle-down affect. They send their money home. So billions of Ringgit leaves the country every month.

Go check with Bank Negara if you want the details (which is what the opposition should be doing instead of arguing about hudud).

Okay, that is about the brain drain. Now what about capital flight?

Do you know that for the last 20 to 30 years, Malaysian tycoons have been quietly investing overseas? Some have even wound down their businesses or sold off their investments in Malaysia to transfer their operations and investments to other countries.

The government screams about how great Malaysia's FDI is. It is like screaming about how much money I earn every month. Yay, I earn RM5,000 a month! But I do not tell you that I spend RM10,000 a month. So what's so great about my RM5,000 earnings a month?

Sure, we have FDIs. But the foreign investors are only here because they can make money. Many foreign companies even have a policy of not buying property in Malaysia. They would rather rent, even if they have to pay more for rental compared to if they bought this property.

This is so that they can wind up their operation and go home super-fast if they need to. If they own property, it takes longer to get out of Malaysia because they need to sell of their assets first. So rent, don't buy.

So you see, they do not intend to become Malaysian 'corporate citizens'. They just want to make money and then go home when they can't make money any longer. They are not loyal to the country. They are just loyal to money.

So, we will eventually lose these people when Malaysia is no longer lucrative. And we have already lost many Malaysian citizens who have sent their money overseas to invest in other countries. And this is not only of late but has been happening over the last 20 to 30 years, but has become more critical over the last five years or so. 

As I said, I do not want to talk about the budget. That's because I am not impressed. I want to know how the government (and the opposition if it becomes the government) is going to stop Malaysia from continuing down this slippery slope of brain drain and capital flight.

Please also read this: After brain drain, now capital flight?

 

Allow me to respond

Posted: 06 Oct 2011 06:26 PM PDT

Below are just some of the many comments in my article 'So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then!' I would like to respond to them as I feel further debate or clarification is required so that we can 'clear the air' on this matter that appears to be dividing us and threatens to break up the opposition like it did once before about a decade ago.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dear RPK

Recently your posts have become more convoluted with everything ending up in a paradox. Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset, If they weren't they won't even bother visiting. I'm afraid if this continues, such tedious yet complex arguments may deter the growing viewership might plummet to the depth of the ocean. Malaysia Today is the instrument of the third force as you claim so cater to the third force. Stop this nonsensical bashing and continue to direct people to the right path. I feel that Malaysia Today has entered another stage of in its struggle for freedom. I'm pretty much aware that most of the people that visit have realized the Injustice that they are living in yet we are still confused on what to do. Yes, we know the system is corrupt, so what do we do? Do we just quit our jobs and protest everyday on the street or just keep on and increasing our political bashing on the net. Therefore I hope you could focus your efforts on the next step, which is showing the people what to do next.

written by Almassy, October 07, 2011 05:39:22

 

MY RESPONSE: The fight for reforms or change is not a 'single-focus' job. It is 'multi-prong' job. We have to do, as what in the IT world they would say, multitasking. So we do not talk about just one issue. We take about many issues because there are so many things that ail Malaysia.

We continue to reveal the transgressions of those in the corridors of power -- although due to the 'selective prosecution' policy that is being practiced in Malaysia (where those close to the powers-that-be are 'immune' from the long arm of the law) very little is going to come out of this effort other than merely 'educating' the Malaysian public so that at least they get to know their government better.

To you, getting to the bottom of the hudud matter may be nonsense. As you said: 'Bear in mind I believe the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset….' I suppose this also means you.

However, judging by the quality of the comments that you read in Malaysia Today, does this give you the impression that 'the majority of Malaysia Today readers are reasonably educated and have broader mindset'? The impression I get is that the reverse is true.

Anyway, we should not just focus on the comments to form our opinion. Can 100 readers who comment give you a good yardstick when more than a million others who read Malaysia Today do so quietly without commenting? What about the private e-mails and phone calls I receive from readers who express their opinion and their opinion is they are not sure yet whether they are going to vote for Pakatan Rakyat come the next election?

So we need to respond to what people say. This is because other people may get influenced by what is being said. For example, some are of the view that if hudud is implemented, pork, gambling, liquor, etc., will be banned. So we have to counter that.

Some are of the view that if they vote Pakatan Rakyat then for sure hudud is going to be implemented. Again, we have to counter that.

So we need to constantly rebut and reply to negative comments because, if we don't, then people might believe these comments to be true and Pakatan Rakyat is going to suffer a serious erosion of support come the next election.

We are not talking religion here. We are talking about politics and reforms. But when religion is being dragged into politics, then we have no choice but to face it head on and address the issue.

And that is what I am doing: engaging the religionists who want to treat this matter as if it were a religious issue when in fact it is a political issue.

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

Pete,

You are learned man and I sense that as you are getting old and perhaps been 'exile' for such a long time you are getting 'religious' in your posting. Also most of the posting are for argument.

When one gets older he tends to be closer to his God or his beliefs. But Pete, MT is getting too 'religious'. Its time you go to Malaysian politics and as our election is looming you may have to use your MT to drive in some message of changes so that readers will be more updated about what is going on with our political parties. You have deep throat around and of course you always get the wind first.

written by neilahmad, October 07, 2011 08:10:55

 

MY RESPONSE:  I think I have covered most of the points in your comment in my response above. I just want to add one more point. Malaysia Today is not getting more religious. Religion is being used more now than before to gain political mileage. And this hudud issue has set the opposition back a wee bit and has given Umno a slight upper hand (which can escalate if we are not careful). So we avoid addressing this matter at our own peril.

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

RPK,

I would like to say that even you are not in the position to comment about Hudud unless you know more than the others. Why not we let people know what hudud is all about. Its not merely chopping off people hands...

written by monty, October 07, 2011 09:29:10

 

MY RESPONSE: Hudud is not about religion. It is about the law and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. And people well versed in the law and the constitution ARE addressing this matter. (See here: 'Right to question hudud law' and 'At variance with the Constitution')

But then the religionists (in this case the Islamists) are shouting them down and telling them that they should not talk about hudud and that only religionists should talk about it.

This is where we have to 'out-shout' them. Is hudud a religious issue or a legal cum constitutional issue? I say it is a legal/constitutional issue and it not only affects the constitution but democracy as well (if the minority pushes it down the throat of the majority).

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

RPK,

I think you should stop wasting time in changing or bashing the Malay Muslim. They are not going to change since they are brought up in such narrow minded. Don't talk about ordinary people even the educated Malays also sometimes act very funny when comes to religion.

You should continue write about Islam because I believe more non-Muslim are starting to understand the beautiful of Islam and how open is Islam is.

written by DR Politics, October 07, 2011 09:35:13

 

MY RESPONSE: Ah, this is my favourite topic. The non-Malays and non-Muslims lament that the 'noisy minority' is screaming their heads off while the 'silent majority' is keeping quiet. "Where is the silent majority Malays-Muslims?" they ask. "Why are they keeping quiet? They should speak up!"

Well, I am one of those in the 'silent majority' that you are talking about -- only that I am not silent but I speak up. Do you want me to keep quiet and just let the noisy minority go on screaming? I can, if you wish. At least the Malays would not become so angry with me, like now.

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

Most of the Malays can't even understand Arab language, what more to say understanding Hudud? They are depended to Ustaz, Imam and etc. Ask that particular Malay, does he fully understand Islamic law or the Quran?

written by Meh, October 07, 2011 10:49:02

 

MY RESPONSE: There is nothing complicated here. Hudud laws, as the name implies, are about the law. The question is: which laws do we want for Malaysia? My answer is: parliament makes the laws. That is why we call them lawmakers. So, can we let parliament do its job?

Now, if you are not happy with parliament, then vote the parliamentarians out of office. Install a new parliament. Just hope that the new parliament is better than the old parliament. And that is our job as voters.

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

Conclusion : All Muslims are taught to think that way, but some like Azmi dare to risk his life and question the religious teachers and the Quran. That is the argument about. If no one question Islam, then the nation will be like Somalia and the Islamic nations. Saudi and Brunei had the money and their countries are built by infidels or kafirs or using kafir's technologies. What is there to be proud of?

And for the information, today a Nobel peace prize may be awarded to a Muslim, but a woman, for questioning the Islamic authorities. Are you going to say that the Nobel committee had intended to insult Islam?

In a democracy, we question all things and are free to think and follows our faith or believe in anything we want to believe. Sadly Malaysia is a false democracy - a semi theocratic and racist nation. How much longer are we going to lie to the world?

written by earthman, October 07, 2011 11:09:43

 

MY RESPONSE: And this is the crux to the whole matter. In a democracy, we have a right to question and to express our views. However, when it comes to hudud, suddenly we have lost that right. Why is that so? Because, according to the Islamists, hudud is God's law so we cannot question it.

So, are you saying that we need to suspend democracy? PAS introduced the slogan 'PAS for all'. 'All' would mean non-Muslims as well, right? Or is PAS going to change its slogan to 'PAS for all-Muslims only'?

Malaysians have a right to defend their democratic right to question and to disagree. PAS should be the first to recognise this since it is accusing Barisan Nasional and Umno of being undemocratic.

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

There are highly intellectual Muslims who support Hudud. Not just narrow minded ones. Why we support? We have digested in our mind that Islam is the correct religion. Then it follows the Quran is the word of God. And since the Quran says Hudud is just as wajib as solat and fasting we support Hudud. A lot of people do not even understand Islam how do we expect them to understand Hudud. The least they could do is to follow Dr Tan the Catholic Archbishop and study the Quran. Dr Tan after studying the Quran supports Hudud. But these people think they are cleverer than Dr Tan, the Catholic Archbishop. He is a well read intellectual with a PhD! I rest my case.

written by johann, October 07, 2011 11:33:48

 

MY RESPONSE: I have already responded to this above. Hudud is about the law and the constitution, not about religion. You don't need to understand Islam to understand that.

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

Generally it is true that an expert of any subject or skill is more knowledgeable than the non-expert. That is true for a Hudud expert when compared to the layman.

However, in this case and the main point of Azmi Haron's contention is not about the contents of Hudud but rather 'In a democracy, EVERYTHING can be questioned'.

If Hudud and its limits cannot be questioned because it is divine and God's law, then it should not be proposed for implementation in a democratic nation like Malaysia.

Even if it is not democracy, normal human rights should grant permission to any human to question everything as a critical thinker.

To demand that one should not question Hudud because one is not a Hudud expert is beside the point, irrelevant and a 'strawman' to the point debated in that article.

As normal human beings with basic human rights, we need not be an expert on Hudud to question its effectiveness and impact on society. One need not be a professional engineer, theologian, drug scientist or gambler to raise questions when there are negative impacts arising from their activities. One can apply out-of-the-box critical thinking techniques besides employing other experts to handle the in-the-box questions.

It is very easy to tackle the Hudud question. If one must insist on God-commanded-Hudud, prove God exists first. If one cannot prove God exists, then one should keep God & Hudud private for psychological/emotional reasons and not bring it into public where it can effect (in grey cases) non-believers negatively. No immutable laws carved in stone tablets for 2011 onward pls

written by TMT, October 07, 2011 14:57:09

 

MY RESPONSE: I doubt I need to add anything more to the above. He/she took the words right out of my mouth.

 

So, teach me the 'jalan yang betul' then!

Posted: 06 Oct 2011 03:31 AM PDT

Next, he or she assumes that the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, is not knowledgeable about the subject matter that he wrote about. And he or she made this assumption merely because the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, has a different view. Therefore, if you have a different view, then this means you are not knowledgeable about the subject.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Saudara azmi anda kena jelas betul2. Anda Muslim Dan org yg berpelajaran tinggi Dan ramai pengikut....jgn samapi kita bawa mereka ke Jln yg sesat.....sy tk kata u sesat....tp rujuklah dulu pd mereka yg lebih mahir dlm bab Hudud. Yg u baca bukan maknanya u faham...u faham cara u...maybe betul maybe tak betul!!!! Innalillah......

written by Eshmaelajenoor, October 07, 2011 00:48:57

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

The above comment was posted by Eshmaelajenoor in the news item 'Right to question hudud law' by Azmi Sharom, originally published in The Star.

I have noticed many such comments posted in Malaysia Today, mainly by Malay-Muslim readers. They are all almost similar in nature.

First of all, the impression I get is that this reader is very lazy. He or she does not even bother to string a proper sentence with correct spelling, grammar, capitals, etc., and he or she uses incomplete or substitute words like 'u', 'tp', 'yg', 'sy', etc. This does not give an impression that this reader is serious in commenting.

Next, he or she assumes that the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, is not knowledgeable about the subject matter that he wrote about. And he or she made this assumption merely because the writer of the article, in this case Azmi Sharom, has a different view. Therefore, if you have a different view, then this means you are not knowledgeable about the subject.

That is a very pompous attitude. If you do not share my view then this means you have no knowledge about the subject matter.

This is the stand that many Malays-Muslims take and it is time these people accept the fact that not everyone shares their view. And it could be possible that they do not share your view not because they are ignorant. In fact, the opposite may be true. They may, in fact, be very knowledgeable and this is the main reason why they have an opposite view to yours.

Anyway, for Eshmaelajenoor to be able to know for a fact that Azmi Sharom is not knowledgeable about the subject can only be because Eshmaelajenoor IS knowledgeable about that subject. So, since Eshmaelajenoor IS knowledgeable about the subject, let us then engage in a discourse on Islam so that we can gauge the depth of Eshmaelajenoor's knowledge and assess whether Azmi Sharom, therefore, may actually be less knowledgeable about the subject matter he wrote about.

Allah, or God, in the Islamic perspective, has 99 properties or attributes -- what Muslims would call the 99 names of Allah.

The most crucial attribute of all is that Allah is omnipotent. This means Allah is all-powerful and nothing is beyond Allah's power. Probably the second most important attribute is that Allah is not born and Allah does not die. Allah is eternal. Even the Jews and Christians believe this.

Okay, if Allah is omnipotent and there is nothing Allah cannot do, can Allah commit suicide? Since Allah is eternal and cannot die, then logically speaking Allah cannot commit suicide. If Allah commits suicide then Allah will die, which means Allah would not then be eternal.

Hence, Eshmaelajenoor, if Allah is not capable of committing suicide, then how do you explain how Allah can be omnipotent when there are still some things that Allah is not capable of doing?

Yes, Eshmaelajenoo, please enlighten us on that and once you can satisfy us that you are certainly knowledgeable on matters of theism we can then probably accept your argument that Azmi Sharom is not knowledgeable enough and should not be talking about matters he clearly does not have enough knowledge to talk about.
 

The chicken and the egg

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 07:38 PM PDT

I believe we are moving towards better system like UK. We are in the move to balance up two-party system. But first, we have to win the election and PR to enforce MCLM as third force and act as referee for two-party system. Since both parties are not as mature as UK, they might use dirty tricks to kill each other. MCLM will be used to monitor both parties come clean and fair (written by jacko2012, October 06, 2011 13:44:29).

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I want to write just a short piece today. I am busy with my studies so that means I can afford little time with cheong hei articles. (Someone asked me what cheong hei means. It means long-winded).

The comment above by jacko2012 is just one example of many such comments (and I mean MANY). I thought I would pick that one up (not that that one is special or above the rest) to demonstrate what many -- and I mean MANY -- readers like to comment.

It is always: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that.

But that is just it. We are looking at the chicken and the egg syndrome. Which comes first, the chicken or the egg?

While you may argue: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that.

I would like to argue: we must first do all that BEFORE we have any chance of seeing the government change.

For example, I am saying that we need electoral reforms.

You then say: forget it. This will not happen under Barisan Nasional. Wait till we change the government. Then we can talk about electoral reforms.

But then that is just it. Without electoral reforms we shall have no chance in hell of changing the government. Barisan Nasional, which has been in power for almost 54 years (earlier as the Alliance Party), will continue to be in power for another 54 years.

So which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Do we push for electoral reforms NOW or wait until after Barisan Nasional is kicked out and Pakatan Rakyat comes into power? Can Pakatan Rakyat win the election without electoral reforms? If we can change the government without electoral reforms, then why do we need to embark upon electoral reforms after successfully changing the government?

Do you get my point? And the same applies for all the other issues as well. We can't wait until Barisan Nasional is kicked out before talking about it because ONE of the criteria to see a change in government is to talk about this NOW.

For example, how many voters (who are not happy about Hudud) are prepared to vote for PAS first, and then later, after Pakatan Rakyat becomes the federal government, we will argue and fight about Hudud? They will want the Hudud matter resolved BEFORE they decide whether to vote for PAS or not. 

So you might say: yes, I agree. That is what we must do. That is not what we are currently seeing in Malaysia. But first we need to change the government. First we need to kick out Barisan Nasional. First we need to vote Pakatan Rakyat into government. And then we can talk about all that. 

However, one million other voters will say 'no way!' and will either vote for Barisan Nasional or will boycott the election and not come out to vote at all. And this applies not only to the Hudud issue but to many other issues as well.

So don't be shiok sendiri. Just because you place ABU (anything but Umno/asal bukan Umno) above all else, and are prepared to 'talk only after PR comes to power', does not mean that 10 million other voters also share your view. They would rather tread carefully. And if they are not sure, they would rather not vote for you.

So that is my very short article for today. And yes, I know, 80% of the comments will be about whether it is the chicken first or the egg first while they ignore the more important message in my article. I have grown accustomed to readers who argue about the colour of the rope rather than whether so-and-so committed suicide by hanging or was murdered.

 

What we are not and why we can never be

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 04:47 AM PDT

Yes, so why bother? If we know that it is futile, we might as well save all our time, energy and money and just let Barisan Nasional walk in uncontested. Well, in that case, do we even need to hold any elections? Maybe we should consider the Saudi Arabian model instead then. At least there is no cheating and bribing of voters there since there are no voters and no elections.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Come now, RPK, you do know that in Malaysia appointments to the Cabinet are a bit more complicated, what with the PM having to satisfy the demands of the 14 parties that make up the BN. No one likes to have 3 football teams in the Cabinet, but that is the political reality in Malaysia.

The urgency for Pakatan to have a Shadow Cabinet is not there, as compared to the UK. This is because, in the UK, the Opposition Leader is recognised as a legal position, and he/she must be invited to all official functions, especially functions involving the Queen, and the Palace. Otherwise, the British PM has to answer to the Queen.

Indeed, the Opposition Leader in the UK has to be provided with a staff of his own, and that is the law. There are legal provisions, traditions, and conventions, that the Opposition Leader is given equal respect and recognition, equivalent to the PM. The Opposition Leader is sometimes just as powerful as the PM, as his position is ruled by law.

In the UK, the Opposition Leader is an integral part of the tradition and process, when the opening of Parliament is performed. When the Opposition Leader writes to any Govt. Dept., it must be, by law treated as an important correspondence that requires the absolute truth be revealed. Etc, etc, etc. In the UK, Opposition Leaders are knighted by the Queen, and honoured with MBE's, CBE's and the likes, and are even appointed to the House of Lords.

Please watch the PM's Question Time in Parliament, every Wednesday. Do you think that it's ever possible to have that in Malaysia? Will Najib ever will want to face Anwar Ibrahim in Parliament, the way the way the PM and the Opposition Leader do in the UK? After all, we do practice the Westminster Model in Malaysia too, don't we? I think not. What do you think RPK?

In Malaysia however, the Opposition and the Leader is a non-entity, is given no respect, no recognition, not invited to ANY functions, and he can even be framed up with sodomy.

Surely you know these things, RPK, seeing that you are a British Citizen now.

The political reality and situation in the UK is completely different from Malaysia.

Please say it as it is, Sir.

written by Ernest , October 05, 2011 23:10:49

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

The above was what Ernest commented in my article called 'The point we are making'. I decided to pick it up and reply to it because it is both a good as well as negative comment.

It is good because what Ernest said is a fact when it comes to the Malaysian situation. It is negative because he (I assume Ernest is a he) is focusing on what we are not and is accepting that without challenge rather than choose to discuss and explore that: since this is what we are not, and since this is what we should be, how we do strive towards having a mature parliament just like in Britain?

The post of Opposition Leader in Parliament is an official post, one that allows for an office in Parliament House together with staff and whatnot. This means the taxpayers are paying for this job of Opposition Leader plus what other costs involved in maintaining this position. In other words, Parliament recognises the post of Opposition Leader although, as Ernest says, the government may not quite give it the respect due to it.

Okay, Ernest has already told us what we are not. He has also, in his own way (probably inevitably), told us what it should be when he explained how it is in the UK and how in Malaysia this is not followed. Now, what do we do to make sure that what we see in the UK we also see in Malaysia?

I take it that Ernest is trying to tell us that the UK example is a good example. And he is also telling us that the Malaysian example is a bad example. I assume this is what he is saying. So, the next logically step would be to ask ourselves how we can make Malaysia (which is the bad example) follow the UK (which is the good example).

Rather than lament that Malaysia is no good and in Malaysia this is not being done and Malaysians are not mature enough, and conclude that, therefore let us just forget about the whole matter, is not only a negative approach but a defeatist attitude as well.

I am now 61. Say the doctor diagnoses me with cancer and I tell him I am going to die one day anyway so why bother to try to cure me? That is a negative stand and a defeatist attitude. I might as well tell him that God has already decided when and how I will die before I was born. So no doctor can help me live another ten years if it has been decided that I am to die within two years. Old age will catch up on me anyway and never mind how healthy I may be, even without cancer I am going to die of old age. So let's just sit back and count the days till I die.

In that same spirit, Malaysian politicians are not mature. They don't respect the opposition and opposition leaders. Malaysia is not as advanced as Britain. So let us forget about trying to reform or change the system and accept this very primitive system and narrow-minded attitude as the Malaysian way and learn how to live with it.

I suppose, in that same spirit, we can say that Malaysian elections are never fair. They will cheat and bribe the voters and Barisan Nasional is still going to win, never mind how much effort we put into trying to win the elections. So why bother?

Yes, so why bother? If we know that it is futile, we might as well save all our time, energy and money and just let Barisan Nasional walk in uncontested. Well, in that case, do we even need to hold any elections? Maybe we should consider the Saudi Arabian model instead then. At least there is no cheating and bribing of voters there since there are no voters and no elections.

End of problem!

 

As John Lennon said: IMAGINE

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 08:12 PM PDT

Let us imagine that the debate between Gan Ping Sieu of MCA and Lim Guan Eng of DAP is held. Let us also imagine that the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) helped organise this debate and that both leaders accepted the invitation to the debate. Let us then imagine what transpires in this debate.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

MCA vice president challenges Guan Eng to hudud debate

(The Star) -- MCA vice-president Gan Ping Sieu has issued a challenge to DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng to a public debate on hudud.

He told reporters in Parliament lobby Tuesday that the debate would be on how DAP was going to stop PAS from implementing hudud law in the country.

Gan said the debate was necessary because during campaigning at various by-elections, DAP had been portraying PAS as a moderate, liberal and professional party.

However, he said PAS' recent statement on implementing hudud law showed that it was "ignoring DAP", its partner in Pakatan Rakyat.

"I wanted to hand him an official letter on my challenge to him on Monday and today. But he was not around in Parliament. So, I will send my letter via registered mail," he said. 

Gan said for courtesy sake, he would let Guan Eng choose the venue, time and mediator for the debate.

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

Gan Ping Sieu: DAP says that PAS is a moderate, liberal and professional party. However, as the evidence shows, PAS just goes and does what it wants. It does not care about DAP. DAP can say one thing but PAS goes and does the opposite.

This shows that PAS does not respect DAP. In fact, it shows that PAS does not respect the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, as well. Even the Opposition Leader, Anwar Ibrahim, does not respect DAP when he said that, in principle, he agrees with PAS, in that the Islamic laws of Hudud should be implemented, although he admitted that this is his personal view and not the consensus of Pakatan Rakyat.

DAP has certainly lost face. PAS and Anwar are sending a message to DAP that it is not relevant and that its views are not important. The message that they are sending to DAP is that DAP can take it or leave it. And if DAP is not happy about this matter, then it can leave Pakatan Rakyat, just like it did once before when the same controversy erupted during the time of Barisan Alternatif.

Pakatan Rakyat talks about consensus. DAP talks about consensus. What consensus? When PAS announced that it is still committed to its aspiration of implementing Hudud, was that based on consensus or based on just what PAS wants?

If PAS implements Hudud, how will the Chinese in Malaysia fare? Will the rights of the Chinese be protected? Will prostitution, nightclubs, karaoke joints, pork, gambling and liquor be banned? Will the wishes of the Chinese no longer matter?

DAP is selling out the Chinese just because it seeks power. DAP will do anything just to get into power, even sell out the Chinese. DAP is a traitor to the Chinese community. DAP talks about defending the rights of the Chinese and yet it works with PAS, which is a party that is dangerous to the Chinese.

Maybe Guan Eng can explain what is going to happen to the Chinese community if Hudud is implemented in Malaysia. And if Guan Eng says that Hudud will never be implemented, then maybe he can explain how DAP can prevent that from happening since PAS has not relented in its mission to implement Hudud and still treats this as the priority of the party.

 

Lim Guan Eng: First of all, MCA must note that while Pakatan Rakyat does things on the basis of consensus, this does not mean we deny each party the right to express its views. Unlike in Barisan Nasional, where no party can make any statement that Umno will not allow and whatever they say is just echoing whatever Umno says, in Pakatan Rakyat we do not stifle the freedom of anyone to express their opinion. That is why PAS is allowed to say what it wants to say, even if the rest of the parties in Pakatan Rakyat may not share this view.

Democracy is not about allowing you to say something that I agree with. That is not democracy. Democracy is about allowing you to say something that I disagree with. No doubt DAP does not agree with Hudud. PAS, however, supports Hudud. So we allow PAS to talk about Hudud and to state its aspirations regarding Hudud. If we stop PAS from saying all this, then DAP would be violating the principles of democracy.

You cannot view this as PAS not respecting DAP by saying something that DAP does not agree with. You have to view it as DAP respecting the right of PAS to say something that DAP does not agree with. To agree is easy. Anyone can do that. But to agree to disagree is the hard thing to do. And that is what Pakatan Rakyat is able to do and which Barisan Nasional is not able to.

I know this is a very difficult concept for MCA to understand because this is not practiced in Barisan Nasional. In Barisan Nasional, MCA can't say something that Umno is opposed to. MCA can only say something that Umno likes to hear. If MCA says something that Umno is unhappy with, then there will be screams for MCA to get out of Barisan Nasional or that MCA should be sacked from Barisan Nasional or that the Chinese should go back to China and so on. This is not how we do things in Pakatan Rakyat.

This talk about Chinese rights is outdated. In Pakatan Rakyat, we do not talk about Chinese rights or Indian rights or Malay rights like you do in Barisan Nasional. In Pakatan Rakyat, we talk about the rights of all Malaysians irrespective or ethnicity. Even when we talk about Hudud we talk about how it will be accepted by all Malaysians and not how it is accepted or reject by any one ethnicity.

What MCA does not seem to understand is that Islamic Sharia laws have been around since before Merdeka. This law used to be the secondary laws in Malaysia and only touches on Islamic matters, and even then only in cases where the common laws do not address, in particular matters concerning marriage, divorce, death, inheritance, and so on. It does not cover crimes, traffic offenses, and whatnot. For that we have the common laws, which override the Sharia laws.

In the past, the common law courts took precedence over the Sharia courts. However, Barisan Nasional, which MCA is a member of, changed this when it made the Sharia courts at par with the common law courts. This confusion was something that Barisan Nasional created and MCA is part of Barisan Nasional. Why did MCA support this move to upgrade the status of the Sharia courts and now we have ambiguity between which court has more power to decide on matters concerning the Sharia?

Can you see that Barisan Nasional, meaning also MCA, is the culprit that started all this confusion? Now you blame us for what you did.

The Sharia laws of Hudud are very specific. It covers only certain violent and serious crimes like robbery, murder, rebellion, apostasy, consuming of intoxicating substances, illicit sex, and slander.

Now, we already have laws governing robbery, murder and rebellion. So these laws will take precedence over Hudud. In fact, the common law punishment for rebellion is even worse. Can you remember we hanged the Al Maunah people who were charged for rebellion a few years ago? Under Hudud, they would not have been hanged. They would have been given a chance to repent and if they repented then they would be pardoned and allowed back into society. But instead we hanged them for rebellion.

Under Hudud, even Chin Peng would have been allowed home since he has already signed a peace treaty with Malaysia back in 1989. Would not Hudud have been better in cases such as these?

On the consumption of intoxicating substances, we already have laws for that as well. If you were to be arrested with drugs above a certain limit, even if you do not consume it but only possessed it, you would be hanged. Under Hudud, possession is not a crime. Only consumption is. And you would not be hanged.

However, with or without Hudud, intoxication and illicit sex are already crimes under the Sharia. Muslims would be punished for this, even now. Non-Muslims are not covered under these laws just like they would not be under Hudud as well.

We must remember, pork, liquor, gambling, illicit sex, and any activities that Islam considers immoral, are only forbidden for Muslims. Non-Muslims can continue being as immoral as they would like to be. Chua Soi Lek admitted publicly that he was the man in the porn video. Since he is not a Muslim, nothing happened to him. If he is a Muslim, then he would have been brought before the Sharia court since he had confessed to being the man in the video. 

According to the Constitution, Islam is the religion of the Federation. According to the Constitution, the Rulers are the head of Islam. According to the Constitution, each state has power over Islam, and this means Islamic Sharia laws as well. So it is up to the states how it would like Islam to be implemented.

If MCA finds this unacceptable, and since MCA is part of the government, then MCA can always get Parliament to amend the Constitution to rectify this. Why does MCA not do this? Why keep quiet?

DAP and PAS are not part of the government. MCA and Umno are. So go amend the Constitution to remove the powers of the states as well as the Rulers and bring Islam under the federal government. MCA and Umno have the power to do this. Why is this not being done? Then, once this is done, PAS can no longer talk about Hudud because Islam will no longer come under the states but will be under the Prime Minister and Parliament.

Anyway, PAS normally contests only one-third the seats in Parliament and it never wins all the seats it contests. It is, therefore, impossible for PAS to amend the Constitution that will allow Hudud to be implemented. PAS will need Umno and the other Muslim MPS from Pakatan Rakyat to combine their votes to get a majority in Parliament. And we all know this will never happen. 

So what is the issue here? Is this a real issue or a red herring? MCA is just trying to distract the people from the fact that it is irrelevant and is going to get wiped out in the coming general election. MCA is trying to treat this Hudud issue as its 'talian hayat'. Let's see whether the voters buy this ploy.

 

See the difference?

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 05:56 PM PDT

Who says I am always cheong hei? Sometimes, when a picture is worth a thousand words, I can be very brief. Anyway, maybe the five photos below can tell the story that I want to tell today.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dato Onn Jaafar, the founder of UMNO, visiting the rakyat in the kampong

 

What it costs today

 

David Cameron, the then British Opposition Leader and now the Prime Minister, going to office

 

David Cameron, the then British Opposition Leader and now the Prime Minister, going to Parliament

 

Boris Johnson, Mayor of London


Just wanted to say sorry

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 04:53 PM PDT

Lim Guan Eng has apologised to H.H. the Sultan of Johor for what he was alleged to have said, which apparently upset (murka) His Highness. Kompas too has apologised to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak regarding the Russian Mafia link story. Now it is my turn to apologise to 'First Lady' Rosmah Mansor. 

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

US$24m ring returned after 'a few days', minister tells Parliament

(The Malaysian Insider) - Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz told Parliament today no payment had been made on a US$24 million (RM77 million) ring linked to the prime minister's wife.

In a written reply to Lim Lip Eng (DAP-Segambut), the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department said the Royal Malaysian Customs confirmed that the ring was "returned" after "a few days" to the company that owns it.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak denied on August 21 that his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor bought the diamond ring or that his Kazakhstan in-laws are linked to the "Russian mafia" as reported by Indonesia's top-selling daily, Kompas.

Kompas has since apologised to the prime minister for its August 4 report but the mystery remains as to why the ring from New York jeweller Jacob & Co. was addressed to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, according to pictures widely circulated on the Internet.

Questions had arisen as to whether Rosmah's name had been used without her knowledge by criminal elements as part of their illegal activities. To date, the government has yet to identify who brought the ring into Malaysia.

Jacob & Co. founder Jacob Arabo, whose custom diamond-encrusted wristwatches and chunky jewellery once adorned Hollywood A-listers like Leonardo DiCaprio and hip-hop stars Kanye West and Jay-Z, is no stranger to such allegations.

The Bukharian-American jeweller, described by the New York Times as the "Harry Winston of the hip-hop world", has twice tangled with US federal law enforcement agencies.

In a column on August 4, Kompas described Rosmah's ties with soon-to-be in-law Maira Nazarbayev as close although it provided no evidence to support its claims and added, "Maira Nazarbayev, who lives a lifestyle a la Imelda Marcos, supposedly has links to the Russian mafia".

Maira is the former wife of Kazakhstan President Nursultan Abishuly Nazarbayev's brother, Bolat Nazarbayev. Nooryana Najwa, the 22-year-old daughter of Rosmah and Najib, was recently betrothed to Maira's son, Daniyar, who was her college sweetheart.

Rosmah has faced repeated allegations that she has a penchant for a lavish lifestyle ever since it became apparent that Najib would succeed Tun Abdullah Badawi as prime minister.

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

The Umno Bloggers and Cyber-troopers allege that I do not have the gumption to say sorry whenever I am wrong. That is not true. When I am wrong I will say sorry. And it appears like I was wrong with regards to the story regarding Rosmah Mansor's RM77 million diamond ring. 

Lim Guan Eng has apologised to H.H. the Sultan of Johor for what he was alleged to have said, which apparently upset (murka) His Highness. Kompas too has apologised to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak regarding the Russian Mafia link story. Now it is my turn to apologise to 'First Lady' Rosmah Mansor. 

I can see that I was wrong when I said that Rosmah bought that RM77 million ring. So, for that, I must apologise. It is now clear that it was not Rosmah who bought that ring. I don't know who actually bought it. But to accuse Rosmah of buying it when it was not she who bought it was wrong.

And I was also wrong to say that Rosmah imported that ring into Malaysia. Rosmah did not import it. Someone sent it to her. Of course, we can only suspect who that was. However, since we do not have any evidence that it was this particular person it would be wrong for me to mention his name.

I mean, just because I suspect that it may have been a certain young Malaysian tycoon of Chinese ethnicity who has received a lot of favours from the government does not make this a fact. It remains merely that, a suspicion. And if I mention his name and I am proven wrong later, then again I may have to apologise. So let that name remain unnamed.

Anyway, the ring has since been returned to sender. So that ends the matter once and for all. Maybe we can now allow this matter to rest.

Z54-QHEZN6E

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z54-QHEZN6E

 

Logic is illogical

Posted: 02 Oct 2011 08:19 PM PDT

The doubters (or atheists) are also trying to be smarty-pants. They argue using logic. Hey, religion is about faith, not about logic. That is why we call it faith. Faith is the word that explains the absence of evidence. Logic requires evidence. Faith does not. So when you use logic to argue with those who argue with faith, it is like a duck and a chicken trying to communicate. Can you see how futile that is?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

While we are seriously trying to resolve the differences amongst the opposition parties, in particular with regards to the issue of Hudud -- which is threatening to break up the opposition coalition like it once did about a decade ago -- we have some smarty-pants trying to impress us on their knowledge of the existence of God (or nonexistence, depending on your point of view) and on what God in His heart wants from us.

Can I make one thing very clear? We are NOT discussing theology. We are discussing politics. We are not debating whether God does, or does not, exist -- and if He does, what He wants from us. We are discussing how to kick out Barisan Nasional and replace it with a better government (and hopefully it WILL be a better government) and not whether God will be happy or angry with us if we do or do not do what some people tell us He wants done.

Aiya! How some people do go off tangent and talk about the price of beef when we are discussing how to fish with better results.

What irritates me most - especially when we are trying to discuss how to win the election -- is theists challenging doubters to prove that God does not exist. Okay, so God exists. Will that help us win the next election? God existed even back in 1955 but still Umno and its cohorts won every election since then.

Anyway, if you are trying to 'sell' your ideology to the doubters, then you shouldn't be challenging doubters to prove that you are wrong. You should instead prove that you are right.

Let me put it another way. You are trying to sell your car and you are saying that your car is better than the other brands. Should it not be you, then, who proves that your car is better? How can you ask the customer to prove that your car is not better than the other brands? You are doing the selling. So you should do the proving. If you fail to do that then the customer will just walk away and buy the other brand, which in his/her mind is better.

The doubters (or atheists) are also trying to be smarty-pants. They argue using logic. Hey, religion is about faith, not about logic. That is why we call it faith. Faith is the word that explains the absence of evidence. Logic requires evidence. Faith does not. So when you use logic to argue with those who argue with faith, it is like a duck and a chicken trying to communicate. Can you see how futile that is?

Anyhow, do you think logic always works? You may think it does but in reality it does not. Let me give you some examples.

Ducks swim. You swim. So, logically speaking, you are a duck.

1% of traffic accident fatalities are caused by drunk drivers. That means 99% of the fatalities are caused by drivers who do not drink. Logically speaking, if we ban people who do not drink from driving, many lives would be saved. 

Okay, what about this one?

Vodka and ice will ruin your kidneys. Rum and ice will ruin your liver. Whiskey and ice will ruin your heart. Gin and ice will ruin your brain. Martini and ice softens your desire. Pepsi and ice will ruin your teeth.

What is the common denominator here? That's right, ice. So, logically speaking, all you need to do it to lay off the ice and you are safe.

So, to those smarty-pants who try to win an argument with theists using what they perceive as logic, let me assure you that that is not a logical thing to do. Logic is sometimes illogical.

Okay, back to the issue of the day: how to win the elections. We win elections by getting the people to vote for us. And to get the people to vote for us we need to make them happy with us. And to get them to be happy with us we need to say the right things and make all sorts of promises.

So that should be the focus. We need to talk sweetly to them. We need to promise them the moon and the stars. And we also need to prepare ourselves with convincing excuses as to why we can't keep those promises in preparation for when we win the election and we can't deliver our promises. If not then the voters will kick us out again come the next election.

So that should be what we do. Arguing about whether there is a God or not and what it is that God wants from us will not bring in the votes. And without the votes we will not be in power. And this is what politics is all about, power. 

So let's get back on track and focus on what we should do.

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


WIKILEAKS: MALAYSIA'S CENTRAL BANK: LET'S MAKE A DEAL! REGULATION BY NEGOTIATION

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT

Similarly, BoAM has not been able to take advantage of its global internet bank because the server for that was located in Hong Kong. According to one BoAM representative, BNM said connecting to a server outside of Malaysia -- whether for internet banking or credit risk management -- was "outsourcing." When the bank argued that connecting to the box would not result in any Malaysians losing their jobs, BNM countered that, in the event of a financial crisis, foreign banks were likely to "flee the country" unless they had sufficient "brick and mortar" invested here. BoAM responded that, in the event of a disaster, there was no back-up system for its Malaysian customers without a connection to an outside server as is done elsewhere in the region.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Classified By: ECON COUNSELOR MATT J. MATTHEWS, FOR REASONS 1.4 (b) and (d)


1.  (C) Summary:  A number of U.S. financial services firms operating in Malaysia have described various informal practices undertaken by staff at Bank Negara Malaysia, the Central Bank, designed to encourage US firms to shift investment and jobs to Malaysia in return for regulatory approvals.  In some cases the staff's demands to support Malaysian government policies are quite direct, while in other more subtle cases, the central bank's regulatory and licensing approvals conveniently and predictably follow investment decisions made by U.S. firms that contribute toward the government's development initiatives. 

U.S. firms attribute these actions by Bank Negara to an effort to earn bragging rights for its support of the GOM's development plans.  Unfortunately, the use of regulatory oversight authority by Bank Negara staff to prod U.S. firms to expand investment and jobs in Malaysia raises serious questions about the central bank's role as a neutral regulator safeguarding financial stability. U.S. firm in Malaysia believe concluding an FTA that includes obligations to liberalize the financial services sector will be the most effective way to address this issue.  End Summary.

GETTING CONNECTED REQUIRES "REINVESTING" IN MALAYSIA

2.  (C) In one case reported to Economic Counselor and Treasury's Financial Attache for Southeast Asia, Bank of America Malaysia (BoAM), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America (BoA), has been unable to expand its business up to now largely because the central bank, Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) would not permit the subsidiary to connect to the parent company's Electronic Credit File (ECF), the bank's centralized credit-decision making and risk management tool.

Across the globe, BoA approves credit decisions and maintains all its credit files electronically on a single system.  In Malaysia, however, BoAM has been forced to make loan applications on paper and send them via fax, maintaining originals in a bulletproof safe.

3.  (C) In April, after several years of negotiation, BoAM finally secured approval from BNM to connect to its global server by promising to "compensate" for using off-shore credit analysis and risk management tools by "reinvesting" in Malaysia.  BNM had cited data secrecy provisions in disallowing the connection, but this prudential issue was not part of the negotiation.  Instead, BoAM reported that the key part of the negotiation revolved around the question of what the bank would "bring back into Malaysia" if it were allowed to "take this out."

4.  (C) Similarly, BoAM has not been able to take advantage of its global internet bank because the server for that was located in Hong Kong. According to one BoAM representative, BNM said connecting to a server outside of Malaysia -- whether for internet banking or credit risk management -- was "outsourcing."  When the bank argued that connecting to the box would not result in any Malaysians losing their jobs, BNM countered that, in the event of a financial crisis, foreign banks were likely to "flee the country" unless they had sufficient "brick and mortar" invested here.  BoAM responded that, in the event of a disaster, there was no back-up system for its Malaysian customers without a connection to an outside server as is done elsewhere in the region.

5.  (C) BNM came back to the "brick and mortar" question, pointing out that HSBC had invested $28 million in back-office operations in Cyberjaya, making a significant contribution toward the government's goals of becoming a regional hub for back-office operations and building up the government-initiated cyber-city.  BoAM responded that their operations in Malaysia were much smaller than those of HSBC and that $28 million represented roughly half their total business in the country; therefore they could not possibly commit to such an investment.  BoAM asked what was required to "reinvest" in Malaysia, but BNM told them, "We do not have a framework for that."  So it became clear, according to the bank representative, that BoAM was expected to bring something to the table.  Finally, BoAM offered to build a $1.5 million Global Disaster Recovery Center for its internet banking system and hire two Malaysians to operate the system. BNM then agreed to allow them to connect to the server in the U.S.

DIRECTED LENDING FOR HOUSING AND SMALL BUSINESSES

6.  (C)  Directed lending also has been a problem.  BNM set an individually-determined housing loan quota for all banks. BNM instructed BoAM to finance 50 low-income housing units (at less than RM60,000 each).  BoAM pointed out several difficulties they would have in meeting this quota.  First, BoAM did not do private mortgage lending in Malaysia, only corporate lending, and as such would have difficulty in assessing credit risk in this consumer market.  Second, very little housing was available at that price in Kuala Lumpur and BoAM had no presence outside the capital city, due to BNM restrictions on foreign conventional banks.  Homebuyers from outside the city were unlikely to travel to KL to apply for a mortgage loan, the bank pointed out.

7.  (C) BNM relented, imposing instead a RM 20 million quota in loans to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).  BoAM had been able to meet only about RM 5 million of that quota, so every year it paid a fine.  Bank headquarters, however, became increasingly concerned about its reputation risk for not complying with BNM's quota, and sent BoAM back to the negotiating table with BNM.  Finally, BNM removed the official quota but established a "target" whereby BoAM was expected to make RM 5.6 million in loans to SMEs, 50% of which must be to SMEs owned by ethnic Malays.

GE COURTS BANK NEGARA

8.  (C) Separately, Stuart Dean, General Electric President for Southeast Asia, described a similar approach to getting approval from BNM.  GE has not been able to enter the Malaysian market because BNM will issue licenses only to banking institutions and GE Money is a finance company.

According to Dean, Malaysia has the largest consumer finance market among the five countries in Southeast Asia in which it operates, which also include Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore, and the Philippines.  If they could enter the consumer finance market, he argued, GE could double its business in Malaysia.

9.  (C) Dean described his company's relationship with BNM as "excellent" and said he was optimistic that GE would get the approval they needed.  In working with the Malaysian government, it was necessary to show them how Malaysia would benefit from any proposal, he explained.  GE recently decided to move 100 of its "backroom" positions to Cyberjaya to serve its clients in Singapore, Hong Kong, and the Philippines.

This supports three key goals of the GOM:  back-office operations, regional operations, and a boost to the cyber-city.  GE also provides scholarships -- another high priority for the GOM which recognizes that the country's acute shortage of skilled labor is one of the major barriers to its development.  Last week, press reports announced that GE planned to invest in yet another high-priority government initiative, the "Iskandar Development Region" bordering

Singapore, in partnership with the government-linked company UEM World.

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL ASSURANCE GROUP

10.  (C) Brad Bennett, CEO of American International Assurance Group (AIG) said he was confident that the company would get the approvals it needed because it was contributing to the country's explicit development goals.  While the GOM does not state outright that it will award approvals to companies that invest in the government's targeted sectors and initiatives, the company makes the investments and then "trusts" that the regulators will come through. 

A year ago, Bank Negara was very helpful in working out a solution for AIG's requirements to incorporate locally and meet foreign equity thresholds, and is assisting the company in navigating the approvals required from various ministries for a data/call center to service the region.  Bank Negara specifically requested AIG not to publicize its plans to invest in the data/call center.  Bennett believes this is to allow Central Bank Governor Zeti to take credit for bringing in this high priority investment.  "It will be a political feather in her cap," he told Econoff. 

AIG's next priority is to get a license for Islamic insurance, as the company perceives that its market share will decline as customers switch from conventional insurance to a Sharia-compliant product.

11.  (C) Comment:  Malaysia has a complex regulatory system whereby approvals are awarded on a case-by-case basis after what often are lengthy negotiations.  U.S. companies operating here have spent years investing time and money in the negotiating process and in developing good relationships with Malaysian regulators.   U.S. firms do not wish their various ongoing negotiations with Bank Negara to become the subject of government-to-government discussions that could undermine the deals these companies are working so hard to complete. 

However, these financial sector companies do hope that the successful conclusion of an FTA with Malaysia will create a more transparent and liberalized operating environment which will eliminate the need for such interactions with Bank Negara in the future.   Finally, the aggressive effort by Bank Negara to use what should be prudential or regulatory tools for the benefit of unrelated government policies should raise some questions about how it will implement any "prudential carve outs" in the FTA. Clearly some of the policies imposed by BNM on the banks actually undermined their global risk management capabilities.  End Comment.

KEITH (OCTOBER 2007)

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


True Folk vs. Good Folk

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 04:00 AM PDT

Dear Pete

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Warmest Regards,

Wally

 

What price freedom from restricted residence?

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 03:34 AM PDT

THE PEOPLE'S PARLIAMENT

Last count, there were 32 responses to my 'UMNO's new election bankers' post.

Allen Tan and Delilah hit the nail square on the head.

Apologies for this late post. Was in Kuantan for  the Himpunan Hijau.

____________________________________________

Last Wednesday, in Parliament, while debating the bill to repeal the Restricted Residence Act, 1933, Najib stated that the government had 'decided to abolish the 1933 Act because the law is outdated and no longer relevant to the current situation', and went on to talk about  how, in the present era of mobile broadband and smart phones, the restricted residence orders had become ineffective.

Was Najib being absolutely candid about the situation leading to this repeal, or were there other considerations?

Malaysiakini reports that Najib went on to say that the government had embarked on this journey 'not because of any pressure… the test (is) whether we deliver on the promise or not….Other parties can recklessly or unashamedly admit that this is their idea or opinion They are not government mandated by the majority of the people to honour what was promised'.

What promise?

And to whom?

And were there any promises made in return?

That same Malaysiakini report quotes Kerismudin as saying, in relation to the release orders, then already signed, relating to the 125 individuals who were going to immediately benefit from the law that would later be repealed, that the 'groundwork was done much earlier… this was not something we plucked from the air' .

What, precisely, did this groundwork entail?

Last Thursday, at a meeting with a senior civil servant where others were also present, this person said that the 125 persons to be released and the 200 others who would have the unserved restricted residence orders cancelled following upon the repeal of the restricted residence law are all known big-time criminals with enough evidence to put them all away for a long, long time.

Trouble is, they wont go down alone.

They'll also take with them practically half the cabinet, scores of senior civil servants and many top cops.

So restricted residence was never a punishment or a deterrent.

At most, an inconvenience.

Otherwise, it was business as usual.

So why, asked the civil servant, the hurry to repeal this Act and free these top dog hoodlums, yet there is not the same rush with the ISA where most of those detained are not criminally tainted?

The answer, he said, was in the promise that Najib spoke of.

The 325 known cash-rich criminals, whose business interests are each, in their own right, the 'goose that lays the golden egg', have promised to provide UMNO with cash for the 13th GE, in return for their new-found unfettered freedom.

I asked if these hoodlums had already made good on their promise of cash for the elections.

The civil servant said he was not sure.

READ MORE HERE

 

Lawyer: PAS cannot go hudud

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 03:27 AM PDT

(The Star) - Despite the PAS bravado about implementing the hudud law in Kelantan without the approval of the Federal Government, it cannot be done unless the Federal Constitution and other laws are amended.

Human rights and constitutional lawyer Syahredzan Johan said the barriers set by the Federal Constitution and other legal provisions governing Islamic laws made it impossible for PAS to make its hudud plan a reality.

He said the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 provided limits to the jurisdiction of Syariah Courts in meting out punishment.

"Under the Act, Syariah Courts cannot mete out punishment of a jail term exceeding three years, fine of more than RM5,000 or whipping of more than six strokes, or any combination thereof.
"Under hudud, there are punishments such as stoning or amputation," he said.

Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat had said that the state government would set up a special technical committee to implement the hudud law.

Syahredzan said hudud law also violated the provision on equality under the Federal Constitution that stipulates everyone is equal before the law.

"The punishment for a Muslim under hudud could be more severe than for a non-Muslim for the same offence," he said.

Since the hudud jurisdiction is non-discretionary, Syahredzan said any person convicted would have no room for appeal.

"Although it takes a lot to convict a person since the evidential burden is quite high, it may also expose a Muslim suspect to double prosecution and punishment, one under the civil law and one under hudud," he said.

DAP national chairman Karpal Singh also said it was wrong for the Kelantan government to say that it was ready to implement hudud without the approval of the Federal Government.

He said it was not the Federal Government's place to sanction hudud as it was the Constitution which must be amended.

"As for DAP, we have reiterated that hudud is unconstitutional. Pakatan Rakyat leadership needs to sit down and find ways to overcome this," he said.

MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong called on Pakatan to come clean and inform the people of its stand on PAS.

"Is Kelantan a Pakatan or PAS government. Pakatan must answer this question. Is PAS part of Pakatan?" he questioned.

 

WIKILEAKS: MALAYSIA'S CENTRAL BANK: LET'S MAKE A DEAL! REGULATION BY NEGOTIATION

Posted: 09 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT

Similarly, BoAM has not been able to take advantage of its global internet bank because the server for that was located in Hong Kong. According to one BoAM representative, BNM said connecting to a server outside of Malaysia -- whether for internet banking or credit risk management -- was "outsourcing." When the bank argued that connecting to the box would not result in any Malaysians losing their jobs, BNM countered that, in the event of a financial crisis, foreign banks were likely to "flee the country" unless they had sufficient "brick and mortar" invested here. BoAM responded that, in the event of a disaster, there was no back-up system for its Malaysian customers without a connection to an outside server as is done elsewhere in the region.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Classified By: ECON COUNSELOR MATT J. MATTHEWS, FOR REASONS 1.4 (b) and (d)


1.  (C) Summary:  A number of U.S. financial services firms operating in Malaysia have described various informal practices undertaken by staff at Bank Negara Malaysia, the Central Bank, designed to encourage US firms to shift investment and jobs to Malaysia in return for regulatory approvals.  In some cases the staff's demands to support Malaysian government policies are quite direct, while in other more subtle cases, the central bank's regulatory and licensing approvals conveniently and predictably follow investment decisions made by U.S. firms that contribute toward the government's development initiatives. 

U.S. firms attribute these actions by Bank Negara to an effort to earn bragging rights for its support of the GOM's development plans.  Unfortunately, the use of regulatory oversight authority by Bank Negara staff to prod U.S. firms to expand investment and jobs in Malaysia raises serious questions about the central bank's role as a neutral regulator safeguarding financial stability. U.S. firm in Malaysia believe concluding an FTA that includes obligations to liberalize the financial services sector will be the most effective way to address this issue.  End Summary.

GETTING CONNECTED REQUIRES "REINVESTING" IN MALAYSIA

2.  (C) In one case reported to Economic Counselor and Treasury's Financial Attache for Southeast Asia, Bank of America Malaysia (BoAM), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America (BoA), has been unable to expand its business up to now largely because the central bank, Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) would not permit the subsidiary to connect to the parent company's Electronic Credit File (ECF), the bank's centralized credit-decision making and risk management tool.

Across the globe, BoA approves credit decisions and maintains all its credit files electronically on a single system.  In Malaysia, however, BoAM has been forced to make loan applications on paper and send them via fax, maintaining originals in a bulletproof safe.

3.  (C) In April, after several years of negotiation, BoAM finally secured approval from BNM to connect to its global server by promising to "compensate" for using off-shore credit analysis and risk management tools by "reinvesting" in Malaysia.  BNM had cited data secrecy provisions in disallowing the connection, but this prudential issue was not part of the negotiation.  Instead, BoAM reported that the key part of the negotiation revolved around the question of what the bank would "bring back into Malaysia" if it were allowed to "take this out."

4.  (C) Similarly, BoAM has not been able to take advantage of its global internet bank because the server for that was located in Hong Kong. According to one BoAM representative, BNM said connecting to a server outside of Malaysia -- whether for internet banking or credit risk management -- was "outsourcing."  When the bank argued that connecting to the box would not result in any Malaysians losing their jobs, BNM countered that, in the event of a financial crisis, foreign banks were likely to "flee the country" unless they had sufficient "brick and mortar" invested here.  BoAM responded that, in the event of a disaster, there was no back-up system for its Malaysian customers without a connection to an outside server as is done elsewhere in the region.

5.  (C) BNM came back to the "brick and mortar" question, pointing out that HSBC had invested $28 million in back-office operations in Cyberjaya, making a significant contribution toward the government's goals of becoming a regional hub for back-office operations and building up the government-initiated cyber-city.  BoAM responded that their operations in Malaysia were much smaller than those of HSBC and that $28 million represented roughly half their total business in the country; therefore they could not possibly commit to such an investment.  BoAM asked what was required to "reinvest" in Malaysia, but BNM told them, "We do not have a framework for that."  So it became clear, according to the bank representative, that BoAM was expected to bring something to the table.  Finally, BoAM offered to build a $1.5 million Global Disaster Recovery Center for its internet banking system and hire two Malaysians to operate the system. BNM then agreed to allow them to connect to the server in the U.S.

DIRECTED LENDING FOR HOUSING AND SMALL BUSINESSES

6.  (C)  Directed lending also has been a problem.  BNM set an individually-determined housing loan quota for all banks. BNM instructed BoAM to finance 50 low-income housing units (at less than RM60,000 each).  BoAM pointed out several difficulties they would have in meeting this quota.  First, BoAM did not do private mortgage lending in Malaysia, only corporate lending, and as such would have difficulty in assessing credit risk in this consumer market.  Second, very little housing was available at that price in Kuala Lumpur and BoAM had no presence outside the capital city, due to BNM restrictions on foreign conventional banks.  Homebuyers from outside the city were unlikely to travel to KL to apply for a mortgage loan, the bank pointed out.

7.  (C) BNM relented, imposing instead a RM 20 million quota in loans to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).  BoAM had been able to meet only about RM 5 million of that quota, so every year it paid a fine.  Bank headquarters, however, became increasingly concerned about its reputation risk for not complying with BNM's quota, and sent BoAM back to the negotiating table with BNM.  Finally, BNM removed the official quota but established a "target" whereby BoAM was expected to make RM 5.6 million in loans to SMEs, 50% of which must be to SMEs owned by ethnic Malays.

GE COURTS BANK NEGARA

8.  (C) Separately, Stuart Dean, General Electric President for Southeast Asia, described a similar approach to getting approval from BNM.  GE has not been able to enter the Malaysian market because BNM will issue licenses only to banking institutions and GE Money is a finance company.

According to Dean, Malaysia has the largest consumer finance market among the five countries in Southeast Asia in which it operates, which also include Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore, and the Philippines.  If they could enter the consumer finance market, he argued, GE could double its business in Malaysia.

9.  (C) Dean described his company's relationship with BNM as "excellent" and said he was optimistic that GE would get the approval they needed.  In working with the Malaysian government, it was necessary to show them how Malaysia would benefit from any proposal, he explained.  GE recently decided to move 100 of its "backroom" positions to Cyberjaya to serve its clients in Singapore, Hong Kong, and the Philippines.

This supports three key goals of the GOM:  back-office operations, regional operations, and a boost to the cyber-city.  GE also provides scholarships -- another high priority for the GOM which recognizes that the country's acute shortage of skilled labor is one of the major barriers to its development.  Last week, press reports announced that GE planned to invest in yet another high-priority government initiative, the "Iskandar Development Region" bordering

Singapore, in partnership with the government-linked company UEM World.

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL ASSURANCE GROUP

10.  (C) Brad Bennett, CEO of American International Assurance Group (AIG) said he was confident that the company would get the approvals it needed because it was contributing to the country's explicit development goals.  While the GOM does not state outright that it will award approvals to companies that invest in the government's targeted sectors and initiatives, the company makes the investments and then "trusts" that the regulators will come through. 

A year ago, Bank Negara was very helpful in working out a solution for AIG's requirements to incorporate locally and meet foreign equity thresholds, and is assisting the company in navigating the approvals required from various ministries for a data/call center to service the region.  Bank Negara specifically requested AIG not to publicize its plans to invest in the data/call center.  Bennett believes this is to allow Central Bank Governor Zeti to take credit for bringing in this high priority investment.  "It will be a political feather in her cap," he told Econoff. 

AIG's next priority is to get a license for Islamic insurance, as the company perceives that its market share will decline as customers switch from conventional insurance to a Sharia-compliant product.

11.  (C) Comment:  Malaysia has a complex regulatory system whereby approvals are awarded on a case-by-case basis after what often are lengthy negotiations.  U.S. companies operating here have spent years investing time and money in the negotiating process and in developing good relationships with Malaysian regulators.   U.S. firms do not wish their various ongoing negotiations with Bank Negara to become the subject of government-to-government discussions that could undermine the deals these companies are working so hard to complete. 

However, these financial sector companies do hope that the successful conclusion of an FTA with Malaysia will create a more transparent and liberalized operating environment which will eliminate the need for such interactions with Bank Negara in the future.   Finally, the aggressive effort by Bank Negara to use what should be prudential or regulatory tools for the benefit of unrelated government policies should raise some questions about how it will implement any "prudential carve outs" in the FTA. Clearly some of the policies imposed by BNM on the banks actually undermined their global risk management capabilities.  End Comment.

KEITH (OCTOBER 2007)

 

Navaratnam: Budget must protect against declining world economy

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 07:43 PM PDT

By Pauline Wong, The Sun

PETALING JAYA (Oct 9, 2011): While the 2012 Budget is full of goodies obviously intended to prepare for the next General Election, it must also protect the Malaysian economy against the declining global economy.

Centre for Public Policy Studies chairman Tan Sri Dr Ramon Navaratnam (pix) said it was a "goodie budget" aimed at the lower income group.

"That is right and proper, but the budget should also look into longer term measures to defend the resilience of the Malaysian economy," he told theSun.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak in tabling the budget, provided optimistic figures as to the expected growth of the economy, with per capita income expected to increase to RM28,725 in 2011 compared to RM26,175 in 2010, said Navaratnam.

The premier also estimated economic growth to remain strong in face of world economic slowdown, with growth of 55 to 5.5% in 2011.

However, Navaratnam cautioned that the Prime Minister cannot take Malaysia's financial strength for granted.

"Najib must ensure that he maintains fiscal and financial discipline to withstand the global decline, because if the economy continues its downward slide, the figures may change.

"Revenue must be increased, and the goods and services tax must be considered after the Elections. Expenditure must also be cut in non-priority sectors, for while it is beautiful to build castles, we cannot ignore the poor or afford to give less priority to the lower income bracket," he said.

The prominent economist and former Transparency International Malaysia president also said he would have liked to have seen more allocations made to strengthen government institutions.

"For example, more funds to the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission to counter corruption, which had an adverse effect on the economy; or more allocations to strengthen the judiciary to build investor confidence.

"The budget needs to also focus not only on expenditure but must be concerned with the benefits thereof," he urged.

He called on Najib to further liberalise the budget to increase meritocracy, competition, and productivity so that the ensuing output would be enhanced to counter growing inflationary pressures.

PM: `Pilihan raya dah dekat’

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 07:24 PM PDT

By Muda Mohd. Noor, FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Perdana Menteri hari ini memberitahu ahli penyokong BN hari ini bahawa pilihan raya umum ke 13 sangat dekat.

Berucap di majlis penerangan perdana BN Wilayah Persekutuan di PWTC, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak berkata "gendang pilihan raya sudah dipalu dan gemanya semakin dirasai"

"Anda sendiri boleh mendengarnya."

Beliau yakin BN akan menang sekali lagi berdasarkan kelebihan dan kekuatan  yang ada.

Bagaimanapun, beliau mengingat komponen mengadakan persiapan di tahap terbaik kerana BN memasuki pilihan raya mahu menang dan bukan mahu kalah.

"BN ada kekuatan sekali lagi untuk menang kerana kita berkhidmat untuk rakyat," katanya memberitahu 8, 000 ahli dan penyokong BN.
.
Pengerusi BN itu juga menegaskan BN bukan parti kelas rendah yang hanya disokong oleh petani dan nelayan.

Menurut Najib beliau mahu BN turut disokong oleh orang bandar terutama di Kuala Lumpur.

Jangan sabotaj

"Kuala Lumpur penting walaupun Kuala Lumpur bukan lagi deposit tetap (BN)," tambahnya.

Pengerusi BN itu mengingatkan semua komponen BN menyelesaikan masalah masing-masing selain tidak menimbulkan masalah baru.

 

Seterusnya di sini.

The Old Man and the Donkey

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 07:03 PM PDT

By Totalecology

In the snooker game of politics, Spin Dr. Mahatir Devil with a single stroke of the Hudud cue stick, has helplessly thrown the fragile cluster of Opposition Coalition billiard balls into disarray. In a smoke screen thrown off by the media to distract an unsuspecting public, the PAS Man & his DAP Son is seen with a Hudud Donkey.

 And now Pakatan big guns meet and work out a treaty!!! Least we forget, the citizens count on Pakatan to support the people, not to support views for or against Hudud. This vertical chain of command smacks of feudalism. " The road to hell is paved with good intentions', but under Pakatan 'benevolence', they will remain children forever. This is how the masses are forever suppressed. For real Democracy to work, the horizontal way is to ask the Kelantan people in true humility , what do you want?

What is Hudud? This is a foremost question on Malaysian minds, which even Socrates would find it hard to answer, others pretend. As on record, JAIS so far is unable to come up with a policy statement, perhaps Silence is golden. If indeed Shariah Law is God's law, how come  the One and Only Allah deem it fit for Kelantan Muslims and for other he subs it to Satan, which in this case, BN ?

We can only define Hudud in Malaysian context as the underbelly of PAS, its softest spot, where at the Party promises milk for its constituencies. Yes, its true, the milk of Divine Love can adjudicate all conditions, but who is so empowered with a heart of undefiled love minus the attitude of bigotry, prejudice and racism ? The zealots are bent on cleaning up our cups and plates on the outside while its contents remain filthy still,  will make a law unto themselves, while denying our Prophets the fire of their words to clean first the contents within.

DAP just don't believe in such crude Medieval exposure and UMNO just don't care, and would rather see Kelantan showcase a failed state. The Nons are unable to jive into this scene, perceiving it to be an offensive fondling of private parts, be it promiscuity, debauchery, theft or trafficking (which hudud don't recognize as crimes). Jokes aside, Hudud would only be as useful as a cup of water in a thunderstorm as they seek recourse to other form of jurisdiction, either to balance past life karma by doing good works OR  the violet flame invoked to transmute sin.

Politics in the rough and tough road. DAP is now accused of sweeping Hudud under PAS carpet. Before the Opposition gets further decapitated by the venom injected at this late hour towards a political genocide. A mere change of clothes to suit each occasion cannot save Pas especially when it is rigged from within, and many a ravenous wolf wear sheep clothing, will have a field day with their band of hired assassins. Not a liberal Malay leader but a Bomoh is needed with the fire to exorcise demons and compel foul spirits it to flee from the Pas camp.

The cue is now in Nik Aziiz's hand. The honest public want to know both sides of the story and not to believe in Chua Soy Lek alone.  To hear the word is from the horse's mouth.  People listen, tongues wag  as he tries to give it a forward spin, in unison  or reaction, win or lose. Well, good luck to him. 

Nik Aziz is the supreme icon of PAS and the face of Pas is Nik. Without Nik, PAS as it is will not exist, and without PAS, Hudud remains an empty cup.  The portrayal of an Islamic Eldorado which Nik Aziz and Nasarudin so idealized and idolized is no where found in any part of the world other than in their own state.

If Hudud Law have some merits, it is not a cure all for society, and care must be taken that the medicine is not worse than the disease.  Hudud is already an old invention, but care must be taken not to open a Pandora box simply for the sake of some ancient treasures locked in. Just as with any other Party in post Mahathir Malaysia, this is a new generation of voters.  Unless Pas reinvent itself before the GE to stay relevant, even in Kelantan, it will be too late thereafter. With Prominent Faces of our Future, like Nasarrudin and Ibrahim Ali to champion the Muslim/Malay agenda, they must not escape being groomed before they don the robes of the prophet.

We hope the Opposition is smart enough to seize this opportunity to turnaround the situation and not unnecessarily suffer collateral damage in the hands of BN ridicule. Here lies a great opportunity to rally the rank and file of the rakyat and forward an Exponential Revolution in the thinking mentality of Malaysians that will counteract Universal Ignorance.

BUDGET 2012 : Pakatan Rakyat VS Pakatan Rakyat

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 06:52 PM PDT

Oleh Shen Yee Aun

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

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

Percanggahan 1 – Elaun Tambahan Kepada Ahli Parlimen

Haji Mohammad Sabu + Anwar VS Lim Guan Eng

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

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

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

VS

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

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

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

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

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

Percanggahan 2 – Belanjawan Defisit


Azmin Ali vs Lim Guan Eng

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

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

VS

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

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


Percanggahan 3 – Belanjawan Perdana Menteri Lebih Baik


Mahfuz Omar VS Mahfuz Omar

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

VS

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

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

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

Percanggahan 4 – Bajet Pilihanraya

Dr Dzulkifly VS Dr Dzulkifly

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

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

VS

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

Kenyataan ini hanya menandakan Dr Dzulkifly sendiri bersetuju bahawa bajet Pakatan Rakyat juga merupakan bajet gula – gula politik dan hanyalah menjurus untuk menghadapi pilihanraya kalau benar Perdana Menteri mencedok daripada Pakatan Rakyat.
 
Percanggahan 5 – Bajet Untuk Kakitangan Awam

Dr Dzulkifly vs Dr Dzulkifly + Salahuddin

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

VS

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

VS

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


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

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

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

Percanggahan 6 – Bajet Perdana Menteri = Bajet Pakatan Rakyat

Pakatan Rakyat VS Pakatan Rakyat

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

VS

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

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

Apakah Pakatan Rakyat kini sendiri hendak memperlekehkan belanjawan mereka sendiri ?

 
Percanggahan 7 – Bajet 2012 Tidak Realistik

Anwar  VS Anwar

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

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

VS

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

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

 

 

 

Najib says BN not just for rural folk

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 06:18 PM PDT

By Melissa Chi, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 9 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak called on Barisan Nasional (BN) to not only be a "rural party" and reach out to the middle class and intellectuals.

"We don't want BN to be a party only supported by rural folk. We want the middle class and intellectual groups to support us as well.

"We want BN to be supported by all groups," the prime minister said at the BN Federal Territory Information session here, attended by about 8,000 of its members.

Najib has announced a raft of reforms over the past few months, including a Malaysia Day address where he pledged to amend and repeal several security and press laws including the controversial Internal Security Act.

He has also set up a parliamentary select committee to look into improving the electoral system in what is seen as a major concession to electoral reform movement Bersih.

His administration had come under heavy fire for its clampdown on the Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reform on July 9, which saw thousands of middle class Malaysians join the march in the capital.

Bersih has claimed some 50,000 people took part in the street demonstration but official police figures place the number closer to 6,000.

Police fired water cannon and tear gas to disperse the marches in chaotic scenes that resulted in over 1,500 people arrested, scores injured and the death of an ex-soldier.

Najib earlier highlighted the importance of only fielding "winnable candidates" in the next general election.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassan had previously acknowledged that there may be dissatisfaction among Umno leaders who are not chosen or are dropped as candidates, but maintained that the party leadership will be able to keep things under control.

"If we play, we play to win," Najib said today.

The Umno president said the ruling coalition should put forth a set of criteria for candidates in order to find the "winnable" individuals that will power them to victory in the next elections.

 

READ MORE HERE.

 

Putting Pakatan's "Flawed Budget" Under Scrutiny

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:59 PM PDT

(Bernama) - KUALA LUMPUR, 9 OCTOBER, 2011: In trying not to miss the boat, the opposition has also scrambled to bring out what it called "a budget that ensures prosperity for all".

But beyond the lofty promises and glossy numbers, the so-called shadow budget, if ever it is implemented, could hurt rather than benefit ordinary Malaysians.

Unlike Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Abdul Razak's all-encompassing Budget 2012, which deliberately opted for a mildly expansionary approach to ensure economic growth continues, Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has taken a more cautious and hawkish stance.
 
Under Najib's budget, the economy is forecast to grow at a respectable 5.0 to 6.0 per cent. Under Pakatan's plan, the growth momentum could slow sharply to 4.0 to 4.5 per cent, down from 5.0 to 5.5 per cent in 2011.

In fact, political analysts said the opposition's budget document had the hallmarks of the orthodox International Monetary Fund (IMF) prescriptions for Malaysia when Anwar was the finance minister during the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis before he was sacked.

Those bitter pills include pushing interest rates sky high, tightening bank lending, raising import duties and sharply cutting back on public infrastructure spending, thus putting sharp brakes on the economy. 

Malaysians who lived through the crisis more than a decade ago will not easily forget those gripping pains they had to endure.

For a start, Pakatan Rakyat, the coalition of opposition parties, has envisaged a RM220-billion budget for 2012, much smaller than the government's RM232.8-billion budget.

But its forecast of government revenue of RM181 billion is way off the mark. The government had said that its revenue could top RM187 billion next year.

Najib opted to spend more in 2012 (up from this year's RM212 billion) to stimulate domestic demand and investments.

Furthermore, the country's economic fundamentals remain on a strong and solid footing. Inflows of foreign direct investment have regained momentum.

Foreign Direct Investment increased six-fold to RM29 billion in 2010, the highest growth in Asia. In the first half of 2011, FDI surged further by 75 per cent to RM21.2 billion compared with RM12.1 billion for the corresponding period in 2010.

However, Najib has given an assurance that the government would continue to remain fiscally prudent and keep a tight rein on the fiscal deficit.

There are a few other examples how life would be difficult under the opposition budget plan. Firstly, the relatively smaller subsidy allocation of RM22 billion against the government's RM33.2 billion would mean more people, especially the poor, would have to struggle to make ends meet amid the rising cost of living.

In his "People's Budget", the prime minister deliberately outlined each essential item that would continue to be subsidised by the government. It is not unusual for Malaysians, including the rich, to take these subsidies for granted. These subsidies include petrol, diesel, cooking gas, natural gas, sugar, rice, flour, and electricity bills.  

And Pakatan's proposed cut of a whopping RM10 billion off the Prime Minister's Department (JPM) allocation next year could deprive thousands of JPM staff of their monthly salaries. JPM forms the backbone of the nation's economic and government policy-making and implementation.

Perhaps the most controversial of Pakatan's budget proposals was to set the minimum wage at RM1,100 to wean off the over-dependence on foreign workers. However, many commentators felt that the threshold was blunt and socio-economically flawed.

The threshold, as it stands, is way above the current market rate for unskilled labour. It is absurd to expect a sudden big jump in wages even for unskilled labour without taking into consideration any direct and indirect impact on labour demand, inflation and productivity. 

A better approach would be to allow gradual increase in the minimum wage level over a three-year period. Interestingly, the RM1,100 minimum wage will also benefit some 300,000 civil servants who are in the lower-income group. This proposal and other special welfare payments plans for children, senior citizens and women, all to be paid annually, have raised concerns of the country's financial sustainability under Pakatan.   

"We can only distribute money when we are having a fiscal surplus or it might further burden the country," columnist Lim Sue Goan wrote in the MySinChew.com column.

Paying special attention to the civil service by dangling a RM5.9-billion carrot to them is also puzzling as Pakatan had made it clear from the start that the civil service is already bloated and needs to be trimmed.

Perhaps one would question the true motivation of Pakatan in taking such a populist posture to woo back civil servants.

At the end of the day, it's a case of Pakatan spending cash that it doesn't have and its budget remains overshadowed by the Barisan Nasional government's pragmatic socio-economic blueprint.

 

Utusan says Manoharan let off hook to save Guan Eng

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:57 PM PDT

By Melissa Chi, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 9 — Utusan Malaysia said today DAP's lifting of assemblyman M. Manoharan's suspension was to "save" Lim Guan Eng from facing disciplinary action over his recent Johor remarks.

The Umno-owned newspaper said that suspending the Kota Alam Shah representative "will invite pressure from a lot of people" especially Indians.

"Manoharan has only been freed to save him. The party had missed the opportunity to show that they are not racist. DAP's leadership can sense that the suspension will spark more dissatisfaction among Indian members and supporters.

"Guan Eng is again shielded. Other than being Kit Siang's son, and holding an important position, his skin is lighter than Manoharan's," Awang Selamat, a pseudonym used by the newspaper's editors, wrote in its weekend edition Mingguan Malaysia.

Awang said the DAP secretary general had committed a much more serious offence as compared to Manoharan who had called for the national flag to be changed.

"There are people who saw Guan Eng's actions as an attempt to sabotage Johor's economy and to ruin the country's image.

"Guan Eng's actions shocked Malaysians especially Johor residents. A lot of people were hurt including the Johor Sultan, and the police who have worked hard to reduce the crime rate in the state," he said in his column.

Although Lim had apologised on September 30, Awang said his method was "not gentlemanly" as the Bagan MP had blamed the media for playing up the issue.

READ MORE HERE.

Bersih: Police corporal ‘scapegoat’ in Tung Shin scandal

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:55 PM PDT

By Lisa J Ariffin, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 9 — Bersih 2.0 said today authorities have made a scapegoat of the policeman held solely responsible for firing tear gas into Tung Shin Hospital during the July 9 rally for free and fair elections.

"This is ridiculous. Everyone saw ... the whole world saw the video. The poor guy is the scapegoat.

"If you say just one, did they really do a proper investigation? How can they say it's one?" Bersih steering committee member Maria Chin Abdullah told The Malaysian Insider.

Kuala Lumpur police had said yesterday that the police corporal who breached standard operating procedure (SOP) during the rally would be disciplined.

"Just like the minister of health (Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai) who denied Tung Shin was attacked by police, this is a denial that more than one police officer was involved," Chin added.

In a report made public on Tuesday, the Health Ministry had determined that police acted in an unethical manner and breached SOP when dispersing demonstrators who had converged on the hospital to escape riot police.

The report prompted a statement from Home Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Mahmood Adam that the matter would be referred to the police disciplinary committee.

 

READ MORE HERE.

Iqraq

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 05:38 PM PDT

The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There are some who say that those who know nothing about a subject matter should not be talking about it. I can agree with that. But then it all depends on what you mean by 'know nothing'.

Maybe there are some who don't know how the Islamic Shariah laws should be applied or interpreted. This is because they are not judges or lawyers. But then, they could be historians and they know their history very well. And because of that, they know the HISTORY of the Shariah. Which means they are certainly qualified to talk about the Shariah from the historical aspect of those laws.

Therefore, to tell a historian to stop talking about the Shariah because he or she is not trained in Islamic laws is not quite correct. If this historian not only knows the history of the Shariah but is also lecturing about it in one of the universities, this makes him or her more than qualified to talk about it.

For Muslims and non-Muslims alike, I would like to recommend you to buy and read just three of the many books I have in my library. These books are:

ISLAM AND THE SECULAR STATE (NEGOTIATING THE FUTURE OF SHARI'A) by Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im (Harvard University Press)

 

THE MANY FACES OF POLITICAL ISLAM (RELIGION AND POLITICS IN THE MUSLIM WORLD) by Mohammed Ayoob  (National University of Singapore)

 

A HISTORY OF ISLAMIC LAW by N. J. Coulson (Edinburgh University Press)

 

These three books will suffice for now to be able to make you an 'expert' on the Shariah. I can recommend another dozen more books if you are still 'hungry' for more knowledge.

The Muslims believe that the first word ever revealed to Prophet Muhammad was IQRAQ (read). I am sure this was done for a reason. So READ, and understand what we are talking about. To scream and shout, "You know nothing about Islam. You are not learned. Go learn from an ustaz," is not good enough. Even those ustaz you are talking about do not read those three books I mentioned above.

 

 

Police, protesters clash at US capital museum

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 03:40 PM PDT

(Reuters) - Authorities shut down Washington's popular National Air and Space Museum yesterday afternoon after antiwar protesters tried to enter the building and clashed with guards, a museum spokeswoman said.

One person was arrested during the melee at the Smithsonian museum involving between 150 and 200 protesters and six guards, museum spokeswoman Isabel Lara said.

"There was a lot of shoving going on," Lara said, adding one of the guards was surrounded and used pepper spray before the demonstrators were moved outside. She said she was not aware of any injuries.

The shoving match broke out in a vestibule between two glass doors at the museum entrance after guards told the protesters they could not enter with signs, Lara said.

Protest organisers said the attempt to enter the museum on the National Mall was part of the Occupy D.C. antiwar demonstrations that began on Thursday on the 10th anniversary of the start of the Afghanistan war.

"Along with the Occupy Wall Street movement, it represents an upswell of people taking to the street around the country to demand social and economic justice as well as an end to the immoral wars in Iraq and Afghanistan," organisers said in an e-mail sent to Reuters.

"It is outrageous that the security guard of a major museum in America pepper sprayed Americans as they entered the museum. The drones housed in this museum and the pepper spraying of Americans at the door are clear evidence of repression in America," Retired Colonel Ann Wright said in the e-mail.

Drones are armed tactical unmanned planes used by the US government to track and attack insurgents overseas.

The museum, which draws 8 million visitors a year and is the most visited Smithsonian Institution museum, was shut down at 3:15pm (1915 GMT). Lara said it would reopen today.

NYC protesters may expand

Anti-Wall Street protests continued in New York City yesterday and in other US cities, although crowds outside New York have been much smaller.

"We're tired of other people controlling, or thinking they control, our lives and our livelihoods," said Kristin Thompson, a 22-year-old preschool teacher and one of 100 protesters in Mobile, Alabama.

In Santa Fe, New Mexico, about 250 protesters lined the streets outside a Bank of America branch, waving signs at passing vehicles.

Participants said they had been summoned via social network Internet sites, labor organisers, the liberal website MoveOn.org and members of the local Green Party.

"We are all in this together," said Ramona Beene, 45, who owns a cake company.

She said her two college-age children were "spending thousands of dollars and won't have jobs after they graduate."

In New York, hundreds of protesters marched from lower Manhattan to Washington Square Park in the Greenwich Village neighbourhood — the site of protests against the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 1970s — to discuss expanding their encampment to other sites.

Lucas Vasquez, a student leading the march, said protesters were looking at expanding into Washington Square and Battery Parks, but stressed, "We're not going to give up Liberty Plaza" — the protesters' name for Zuccotti Park near Wall Street, where about 250 have camped out around the clock.

"It's sometimes hard to move around there. We have a lot of people," he said.

 

GSC henti tayang filem Namewee Nasi Lemak 2.0

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 02:26 PM PDT

(TMI) - Golden Screen Cinemas (GSC), rangkaian pawagam terbesar negara ini telah memutuskan untuk menghentikan tayangan Nasi Lemak 2.0 arahan pembikin filem dan artis kontroversi Namewee.

Tidak dapat dipastikan sama ada ia ada kaitan dengan siri kontroversi sejak kebelakangan, tetapi GSC dipetik akhbar tempatan berkata keputusan itu diambil ekoran keputusan Astro menyiarkan menerusi saluran Astro First.

Laporan New Sunday Times hari ini berkata, filem yang telah mencatatkan kutipan lebih RM4 juta setakat ini dihentikan penayangan sejak Jumaat lalu.

Menurut laporan itu, GSC juga menyiarkan permohonan maaf menerusi laman sosial Facebook memaklumkan bahawa mereka yang sudah membeli tiket boleh mendapatkan balik duit masing-masing.

"Bukan amalan GSC untuk menyiarkan mana-mana filem yang disiarkan serentak di mana-mana saluran filem berbayar yang lain," kata mesej Facebook itu.

Seorang jurucakap dipetik akhbar itu berkata pihaknya menayangkan filem itu sejak lima minggu lalu.

Dalam satu kenyataan akhbar tiga minggu lalu, Namewee atau nama sebenarnya Wee Meng Chee bimbang Nasi Lemak 2.0 mungkin diharamkan ekoran demonstrasi membantah filem tersebut di Perak baru-baru ini.

Katanya, dia kesal dengan protes tersebut dan berharap pihak berkuasa tidak mengendahkan desakan supaya filemnya diharamkan.

"Film ini mendapat kelulusan sebelum penggambaraan dan satu lagi kelulusan sebelum tayangan. Saya berharap pihak berkuasa menghormati keputusan mereka sendiri serta usaha kerja saya," katanya.

Filem tersebut dilaporkan dikecam pihak-pihaknya yang mendakwa ia mempunyai pengaruh buruk kepada anak-anak muda.

Ketika mengadakan protes di luar sebuah panggung wayang di Ipoh, satu kumpulan yang menggelarkan diri mereka Pertubuhan Gagasan Rakyat Didahulukan Perak, menuntut kerajaan mempertimbangkan mengharamkan filem tersebut.

Menteri Dalam Negeri Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein sebelum ini berkata mereka yang tidak berpuas hati dengan filem ini boleh membuat aduan.

Menjawab soalan mengapa tidak mahu meneruskan tayangan meskipun mendapat sokongan besar, GSC berkata, pihaknya mahu mempertahankan hakikat bahawa institusi pawagam masih merupakan tempat terbaik bagi mana-mana tayangan filem.

Dalam pada itu, Pengarah Eksekutif Nasi Lemak 2.0 Fred Chong pula memberitahu beliau menerima keputusan GSC dan menghargai sokongan institusi pawagam.

"Kami gembira kerana menerima sokongan mereka lebih empat minggu meskipun kami tidak mendapat sokongan tayangan wajib daripada Finas," katanya lagi.

Sehubungan itu, Chong berkata dia berharap mereka yang kehilangan peluang menonton di pawagam boleh mengikutinya menerusi saluran Astro First.

GSC menjelaskan, Nasi Lemak 2.0 bukan merupakan filem pertama pihaknya menghentikan tayangan.

Filem Bini Biniku Gangster, yang menjana RM7 juta dalam empat hari pertama tayangan juga telah dihentikan selepas tiga minggu apabila Astro menawarkan tayangan.

Filem Nasi Lemak 2.0 tidak memperoleh status Wajib Tayang daripada Finas, yang mewajibkan operator pawagam menayangkan selama dua minggu.

Pelakon Nasi Lemak 2.0 termasuklah Adibah Noor, Datuk David Arumugam dari Alleycats, Karen Kong, Afdlin Shauki, Kenny & Chee, Reshmonu, Dennis Lau, Nur Fathia, Nadine Thomas, Pete Teo, Ho Yuhang, Dian Sharlin, Felixia Yap dan Namewee.

 

 

 

READ MORE HERE.


 

Malaysia asked for more information on nude squat case

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 02:03 PM PDT

(The Straits Time/Asia News Network)- Singapore's Foreign Affairs Ministry (MFA) has written to the Malaysian High Commission seeking details of an investigation into how two Singaporean women were treated while in detention in a Johor lock-up.

An MFA statement released on Friday said there was an understanding with the Malaysian authorities that they would let Singapore know the results of the investigations as soon as it was ready, but they had not received any to date.

Instead, findings of Malaysia's probe into the highly-publicised matter were announced in their parliament session earlier this week, when a Home Ministry statement cleared the officers involved in the June incident of any wrongdoing.

"Following media reports in Malaysia that the Malaysian authorities have provided a reply to a Parliamentary question on the same case, MFA has asked the Malaysian High Commission in Singapore to provide more information," the statement said.

The two Singaporean women were driving into Johor Baru for supper on June 9 when they went through an unmanned checkpoint lane and entered Malaysia without getting their passports stamped.

Realising what had happened, the pair did a U-turn and approached some Malaysian officers who questioned them and sent them to a detention centre in Pontian.

There, the women claimed they were made to strip and asked to do 10 squats each while pulling their ears – acts which have been roundly criticised on both sides of the Causeway as inhumane and humiliating.

But, on Wednesday, Malaysia's Home Ministry, in a written reply to a question by opposition Member of Parliament Fong Po Kuan, said the checks were done in a "good and orderly fashion".

According to online newspaper Malaysian Insider, the ministry said the inspection was carried out according to standard operating procedures, such as having the women examined by a female officer. — The Straits Times /Asia News Network

No joy for Sarawak

Posted: 08 Oct 2011 01:31 PM PDT

By Joseph Tawie, FMT

KUCHING:  Sarawak has not been given much attention by the Barisan Nasional-led government in the Budget 2012 although the state's rural areas are being touted as the coalition's 'fixed deposit',  claimed Sarawak DAP.

Said state DAP secretary Chong Chieng Jen: "There is nothing much in the budget, except for the mention of building some roads, supply of electricity and water to the rural areas.

"Even then we don't know the amount as we have to share with Sabah. Given 20% of the RM232 billion of the total expenditure is for development, how much can Sarawak get for its development?

"In this type of budget, Sarawak roads will remain substandard forever. The amount of money given to Sarawak for its development does not commensurate with its contribution to the national coffers."

Chong, who is the Bandar Kuching MP, was commenting on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's   Budget 2012 announcement on Friday.

"For the past 14 years, the nation has (accumulated) a total deficit amounting to more than RM436 billion.

"The next year's budget has lot of goodies. Where will money for all these come from? And I think the only way for the government to finance all these is to obtain loans.

"We expect to incur RM45 billion deficit, and if you add this, our deficit will easily come to RM500 billion.

"This will be more than 50% of GDP (Gross Domestic Product)," he said.

Unhealthy budget

Reflecting on Greece's experience, Chong said the country went bankrupt when its deficits reached 67% of its GDP.

"We are very near towards that direction… this budget is  a very unhealthy one.

"Eighty percent of the nation's budget is for administrative operations and emolument, while only 20% is for the development fund," he said.

Chong believes a balance budget should be one that allocates 60% for administrative operations and 40% for development.

He said development projects such as roads will help to stimulate the economy adding that the current imbalanced budget had been going on for the past few years due to the over-sized civil service.

"For this year, we see the emolument of 1.2 million civil servants, and the amount spent on this is more than the whole amount of development fund for the whole country.

"This is very inefficient use of money. That is really shocking," he added.

Deafening silence on anti-corruption

Chong welcomed the government's allocations of fund for Chinese and mission schools and RM500 for a poor family, RM100 for each school child  and RM200 each for university students, pointing out that the only good feeling is that something is better than nothing.

"But the government can't really solve the financial burden of the poor.  It does not address the poverty issue unlike our Alternative Budget.

 

READ MORE HERE.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved