Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Cocky BN needs to repent
- Replacing national flag: chasing after fantasy demons?
- Janji Demokrasi – the real Merdeka event
- Nefarious act of betrayal
- Doing battle over land deals
- Three questions for Najib
- Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale
- A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka?
- Time for DAP to be a good partner
- Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda
| Posted: 02 Sep 2012 05:11 PM PDT Before fingers are pointed at Pakatan for doing a bad job, it will do BN good to take a good look at itself and realise how how bad a track record it has. Jeswan Kaur, FMT Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the country's former longest-serving prime minister, wants the rakyat to vote for Barisan Nasional come the 13th general election. His reason is that the federal government under the Barisan Nasional was all ears and had changed many laws and policies to bring a better future for the people. Thanks but no thanks, Mahathir; had BN been listening, there would have been no reason for the "Bersih" saga to take place. If all was well at the polls, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections or Bersih, would not have taken to the streets, not one or twice but thrice. And did the BN government listen then? No! Why then must the rakyat vote BN back into power, if all BN does is to "monopolise" its existence and hoodwink the people into believing that it cares? Had BN been a good listener as Mahathir is desperately alluding, there would have been much peace and harmony among the people. In the over five decades that BN has held the nation's fort, much damage has been done, all because its leaders chose to give in to corruption and their never-ending hunger for more power. On the contrary, the opposition under the Pakatan Rakyat banner has only had a taste of "calling the shots" since 2008; has it in just four years done as much damage to the nation as BN has been doing for the past 55 years? For Mahathir to brag that only BN can determine the survival of the nation is implausible as the fate of the country does not lie in the hands of BN; likewise, Pakatan too should not claim it can do wonders for a nation whose people are slowly but surely being torn apart by racial slurs made by the very politicians who had once pledged to keep the nation united. Too many mistakes made Still, given time and experience, the opposition can deliver, provided it ties up all "loose ends" and all three parties under it – PKR, DAP and PAS – work in unison. Any attempt by Mahathir or the likes of him to conjure up a "prima facie" case in the favour of BN is not going to work. Too many deliberate mistakes have been made by BN time and again, a reflection of its disrespect for the very voters who ensured its survival over the years. Is BN willing to "repent", to take cognisance of all its wrongdoings and pledge never to take the rakyat for granted? Can Mahathir give the people the assurance that BN has turned over a new leaf? Clearly, the former premier is unable for the "sludge" covering BN is beyond cleansing; the repeated acts of corruption tell the people that BN has become "too big for its shoes", its arrogance shrouding all promises made to the rakyat. The instances are one too many. The controversial listing of the Felda Global Ventures Holdings is aimed at putting BN in the good books of the people; but really, why will the rakyat bother trusting the federal government when it knows, come what may, BN will never put an end to corruption, a scourge that is here to stay. BN had no qualms appointing Isa Abdul Samad, the former Negeri Sembilan menteri besar who was suspended from Umno for engaging in money politics, as the chairman of Felda. Is this what Mahathir means by "BN listening to the rakyat"? The day BN gets serious in wanting to "listen to the rakyat", it will make an end of corrupt politicians like Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud. Until then, it is pointless for Mahathir to beg for the rakyat's support in ensuring BN's victory in the coming general election. BN selfish Before fingers are pointed at Pakatan for doing a bad job since it came on board four years ago, it will do BN good to take a good look at itself and realise how how bad a track record it has. Post-May 13, 1969 racial riots, did BN learn its lesson and work at strengthening unity among the people? No; instead, the racial divide became wider to the extent that the non-Malays have been made to feel "out of place" in their own homeland. Was it not Mahathir who last year cautioned the non-Malays not to get carried away with the life enjoyed in this country, saying they owed it all to the Malays, the real "owners" of this nation? Did it ever bother Mahathir how the non-Malays and maybe a handful of Malays must have felt each time Umno at its general assembly promised to wage war against the non-Malays should they dare question Article 153 of the Federal Constitution which safeguards Malay rights and privileges? Is this how BN pays attention to the rakyat's woes?
|
| Replacing national flag: chasing after fantasy demons? Posted: 02 Sep 2012 01:47 PM PDT
Two apparently well-meaning youths displayed a flag that looked similar but different from the national flag as a token to commemorate unsung heroes of independence at an independence eve rally, and lo and behold, the entire top leadership of Umno jumped instantly into a frenzy of wild accusations against the opposition without any proof. By Kim Quek As tension continues to mount ahead of the imminent general election, almost the entire top heirarchy of the incumbent Barisan Nasional government appears to have gone bonkers. Two apparently well-meaning youths displayed a flag that looked similar but different from the national flag as a token to commemorate unsung heroes of independence at an independence eve rally, and lo and behold, the entire top leadership of Umno jumped instantly into a frenzy of wild accusations against the opposition without any proof. Prime Minister Najib Razak accused the opposition of wanting to replace the national flag, and warned of many more undesirable changes including the institution of royalty, should the opposition alliance come to power. Minister of International Trade and Industry Mustapa Mohamed warned of a plot to amend the constitution and to turn the current constitutional monarchy into a republic. Minister of Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Noh Omar said that in wanting to replace the national flag, the opposition has lost direction, and shown signs of power crazy even before they are in power. Minister of Home Affairs Hishamuddin Hussein said he would act decisively against the "perpetrators of the provocative act", adding that the police have started investigation, and the attorney general will prosecute upon obtaining sufficient evidence. Many other Umno ministers also launched similar attacks against the opposition simultaneously, including Rural and Regional Development Minister Shafie Apdal and Youth and Sports Minister Shabery Cheek. Meanwhile, the police announced in its face book page that it was launching a man-hunt on the offenders who "tried to change the national flag", saying that such act "violates the federal constitution and the democratic process", which is a breach of the Sedition Act. ACCUSATION DEBUNKED Amidst this furor, two youths promptly appeared on the scene to debunk the story of changing flag. Blogger Serigala Selatan, a student, claimed in his blog posting that he and a friend Zairi Shafai were the duo who showed the flag in question, known as Sang Saka Malaya. It was a flag used by pre-independence nationalists during their struggle to gain independence for then Malaya. As the story of their struggles has been erased from the official history, they wanted to remind the country of the existence of these forgotten heroes by displaying the Sang Saka Malaya on this commemorative occasion. Serigala said they have not the slightest intention to replace the national flag (known as Jalur Gemilang) with Sang Saka Malaya, from which the Jalur Gemilang has evolved. Meanwhile, top leaders of Pakatan Rakyat instantly and flatly denied that they ever conceived the idea of changing the national flag. HILARIOUS BUT SERIOUS MISCONDUCT Judging from the ferocity and intensity with which so many Umno ministers jumpted to the attacks, one would have imagined that the opposition must have been caught red handed in the act of committing the highest treason against the country, but alas, the truth turns out to be simply that these senior Umno leaders have been acting like a bunch of hyper-imaginative kids chasing after some fantasy demons, as there is neither a shred of evidence nor any credibility whatsoever to their accusations. As DAP leader Lim Kit Siang succinctly put it, "the change of national flag is never a Pakatan Rakyat agenda and has never been discussed or raised in any Pakatan meeting". In fact, the entire episode is so bizarre and funny that it would have made a hilarious Hollywood comedy, if not for the serious implications it carries for the nation. Here we are not talking about some naughty politicians politicking, but the entire top hierarchy of the Malaysian government making unfounded accusations that are grave and obviously far-fetched. Such weird conduct by the ruling clique suggests that they are either dim-witted or dangerously deceitful, or perhaps both. Whatever case it is, it means our country is in terribly bad hands. Needless to say, this is another serious setback for BN along its bumbling road to defend a political power that looks more precarious by the day.
|
| Janji Demokrasi – the real Merdeka event Posted: 02 Sep 2012 09:07 AM PDT
The comparison of the participants at the Janji Demokrasi gathering and those at Himpunan Merdeka is striking. The former were not promised any incentives. The only incentive for them was expressing their disaffection for the government, sending the ruling party the message that it cannot hijack Merdeka for its own selfish purpose: Merdeka belongs to the people, not to BN. Kee Thuan Chye
The occasion could not have been better chosen or timed: The eve of the country's 55th Merdeka anniversary, two hours before countdown. The venue could not have been more appropriate: Dataran Merdeka, where the countdown to Merdeka is held every year to commemorate the very first countdown to independence in 1957. The theme could not have been more telling: 'Janji Demokrasi', a response to the government's Merdeka theme, 'Janji Ditepati'. Sasterawan Negara (National Laureate) A Samad Said (centre) to read his impassioned poem with its powerful ending: Kita laungkan jerit senyaringnya: "Janji Demokrasi!" (We cry with all our hearts: "The promise of democracy!" Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein predicted few people would turn up. But he was wrong. They came by the thousands – some counted tens of thousands – dressed in yellow, as requested by the organisers.
A demonstration like this would have come in the past from the opposition, but the amazing thing about this one is that it came from the rakyat. The rakyat came to Dataran Merdeka – people of all races, dressed in yellow, in fraternity, united in a common cause. When this comes from the rakyat, not opposition politicians, the ruling party must needs tremble. The rakyat even defied the police ban on the gathering. Hours before the event, the police tried to frighten people away by declaring the gathering illegal. But the people didn't care. Their disregard was a clear sign that the system is falling apart. When the people don't respect the law enforcers as well as the policy-makers, the end for the latter has to be near.
Of those who attended the Bukit Jalil event, 'Himpunan Merdeka', an insider tells me, "at least 50 percent were instructed to attend. We were given RM60 for meal expenses, free travel on the LRT. Those who brought their family got an additional RM50. Free rides on chartered buses were provided." About 100,000 people reportedly showed up, but there must have been many who were lured by the live performances of famous local artistes, the fireworks display and the lucky draw. The prizes included a Proton Prevé, a Chevrolet Cruze, air tickets to London and Sydney, motorcycles, bicycles, etc. The comparison of the participants at the Janji Demokrasi gathering and those at Himpunan Merdeka is striking. The former were not promised any incentives. The only incentive for them was expressing their disaffection for the government, sending the ruling party the message that it cannot hijack Merdeka for its own selfish purpose: Merdeka belongs to the people, not to BN. That they managed to do so, in defiance of the police, on such a significant national occasion must be devastating for the government. Going by this, if BN were to retain Putrajaya at the next general election, it will not have an easy time governing for another five years. It will likely face consistent resistance from a recalcitrant rakyat. Would it be facetious then to suggest that it capitulate now? Indeed, some people have already been calling this year's Merdeka celebrations "Umno-BN's farewell bash". However, BN's leaders continue to strive to maintain that they are right.
The reasoning sounds weird and warped. Mainly because the logic of putting the onus on the people to ensure peace and stability is strained and contrived. Usually, that duty is assigned to the government. But what is more telling is Najib's evasion of the all-important point – that 'Janji Ditepati' is also BN's campaign slogan for the upcoming general election. That is the point of contention that he should have addressed. In his speech at Himpunan Merdeka, Najib responded to the Janji Demokrasi gathering by saying that it involved only the minority whereas the gathering at Bukit Jalil involved the majority. First, many people were compelled to attend Himpunan Merdeka – among them civil servants and staff of some statutory bodies.
Third, if there had been no banning of the Janji Demokrasi gathering and the threat of possible arrest, many more people might have gone for it. Plus, many who did not show up nonetheless support it in their hearts. On social media that night, many said they wished they had gone, and many more cheered the success of the turnout. Fourth, those who did come for the Janji Demokrasi gathering were not attracted by incentives, like payments, free transport and lucky draws. Their reason for coming was sincere and genuine. Sore losers Not only that, he also demonised the opposition by accusing them of trying to bring chaos to the nation. Merdeka Day is supposed to be a day of national harmony and reconciliation. Desperate though Najib may be to win the next general election, he should still have shown respect for the occasion. Instead, he hijacked the event and used it as his election platform. How then can it not be said that the Janji Demokrasi gathering was totally justified? By the way, the gathering was peaceful, and Dang Wangi district police chief ACP Zainuddin Ahmad admitted that no untoward incidents were reported. Yet even so, he added, "We'll investigate later (for any violations)." What's there to investigate if there were no untoward incidents? He also said they would investigate Samad for reading a poem. Since when has reading a poem become an offence? Don't the police have more important things to do – like going after criminals instead? It's time the police realised that people power is on the rise and adjusted to the new paradigm – or they will look stupid playing their outdated games. It does not do them well to take their cue from their boss at the Home Ministry, Hishammuddin Hussein, who in commending them for maintaining security at the Janji Demokrasi gathering said: "We see that the event, which was aimed at creating chaos, failed …" His statement was outright unfair – and downright stupid. He also sounded like a sore loser. But then, if you have seen how gamblers behave when their chips are down, you will understand why he said it. KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of the bestselling book 'No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians', available at major bookstores. |
| Posted: 01 Sep 2012 03:38 PM PDT
Party-hopping is a potent threat to parliamentary democracy and it is hoped that politicians will come to grips with this issue in a bipartisan manner. Roger Tan, The Star THE great Winston Churchill (1874-1965) was known for party-hopping. In 1904, he changed parties from the Conservative Party to the Liberal Party, and was made Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in 1905. He officially returned to the Tories in 1925 after he failed in two successive attempts to win a seat as an independent. On record, his reasons for defecting to the Liberals were the Conservatives' reluctance to undertake social reform and their protectionist policy of favouring trade with the British Empire. But on the other hand, the Liberals were then an up-and-coming party, and his calculated move obviously did catapult him to high office at the rather young age of 31. Of course, admirers and detractors of Churchill would respectively describe his act as one of political conscience and opportunism. But that is immaterial as until today, the British parliamentary system still does not proscribe party-hopping which also has different nomenclatures such as party-crossing, party-switching, party-leaping, floor-crossing and waka-jumping. Like any democracy, regardless of it being an established or an incipient one, Malaysia too faces this perennial problem of party-hopping and elected representatives resigning from their political parties to become an independent. Hence, we are not short of inveterate party-hoppers. One of them is Sabah State Reform Party (Star) chairman Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan. Prior to this, he had joined Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), the Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah (PBRS), Angkatan Keadilan Rakyat (now defunct Akar), United Pasokmomogun Kadazandusun Organisation (Upko) and Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR). It is, therefore, not surprising for such politicians to be given various undignified names such as political frogs, traitors, lepers and chameleons. But we not only do not have any anti-defection law, but the Federal Constitution guarantees the freedom of association – that is the right to join or not to join an association or dissociate from it. The justification for this is best summed up by the eminent Indian jurist, Nanabhoy Palkhivala, in his book, Our Constitution Defaced and Defiled: "No greater insult can be imagined to members of Parliament and the state legislatures than to tell them that once they become members of a political party, apart from any question of the party constitution and any disciplinary action the party may choose to take, the Constitution of India itself expects them to have no right for themselves, but they must become soulless and conscienceless entities who would be driven by their political party in whichever direction the party chooses to push them." However, today the Indian Constitution not only disqualifies an elected representative if he resigns from his political party but also if he votes or abstains from voting contrary to any direction issued by his political party without its prior permission or without having been condoned by his political party within 15 days after the date of voting or abstention. In fact, there are about 40 other countries which have various anti-defection laws. Our neighbour Singapore has a provision in Article 46 of her Constitution which disqualifies a member of parliament if he ceases to be a member of or is expelled or resigns from his political party. Hence, a by-election was held on May 26 this year when Hougang Member of Parliament Yaw Shin Leong was expelled by the Workers' Party on Feb 15 for alleged extramarital affairs. In Malaysia, freedom of association is enshrined in Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution, but Article 10(2)(c) and (3) allow Parliament to impose such restrictions as it deems necessary in the interest of security, public order, morality, labour or education. In the 1992 case of Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan v Nordin Salleh, the Supreme Court (now Federal Court) ruled that an amendment to the Kelantan state constitution prohibiting party-hopping was inconsistent with Article 10(1)(c). The apex court declared that such a law was invalid because the restriction imposed by the Kelantan Constitution could not be a restriction imposed under Article 10(2)(c) and (3) of Article 10 as it was a law passed by a state legislature and not the Federal Parliament. In the words of the then Lord President, Tun Abdul Hamid Omar: "It is, in our view, inconceivable that a member of the legislature can be penalised by any ordinary legislation for exercising a fundamental right which the Constitution expressly confers upon him subject to such restrictions as only Parliament may impose and that too on specified grounds, and on no other grounds." It follows that any anti-hopping law if passed by the Penang state legislature will be inconsistent with Article 10 since our apex court has already declared that only Federal Parliament can impose any restriction on freedom of association and dissociation such as on the ground that party-hopping is morally reprehensible. And this cannot be done by way of an amendment to a state constitution or an ordinary legislation passed by a simple majority in Federal Parliament. In other words, for any anti-hopping law to be intra vires the Constitution, amendments must first be made by Federal Parliament to Article 10 or Article 48(6) (which disqualifies a person who has resigned from the Dewan Rakyat membership from running again in a general election for a period of five years from the date of his resignation) and section 6(1) of Part I of the Eighth Schedule to the Federal Constitution. In this sense, one would have expected the Penang state government to be more respectful of the Federal Constitution when Article 4 declares that the Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with it shall be void. To pass a law knowing that it is invalid but with the hope that someone will challenge its validity at the Federal Court is indeed an example of bad governance and it says a lot about the government's lack of respect for the rule of law and constitutional supremacy. That said, personally I would support an anti-hopping law. Having seen the amount of politicking and instability since 2008 caused by those who have defected or become independents, including the Sept 16 fiasco, I believe such a law will provide stability especially if the next election is going to be the most keenly contested one in our nation's history. In fact, hitherto none of the defectors is near the stature of Churchill and neither has any one of them impressed me to be doing out of their own conscience other than perhaps for their own personal aggrandisement. It is also rumoured that some have turned into multi-millionaires overnight. Be that as it may, party-hopping is a potent threat to parliamentary democracy. It is a nefarious act of betrayal especially when it can be employed as an extra parliamentary means to topple a democratically-elected government. In fact, this issue is many times more crucial than those advanced by Bersih! Therefore, by prohibiting our elected representatives from switching their political allegiance, it will ensure that the sacrosanct will of the people expressed through the ballot box is respected. If they defect, the inevitable consequence must be that they give back their seat or seek a fresh mandate. It is hoped that politicians will come to grips with this issue in a bipartisan manner as it will not bode well for the nation if due to this we are plunged into political chaos or the country comes to a standstill after an election. Currently, all political parties are in one way or another hypocritically guilty of condoning and enticing party-hopping. One can only hope that they will remember and remember it well that what goes around will come around to haunt them. The writer is a senior lawyer.
|
| Posted: 01 Sep 2012 11:27 AM PDT  Cheap sale: Oh (in the foreground) showing the various public properties that he claimed the Lim administration sold off to private developers and individuals. Barisan Nasional politicians have been on the warpath over the way the Penang state government has been selling off land to private developers. Joceline Tan PENANG'S famous Esplanade has been quite a political hotspot ever since the Speaker's Square was located there. It is the Pakatan Rakyat government's gesture towards democracy and free speech in the state. But things got a little too hot last weekend when a blue truck drove up to the spot and the occupants on board launched an instant ceramah criticising the state for selling off land to private developers. It was the Barisan Nasional's mobile war truck, a refurbished mini lorry that opens up into a small ceramah stage, equipped with sound system and projection screen. The mobile war truck idea came about after Barisan was denied the use of public community halls and fields for ceramah purposes by the Pakatan government. It immediately drew a small crowd of mostly curious onlookers. But Speaker's Square is said to be patrolled by loyal DAP supporters, who hang around the place, ready to heckle speakers who criticise their party. That was more or less what happened last Sunday. Jeers and boos erupted from several people when state Barisan Youth chief Oh Tong Keong, who is a superb Hokkien speaker, began his "Penang For Sale" talk. "We know you were angry and decided to vote for them. But we must vote for a government that works hard, creates jobs, builds affordable houses, not a government that sells off the people's land. Penang people like to shop during cheap sales, but Penang land is not for cheap sale. One day, Lim Guan Eng may even decide to sell off Komtar," said Oh who is also Penang Gerakan Youth chief. Oh and his Gerakan colleagues have been a thorn in the side of the Pakatan government over the sale of public land. The most controversial transaction thus far has been Taman Manggis, a piece of land in the heart of George Town that the Barisan administration allocated for housing for the poor and which the Pakatan government has reportedly sold to a company to build a hotel and private medical centre.  Dr Thor: 'DAP trying to sell Penang's land, sea and sky.' Oh said it was "taking from the poor to give to the rich" and named Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng "land broker of the year". Oh's team also asked about a certain "Miss P" who owns the bungalow rented out to Lim and who apparently has links to the hotel and medical centre project. Lim retaliated by slamming Oh as "brainless, childish, immoral, dirty and shameless" while also accusing him of dragging the owner of his rented residence into politics. But strangely enough, he did not deny the alleged connection of "Miss P" to the project. The string of names shot Oh to some degree of fame and as he stood on top of the truck last weekend, he held up the Chinese language newspaper of the report. "It's okay, he can scold me, I don't mind. It's also okay that Guan Eng couldn't build any low-cost houses. But it is not okay for him to take land from poor people to give to rich people," he said, as some people clapped while the DAP supporters booed. By then, one of the DAP guardians in the audience was using a loud hailer to shout down Oh. It was Malaysian-style democracy at work; people are all free speech but they only like it when the speaker is saying things that they want to hear. Incidentally, there was a "war casualty"; the man with the loud hailer was so worked up over the war truck ceramah, he suffered chest pains and had to be hospitalised. However, he had several VIP visitors the next day in the form of Lim, state exco member Phee Boon Poh and assemblyman Ng Wei Aik and there were bouquets of flowers around his bed. Ironic statement But the funniest part of the Barisan war truck incident was that Lim condemned it as an illegal assembly and threatened to use the illegal assembly law against them. This was coming from the man whose party used to condemn the illegal assembly legislation. "If they do it again, I will inform the police and MPPP (Penang Island City Council) to take action," Lim said.  Jong: 'Penang people want sustainable development.' There has been too much emphasis on glamour projects and too little on rakyat-type of projects. It was only after the Taman Manggis case exploded that the state government quickly said they would allocate a site for low-cost housing. Among all the DAP YBs, only Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi has spoken out and made a stand on housing for the poor. After the 2008 victory, DAP strategists and advisers had the impression that Penangites were starved for development. The party's developer friends had complained about Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon's cautious approach on development and they thought the way into the hearts of Penangites would be through more development Lim announced a barrage of mega projects which he thought would impress Penang folk but proposals like the undersea tunnel and super-highways have backfired. The protests against unchecked hillslope projects also came as a shock to his government. Mega projects bring a lot of side effects and should not be rushed through without proper studies and planning. It is quite ironic that while people complained that Dr Koh did not bring more development, the complaint now is that Lim is too pro-development. "People do not mind development but it also means more people and cars. Penangites want assurances about traffic and the environment. They want sustainable development," said Datuk Richard Jong, the new deputy president of the Penang Chinese Chamber of Commerce. The Barisan side can understand why Lim is into mega projects he wants to build his legacy and leave a visible mark. But they are puzzled why Lim is selling off plots of land belonging to the state and MPPP from the sale of the 41ha Bayan Mutiara land to smaller lots in the city. Lim could have saved himself a lot of trouble by being more upfront about the land sales. It is possible some of these smaller properties are sitting there not generating any income. Selling them would add to the state's coffers and provide revenue to fund future projects. Instead, he has claimed that he is doing it to "save money for the people". Questionable transactions When the opposition queried him about the land sales, Lim demanded that they show proof of what they are saying which is ridiculous because the onus is on Lim and his team, as public servants, to explain and defend their decisions. All this has paved the way for his opponents to conclude that the state's Freedom of Information Act and its CAT policy to promote competency, accountability and transparency are just for show.  Ooi: The only DAP man who fought for low-cost housing Basically, Lim's critics think it is wrong to sell off public land without a good reason. Land is a scarce commodity especially on the island and they think that it should be developed via joint-venture so that the property remains in public hands. Moreover, they claimed that some of these transactions were below market value. Gerakan publicity chief Dr Thor Teong Ghee has been very critical of the Bayan Mutiara deal for several reasons. He said the land, which the previous government had intended for the new state government complex, was sold at below market value. Secondly, it was sold to a developer whom he claimed did not have a sound track record. There has been no clear explanation about how the land is to be developed and Dr Thor's fear is that instead of developing it, the new owner may break it in smaller parcels and resell at a hefty profit. "Just imagine, it would be like Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu earmarking a huge tract of land to develop as the Free Trade Zone and selling it to one company to do as he likes," he said. Those on the Barisan side know what they are doing may not necessarily change people's mind about the DAP but they say Lim has got away with too many baseless accusations. They are telling him not to simply blame or accuse the previous government. They say they are not going to take it lying down; they are fighting back. For instance, when Lim wanted to appoint Datuk Patahiyah Ismail as MPPP president in 2009, it was pointed out that the Local Government Act 1976 states that the president has to also be a councillor but the 24 councillor posts were already filled. When Penang Gerakan chairman Datuk Dr Teng Hock Nan, a former MPPP president, questioned the legality of Patahiyah's appointment, Lim accused Dr Teng of being anti-woman and slammed him as "chou nan ren (bad man)". Dr Teng had made a valid observation but Lim was then riding so high that he could say and do what he liked. The hate and blame game was quite entertaining for some people in the first few years but after four years, even DAP people are growing uncomfortable about it. State exco member Chow Kon Yeow has told reporters that it is time to act like the government of the day and take responsibility. Dr Koh's administration was not perfect, it had weaknesses and mistakes but it was certainly not as terrible as Lim has painted it out to be. Dr Koh was a real Penang-born gentleman, he did not shout at journalists or bar them from his press conferences. He did not simply call people liars and racists just because they questioned what he did. He did not blame people when things went wrong nor did he claim credit for what he did not do and he has made a graceful exit. Journalists are beginning to appreciate Dr Koh for his finer points just as they are starting to see the real Lim. Lim seems to have his back against the wall over the land sales especially on the Taman Manggis land case. It looks real bad for a government to sell land meant for the poor to build a hotel and private hospital. It is an emotive issue and it has refused to go away simply because the answers from the state have not been convincing at all. Last week, when Lim was asked about it for the umpteenth time, he exploded and said it was all lies created by Teng Chang Yeow (Penang Barisan chief) and that Teng would sell off the whole of Penang if he became Chief Minister. Two days later, Dr Thor returned fire he said that Lim had sold the land, the sea and even the sky of Penang. The land referred to the land sales, the sea referred to Lim's plans for an undersea tunnel and the sky referred to the increased building density that some developers are enjoying. It is game on. There will be no elegant silence on both sides.
|
| Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:54 PM PDT The PM is known to avoid answering difficult questions. Selena Tay, FMT There are three questions pertaining to the 13th general election which Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak must answer immediately. These three questions are: 1. Will the movie 'Tanda Putera' be shown in the cinemas while the election campaign is going on? 2. Will the voter rolls be cleaned up before the election is held? 3. If Pakatan Rakyat were to win the 13th GE, will PM Najib hand over power graciously in a smooth transition of power? "If the PM fails to answer the above three questions immediately, then his credibility and sincerity as a leader who strives for the good of the nation is seriously in doubt," opined PAS strategist and Kuala Selangor MP, Dzulkefly Ahmad. The PM is known to avoid answering difficult questions. No one knows the reason why. The PM must give a reasonable and acceptable answer as to why 'Tanda Putera' is being screened during the election campaign period if it is to be screened during that particular period in question and he must state clearly the purpose of doing so. Question No 2 in regards to the voter rolls has been asked many times. Still, the PM has turned a deaf ear to this said question. Is this question so very difficult to answer? If the voter rolls have been cleaned up, then just say so. If not, then please state the reason why and when action will be taken to clean them up. There is no reason not to answer this question unless one has something to hide. Not answering the said question does indeed give rise to the suspicion that there is something highly irregular with the voter rolls. "Winning the general election is one thing but by not answering the question pertaining to the voter rolls, then there will be a suspicion that the victory was achieved via dubious methods," remarked Dzulkefly. Then what can the citizens do? Call for international observers to be on duty before and during the polls is one. And if that is disallowed, then it is highly suspicious. We should also play an active role by volunteering to keep our eyes and ears open to monitor the electoral process by joining electoral watchdog groups. A smile and a wave The PM is only concerned with sprucing up his image as a leader. A smile here and a wave there is all that matters instead of really providing answers to tough questions especially in regards to the voter rolls. Each time this issue is raised, BN leaders will inevitably reply that the voter rolls are clean by saying "If not, then how can the opposition win five states in the previous general election?" The BN leaders always give that same reply. Well, if the voter rolls are clean, the margin of BN's victory would have been much narrower. BN can still win of course and this is due to the tricky delineation of electoral boundaries. Therefore there are many questionable goings-on in the electoral process, not only in regards to phantom voters but also in regards to the constituency mapping. As for Question No 3, it has been asked before earlier this year. Till today the PM has avoided answering this particular said question. Why? This is a very simple question. Just answer 'yes' or 'no'. The PM's reluctance to answer the question pertaining to the smooth transition of power is most telling. Is this an ominous sign? As we have just celebrated the 55th year of Independence, it is time to look forward to meeting the challenges facing the nation. With the advent of instant technology, no one can easily hide their misdeeds. Thus we as citizens must demand that our leaders be forthright and honest. Double-talk and dodgy answers are unacceptable. No two-ways about it. PM Najib owes the citizens, including the Pakatan lawmakers frank and straightforward answers. He must put aside partisan politics and be fair to all. He has to strive to improve in all areas of administration as has often been proclaimed in the much-touted GTP (Government Transformation Programme) and the various NKRAs (National Key Result Areas).
|
| Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:16 PM PDT Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, 'Janji DiTepati' is an affront to the rakyat. Mariam Mokhtar, FMT The nation is 55 years old today. To read some newspapers you'd think that it was Barisan Nasional, and not the people, which achieved independence from Britain. To learn that the Merdeka Day celebrations at the Bukit Jalil Stadium is "by invitation only", is appalling. Who decreed that the rakyat had to be members of the "select" BN club to celebrate Merdeka? If Merdeka is exclusively BN, then the slogan "1Malaysia" is rendered meaningless. As with many things in Umno, the taxpayers are made to pay for the prizes and the ceremony, but they are denied the opportunity to win any of the prizes or even attend the event. If the Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and his Information, Communications and Culture Minister, Rais Yatim, cannot even organise a Merdeka event that is inclusive of all Malaysians, then they are not fit to run the country after the 13th general election. You'd be forgiven for thinking that it was not Merdeka we were celebrating but Hari BN. Rais' foray into composing the Merdeka song makes you wonder: which is he worse at – songwriting or being a Cabinet minister? The biggest disappointment is Najib. He is weighted by personal and political baggage. Even if he listened and learnt (from his and others' mistakes), he cannot be rescued politically. He was not elected into office and is now vilified by the man who put him there, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, "Janji Di Tepati" is an affront to the rakyat. He is insecure and is desperate to win the affection of the rakyat. His reputation locally and abroad is tarnished. At the beginning of the week, it was reported that The Guardian had sacked its journalist, Joshua Trevino, for conflict of interest and for bringing the media industry into disrepute. Trevino had belonged to FBC Media, a public relations company, which had been paid by Najib to bathe Malaysia in a good light, to whitewash the misdeeds of its government, and to criticise Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. Using taxpayers' money, Najib paid overseas PR companies such as Apco, FBC and CNBC millions of ringgit to promote him and his administration. Why does Najib need to spruce up his image? Why waste taxpayers' money when he only needs to act responsibly at home? If he is not sure of his duties, they are to lead, to listen and to learn. Najib holds on to the illusion of power, but the real power is in the hands of a man, who is sitting in The Mines Resort, just outside Kuala Lumpur. Najib thought he could win the hearts of the overseas Malaysians with the promise of enfranchisement, but his promises have remained an illusion. The Home Ministry, the police and Pemandu CEO Idris Jala, all gave us the illusion that crime was falling, but the truth is people are being raped, mugged, killed, abducted and robbed, on a daily basis. The illusion that Najib presents to overseas leaders is that he is a champion of the "moderates", but Malaysians beg to differ. At home, race and religion are used to divide the nation. Thus, the illusion of racial and religious harmony is just that. An illusion. Periodically, Malays are scared into thinking that Muslims are covertly being converted to Christianity, en masse. The controversial raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) sparked off the formation of Himpunan Sejuta Melayu to defend Islam. Himpunan reported that it had the support of four million Muslims and 200 NGOs. Last October, a mere 5,000 people turned up for the rally, at the 100,000-capacity Shah Alam stadium. Another illusion was broken. Last May, the government held a "Million Youths Rally 2012" in Putrajaya, an event which some alleged was the government's attempt to try and rival the success of the Bersih 3.0 rally. The illusion of mass support by the youth was crushed with allegations of money and free food for those who attended. To make matters worse, several people were injured when a drag race car tore into the crowds. The illusion that the government looks after its youth was shattered when the Youth and Sports Minister Ahmad Shabery Cheek asked that the event not be politicised. Both he and the organisers refused to be held responsible for the lack of safety at the event. The 11th National Cooperative Day Expo 2012 held in mid-July at the National Stadium was another flop. Many seats were unoccupied. Old-age pensioners who had been bused in to fill the seats started to disperse as Najib started to speak. Bored schoolchildren blew their vuvuzelas and were reprimanded by Najib for drowning him out. The illusion that the prime minister draws crowds wherever he goes is false. It is also alleged that several government servants were transferred because of the dismal attendance.
|
| A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka? Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:50 PM PDT
Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian? This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant? Dina Zaman, The Malaysian Insider Seeing a headline shouting "Putrajaya offers cash rewards to N-Day event participation" does not encourage patriotism. It does not help that this year, just like the past few years, the atmosphere is muted. Very few Malaysians are in the mood to celebrate Malaysia's 55th year of Independence, and that is a truly sorry state for the country to be. There are many factors related to this. A declining economy, rising costs of living, gutter politics, crime, and there is also a general air of hopelessness among Malaysians when asked if they were looking forward to August 31, 2012. If one is to believe the noise on social media, and in forums, it would seem that Malaysians hate their country. There seems to be nothing positive about the country, and every effort the government puts, is met with ridicule. What does the average Malaysian think about this year's Merdeka celebrations? CS Tan of Terengganu finds that this year theme is a joke. "I 'created' a few phases to my Merdeka celebration. From primary to secondary school Merdeka was about how we managed to be independent, govern our country on our own terms, instead of being under British rule, and of course the colourful floats we saw on television. Tertiary – it's about holidays. Young working life – it's about holidays plus those outrageous uniforms from TNB and Telekom and other Malaysian companies we had to wear. Middle age phase – Merdeka is about able to think of myself after years of believing that the government can't do wrong. This year – it's about Merdeka from crime in Malaysia. Not optimistic huh?" The 1Malaysia Merdeka logo provoked such outcry and ridicule, one can only feel sorry for the government. "I'm sure that our Government had the best of intentions when they commissioned the design …" a rather diplomatic professional who did not want to be named said. Oso-San Anna disagrees. A Communications professional, she has worked in advertising agencies and in-house communications departments. She understands design and branding – she lives and breathes them. "Firstly, for something as important as Merdeka, the Government should leave it to the pros. I mean real pros (and not some crony's son) who has a solid understanding of the use of symbol and colour and collective expression of national pride." "Secondly, branding is powerful when built and layered over time with consistency and commitment." "Thirdly, where are the brand values? Both from the standpoint of the creator and the people it's meant for? Is there buy-in from the Rakyat? I feel all 3 are missing in the 1Malaysia logo that was designed. We are 55 years old as a Nation. Sure it's national pride but the meaning of real patriotism is already lost since it's seldom practiced in soul & spirit," she said. Angelia Ong, who works in animation is saddened by recent celebrations. The idea of Merdeka has somehow lost its spirit, she says. "It used to be more alive and less about polishing the achievements of a particular political coalition. It used to come across as more inclusive and meaningful. The phrase "1Malaysia" has taken over so much, my youngest had one time thought our country was called 1Malaysia, rather than Malaysia. From a branding point of view, I guess they have succeeded in ensuring that it's everywhere and anywhere, to the point of oversaturation." From a Malaysian's point of view (on what she thought of the logo), "it was just a major facepalm moment." On Facebook, one lone friend is spotted asking on his status update, "Where can I get a Malaysian flag? I want to hang it from my balcony." Very few of his friends responded to the query. No Money, No Merdeka Honey Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian? This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant? Tania Leong, who runs a new age shop, is not confident of our economy. "Everyone I know who owns a business, has reported a decrease in revenue. Even my customers share a same complaint of their businesses, be it property, legal (clients unable to pay), travel agency, health spas, dvd shops, children's play facilities, restaurants etc. Sungai Wang Plaza in the city has always been golden hot property (probably one of the top 5 most expensive per sq.ft.), and even that is suffering." "What I have observed is that this country is lacking qualified personnel in many areas of work from a sale assistant to corporate positions, a low standard of education system, many government workers are slow, inefficient and clueless, there is no minimum wage, corruption appears to be the norm in our judicial, police & government departments, religion has been made into law, sex education in schools are non-existent or minimal and so we have children bearing children. Crime rates seemed to have soared the last couple of years." "If leaving the country was an option for me, I would leave in a heartbeat." Hani B works in retail and has first-hand experiences with customer spending. Her customers range from the wealthy Middle Easterners to young college students, and understands their buying habits. "I used to be confident that our economy can weather most adversities, now I get totally scared when reading that our national debt amounted to 257 billion in 2011 … yikes!! When I google about our economy, the results go on and on about how much it's growing bla bla bla but retail wise, I just don't see it and my salary certainly doesn't reflect it." Like Tania, she notes that skilled workers are lacking. "I read that our country is among the top 20 nations to be labelled as losers of capital flight ... that is RM893 billion(!) siphoned out between 1970 and 2010, so why should we stay back and help with the improvement of wealth to the 1 per cent? Then again, what do I know, I'm just a shopgirl." At the many open houses around the capital, the Malaysians asked, professed to forgetting that Merdeka was around the corner. This year is bad, they said, and their open houses reflect that. Open houses are celebrated on a smaller scale now.
|
| Time for DAP to be a good partner Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:42 PM PDT The Chinese-based party should not rock the Pakatan boat right now by harping on non-issues and should instead work towards winning the polls. CT Ali, FMT The 13th general election is there for Pakatan Rakyat to lose. And lose it they will if DAP does not get its act together. I never thought I would say that. All this time I have watched DAP grow from strength to strength. Consolidating its considerable presence in Sabah and Sarawak while making inroads into the Peninsula in places where even Umno thinks Pakatan would not dare venture into or could hope to field a candidate against the Barisan Nasional and have a chance to win. All this while, the DAP has made concerted efforts to take in Malays to boost its claims to be a party for all Malaysians. Its commitment on taking over the government in concert with PAS and PKR seems to be the order of the day. And yet as the 13th general election nears, we see the real DAP is starting to unravel… to fray at its edges. The memory of the controversial exit of its vice-chairman, Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, has returned to haunt the party because now, through Tunku Aziz, we are privy to what has been said of Anwar Ibrahim by DAP's first-tiered leadership. And what they say of Anwar is not flattering to DAP and to Anwar himself. Now, is DAP making use of Tunku Aziz to rein in Anwar after his acquittal of Sodomy II? Or is Tunku Aziz making use of DAP to continue his public spat with Anwar over his insistence that the April 28 Bersih rally should not have proceeded at Dataran Merdeka? You tell me. Either way, it bodes ill for the Pakatan coalition. Hudud a non-issue The DAP also insists on mischievously harping on hudud – a non-issue as both BN and Pakatan are on record as having said that they will not and cannot implement. So why talk about something that is not going to be implemented? Another non-issue is party hopping. It is a non-issue because anybody with an ounce of grey matter in his or her brain is against this. But anybody with an ounce of grey matter also knows, understands and accepts that no matter what anybody says, any politician worth his salt will have to accept that in a democracy, elections are won in a number of ways – and party hopping is one of them. Tell us, Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang, was there not a time when this Anwar was once your sworn enemy? Wasn't he your favourite target and whipping boy in Parliament? And now you are comrades in arms. And do you not have within DAP ranks former Umno politicians? What do you call that? A change of heart, a marriage of convenience? Or has the time come even for sworn enemies to look again at each other's convictions and see if there is room to work together towards a common goal? So please DAP, while it is a decent thing to do to be against frogs that go hopping from one party to another, the adherence to such sentiment might be a bit harder to do. We are at war with BN. Almost anything that could assist us to win that war must be considered. When victory is in hand, these "questionable tactics" can be looked again with clear heads. Until then shut up.
|
| Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:35 AM PDT
Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative. Kim Quek Like any reader of The Sin Chew Daily, I was stunned by its front page headline on Aug 28, which reads: "PAS will implement Hudud when it rules". My split-second reaction was: "Gosh, this is serious!". Flashing instantly across the mind is the image of an Islamic state, mixed with the consternation that PAS might have suddenly changed course over the Islamic state issue and the devastating electoral repercussion that can be expected to ensue from the Chinese community following such a shocking turn of event. Anxious to know more, I read through the entire two pages covering the event without pause, and was relieved that, as I expected, PAS has indeed held on to its policy of putting the pursuit of an Islamic state and implementation of Hudud as a long term objective – certainly not the current priority. I am happy that the alliance of PAS-PKR-DAP remains intact and on-course in its relentless march to Putrajaya. Meanwhile Sin Chew's headline on Aug 28 has kicked up a mini-storm in the Internet.
PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu immediately denied that he said PAS would amend the federal constitution to implement Hudud should it come to power. "I did not say (we'll bring) hudud (to Parliament)," he told Malaysiakini. He added that good governance and social justice must be practised in Malaysia before implementing the Islamic penal code. However, Sin Chew on the other hand also defended its headline report by giving the following sequence of events through its website on Aug 28 (Tuesday): Stage 1: On Sunday, Aug 26: Sin Chew asked Mat Sabu to comment on PAS President Hadi Awang's statement on Saturday (Aug 25) that PAS would implement Hudud through the democratic process. Mat Sabu answered: "Democracy is to govern through the ballot box, and change to any policy must be done through Parliament, and two-thirds support (in Parliament) is needed to amend the constitution." Stage 2: On Monday, Aug 27: Based on the above Mat Sabu answer, Sin Chew's evening edition said in its headline story: "Mat Sabu says PAS has decided to propose constitutional amendment to implement hudud should the Islamic party capture Putrajaya" Upon learning from an English daily that Mat Sabu had denied saying so, Sin Chew called Mat Sabu to clarify further. Mat Sabu reiterated that if any party wanted to amend "any Act", it would need to go through Parliament, and that he didn't mention hudud. He also stated that the party had not discussed whether to table a motion to amend the constitution. However, Sin Chew reporter pressed further and asked: "The 'any Act', does it include hudud?". Mat Sabu answered: "Yes." The reporter further asked: : "Can I say PAS 'memang berhasrat' (intend) to amend the constitution to implement any Act, including hudud, but at the moment has not discussed the matter of tabling a motion in Parliament?". Mat Sabu answered: "Can." Stage 3: (Tuesday, Aug 28) Sin Chew splashed the headline "PAS will implement hudud when it rules", saying in its first line: "PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu says PAS intends to seek constitutional amendment in Parliament in order to implement hudud, when it rules in the central government".
From the above sequence of events, we can see that Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative. In fact, Mat Sabu was only making a general remark when he answered that a constitutional amendment needs to have two thirds support in parliament. He was certainly not specifically referring to hudud, so it is not fair to coin the words in such a way as to portray Mat Sabu as driving the point that PAS will seek parliamentary approval for implementing hudud upon taking over the federal government. It is apparent that Mat Sabu didn't want to give a direct answer. The reasons are simple. In the first place, a parliamentary motion from PAS needs to go through the process of building consensus within Pakatan Rakyat, more so when it is a constitutional amendment as momentous as the introduction of hudud and the conversion of the status quo into an Islamic state. There is no such consensus now or in the foreseeable future. Secondly, social conditions are not ripe for implementation of hudud as exemplified by the lack of social justice and good governance in our country, as pointed out by Mat Sabu and other Islamic scholars. Thirdly, it is suicidal for PAS to hammer home the hudud agenda at this sensitive election time when it says it is still in the process of building greater understanding among non-supporters of hudud,who in all likelihood, predominate the electorate. So, with all these hurdles standing in the way, does it make sense for PAS to trumpet the message that upon reaching Putrajaya, it will implement hudud – as if this is currently its urgent priority?
Perhaps what causes the furor most is not so much the details in Sin Chew's report as the grossly misleading and sensational title of "PAS WILL IMPLEMENT HUDUD WHEN IT RULES". It distinctly gives the impression that hudud is on the cards, the moment PAS steps into Putrajaya. So, who among the non-Muslims wouldn't be alarmed and shocked by such a headline and the leading sentences of the story, when they have all along been assured that PAS will only move through consensus within Pakatan Rakyat and that the latter's prime political objective is to improve the people's welfare by replacing the corrupt and obsolete Barisan Nasional? Considering that many readers do not read through all the relevant details or possess the analytical mind to sort out the wheat from the chaff, many must have already been misled and alienated by this sensational report. (In all fairness to Sin Chew, despite the misleading headlines and the leading story on Aug 28, its entire coverage of the subject, particularly its exhaustive coverage spreading over five pages in the following day, Aug 29, do contain sufficient truthful information for the more discerning reader to form the correct conclusion). Now that the damage has been done, it falls upon Pakatan Rakyat and democracy activists to dispel the misperception and spread the truth that hudud remains a PAS objective, but not an agreed Pakatan Rakyat agenda when it comes to power. And hence, a vote for PAS is not a vote for Hudud, but a vote for good governance. |
They came to show their disapproval of the government's hijack of this year's celebrations by imposing the theme 'Janji Ditepati' (Promises Fulfilled), which is actually the ruling party's election campaign slogan. They came to remind the government that it had indeed not fulfilled its promises – above all, the promise of clean and fair elections.
These were people who came of their own accord, braving the possibility of arrest. Very different from many of those who would be attending the official Merdeka Day celebrations the next night at the Bukit Jalil Stadium, the extravaganza organised by the government to display its might.
Prime Minister Najib Razak, in defending the use of 'Janji Ditepati' as the Merdeka theme, says there is no reason for anyone to dispute it "unless a person is not used to keeping promises". He says everyone should fulfil their promises, including ordinary people. "If the people want the country to be peaceful, stable and more prosperous, the people must promise to contribute to peace and prosperity."
Second, many of the people of his so-called "majority" are those still zombified by the massive doses of government propaganda they are fed every day through the mainstream press and television, and have therefore not awakened to the government's chicanery.
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan