Ahad, 23 September 2012

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


How to torpedo a submarine investigation

Posted: 23 Sep 2012 01:00 AM PDT

 

The Malaysian government, therefore, now has to defend itself against a possible legal action. And to do that it has to bring into question Suaram's status as an international NGO. And if the Malaysian government can prove that Suaram is not an international NGO but is a registered company (and hence profit-motivated) then it may be able to torpedo the submarine investigation. Hmm…torpedo a submarine investigation…I like that.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

CM slams 'revenge' probe on Suaram

Lim Guan Eng says the ulterior motive is apparent since the authorities chose to act on Suaram only now despite the organisation being in existence for 23 years.

(Free Malaysia Today) - DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng has criticised the federal government's investigation on human rights organisation Suaram, calling it a "clear act of political revenge".

By picking on Suaram, the Penang chief minister said Putrajaya had again demonstrated double standard with its selective prosecution. He was curious why Barisan Nasional did not give the same attention to many companies that had committed more serious financial irregularities.

He noted that Domestic Trade, Co-operative and Consumerism Minister Ismail Sabri had said that Suaram would soon face prosecution for its "confusing" and "misleading financial accounts". Lim said Sabri's statement intensified the attack on Suaram while the BN government's selective prosecution of Suaram had exposed its penchant for punishing whistle-blowers.

He was convinced that the selective prosecution of Suaram was a political revenge to distract attention from the Scorpene and National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) scandals. He recalled that PKR election strategy director Rafizi Ramli was arrested for revealing bank account details that led to the charges against NFC chairman Mohamed Salleh Ismail. "Suaram appears to have been victimised for its role in publicly highlighting and assisting in the Scorpene corruption trial in France," he added.

According to press reports, the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) was supposed to have made a recommendation early this week to the Attorney-General's Office to press charges against Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd, a company linked to Suaram, for unexplained financial irregularities.

Lim asked why a privately-funded human rights NGO was being electively victimised over supposed financial irregularities when there were a multitude of high-profile and scandalous cases of alleged corruption and mismanagement of public funds such as the RM500 million commission for the purchase of two Scorpene submarines and the RM250 million NFC scandal.

"No minister ever talked of investigating the accounts of the companies involved in the two alleged scandals," he added. He said Suaram's accounts had been audited and submitted routinely every year and even the NGO leaders publicly declared they had nothing to hide. "As Suaram was formed in 1989, why take action only now but not for the previous 23 years? Is it an act of vengeance?" he asked.

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

An EXCLUSIVE insider report by YL Chong, a.k.a. Desiderata

Some time in early 2001, the Far Eastern Review ran a short report saying that Malaysiakini was receiving money from "purported" rogue trader (as alleged by several Malaysian leaders including the then Prime Minister), George Soros. FEER claimed the money was channelled through South East Asia Press Alliance (SEAPA). Yes, Premesh denied this report of George Soros funding, whether "direct of indirect".

I later found out at a company meeting that Premesh was not being truthful. I wrote later that while FEER was barking up the right tree, it was standing on the wrong branch. The investment money came NOT from SEAPA but from the Media Development Loan Fund (MDLF), via a George Soros unit called the Open Society Institute (OSI), which has many offices outside of the United States.

I was then News Editor, and hence privy to information raised at Malaysiakini's meetings, and I had learned that indeed Malaysiakini had received an initial 10 percent down payment of RM188,000 for a 10 percent interest in Malaysiakini. At a weekend meeting, I told the top two guns -- Steven Gan and Premesh Chandran -- they had better come clean by telling the "full story" and not half-truths. I said how the investment money came through from George Soros -- direct or indirect -- was not important. The truth was indeed that RM188,000 came as initial investment from MDLF, a Soros unit.

I told them since Malaysiakini flagged itself as promoting transparency and openness, it was not right to hide the fact. I said I had no problem with funding from Soros into the news portal -- as long as we practised ethical journalism.

Since the top two guns did not agree with me -- in fact Steven Gan said it would be the death of Malaysiakini if they admitted to receiving this Soros funding! -- I was given Hobson's choice but told them I would hand in my resignation the following Monday (two days later).

Premesh in a following press statement kept on insisting it was NOT true when I said indeed, the FEER story was correct in essence -- barking up the right tree but wrong branch was my metaphoric narrative! -- disclosed when I went public on why I resigned. Premesh still vehemently denied the story of Malaysiakini having received money from George Soros, and defamed me by saying I resigned over dissatisfaction over my "pay"!

I believe it was some 10 to 11 months later, MDLF paid the remaining 90 percent of its investment, or more than the 1.88 million initially indicated at the time of my resignation) or MORE for a 30 percent (I stand corrected on this point on the numbers). I drew the NST attention to this development and it ran an update story on this development.

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

Inspector Clouseau, where are you?

There appears to be some confusion as to what is currently going on in Paris. We are being told that there is an on-going trial in Paris and that the French police are about to arrest and extradite Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to France to face charges and whatnot. This sounds like a Manuel Noriega of Panama episode all over again. Are we going to see a planeload of French commandos parachuting into Putrajaya to whisk Najib out of bed?

Actually, this is not an open court hearing but merely an application by Suaram who filed a criminal complaint, together with an application to join the proceedings as a civil party -- Civil Party Petition -- before a judge in chambers. The judge will first have to look through the evidence and determine whether a crime has been committed before ordering a trial.

Based on Suaram's application, the prosecutor ordered the Tribunal De Grande Instance in Paris to investigate the allegations of impropriety in the submarine contract. The result of this police investigation runs into hundreds of pages from D1 to D153, which you can read below.

The idea to initiate a campaign to keep the Scorpene submarines issue alive until the 13th General Election was mooted by R. Sivarasa and Tian Chua some time back in 2009. Sivarasa and Tian Chua discussed the matter with Anwar Ibrahim who decided that Suaram would be the best vehicle to use to initiate the action.

French lawyers were then engaged to act on behalf of Suaram to apply to the French court for a probe to be conducted on all the companies and personalities involved in the submarines contract. This was a sort of 'class action suit' to be taken by Suaram but Suaram had to first convince the court that it had locus standi on the matter. Suaram was presented to the court as an international NGO similar in status to Amnesty International whose job is to uphold democracy and human rights. This pleading to the court can be seen in the first document, document D1, below. (Malaysia Today, 26 June 2012)

(READ MORE HERE)

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

Okay, so what is really going on here?

First of all, it was Desmond YL Chong of Malaysia Chronicle, a.k.a. Suara Tian Chua, who revealed that Malaysiakini was receiving foreign funding. And Chong pointed out that this is wrong and he went on to explain why that prompted him to resign from Malaysiakini two days after he discovered this 'scandal'.

Hence it was Tian Chua's 'running dog' who first triggered this problem resulting in the shit hitting the fan.

Now, these people funding Malaysiakini are the same people who are funding Suaram. Hence, if Chong feels that it is wrong for Malaysiakini to receive funding from these people, then, according to the government, it should be equally wrong for Suaram to do so as well.

That is point number one.

The next point is regarding what is going on in Paris, which you can read about above. The crucial part of this French investigation is in document D1: http://www.malaysia-today.net/files/scorpene/D00001.pdf

And the part you must note in that document (D1) is as follows:

SUARAM est une organisation non gouvernementale fondée en 1989 (SUARAM is a non-governmental organization founded in 1989).

Il ne fait donc pas le moindre doute qu'eu égard à l'article 2 du code de procédure pénale français SUARAM est tout à fait recevable à ester en justice pour obtenir réparation des atteintes qu'elle a personnellement subie de par l'évident phénomène corruptif entourant la vente de ces sous-marins (There is therefore no doubt that, with regards to Article 2 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, SUARAM is quite admissible to sue for compensation for she has personally suffered damage because of the obvious phenomenon surrounding the corrupt sale of these submarines).

The French investigation into the sale of the two submarines to Malaysia was launched mainly because of an application made by Suaram. Suaram had applied to the French court for this investigation to be launched on the basis that Suaram is an international NGO that has suffered damage because France sold two submarines to Malaysia. And Suaram is seeking compensation.

Hence Suaram is the complainant cum applicant and the defendant in this case is the Malaysian government. But the action is being taken in a French court, not in Malaysia. And Suaram has managed to convince the French court that it is an International NGO and therefore has locus standi to take this 'class action suit' against the Malaysian government.

The Malaysian government, therefore, now has to defend itself against a possible legal action. And to do that it has to bring into question Suaram's status as an international NGO. And if the Malaysian government can prove that Suaram is not an international NGO but is a registered company (and hence profit-motivated) then it may be able to torpedo the submarine investigation. Hmm…torpedo a submarine investigation…I like that.

And that is why the Malaysian government is going after Suaram. The Malaysian government has to rip to shreds Suaram's 'status' so that it can argue that not only is Suaram a profit-motivated company and not an international NGO, but it also has no locus standi in this 'class action suit'.

I would say that this is a very clever 'defend by attacking' strategy, which I would also use if I were placed in that same situation.

Well, as they say, all is fair in love and war.

(MORE DOCUMENTS CAN BE SEEN HERE: D1-D153)

 

Like a trapped animal (part 2)

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 05:27 PM PDT

 

And that is what the 13th General Election is all about. It is about kill or be killed. It is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar will win. It is about who is going to jail, Dr Mahathir or Anwar. And if Anwar wins then Dr Mahathir is not going to go to jail alone. Pakatan Rakyat has promised to go for everyone who is corrupt and has committed a crime. So, many people have something to lose. Anwar has to die so that so many others can live.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dr M: Malays will lose political power if PR takes over

(The Malaysian Insider) - Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has called the Malays "ungrateful" and "lacking intelligence", warning that the greed of a few power-hungry Malays in the opposition would see the country's dominant race lose its political power.

"If any of these Malay (opposition) parties win the elections and forms the government, this government would have to follow the dictates of other (races). The Malays will no longer hold dominance in the government that they were so willing to share with others," he said in a special column titled "Suara Hati Mahathir" published in Mingguan Malaysia today, the weekend edition of Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia. 

In his lengthy tirade against the Malays, the former prime minister expressed sadness that the Malays were now purportedly split into three factions and said that this has resulted in them "begging" for support from the other races.

"It has forced them to beg for support... even from those who have all this time been fighting against efforts to uplift the positions of the Malays and make them equal to the others. But this support is not given for free," he warned.

"Who brought on this disaster? No other than the Malays themselves ― greedy Malays, Malays lacking in intelligence, Malays easily influenced by lust, easily dominated by hatred when agitated," he continued in typical no-holds-barred fashion.

Dr Mahathir took pains to remind the Malays of their colonised past in the decades before independence, detailing horror stories of how the British had called them lazy and stupid, enslaving them in their own country. He said the Malays were only allowed to take on menial labour jobs and were made into drivers and orderlies or clerks and office boys at most.

"There were assumed to be incapable of holding any responsibility. The Chinese and the Indians were even brought into the country to solve this problem of the Malays being stupid and incompetent," the veteran politician recalled.

When the Japanese arrived, Dr Mahathir said the Malays even lost their lowly office jobs and were forced to become petty roadside traders selling goods like bananas. If they failed to bow their heads low when walking by a Japanese soldier, they would be forced to balance large chunks of rocks on their heads and shoulders until they would collapse from dizziness, he said.

"They would be ordered to climb tall coconut trees to get the fruits for these Japanese soldiers. If they failed, they would be slapped and would have to crouch to seek forgiveness," Dr Mahathir continued.

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

The 13th General Election, which most expect in February-March next year, is going to be very interesting. It is going to be interesting because of a few reasons. The pertinent questions I would ask would be:

1. Are we going to see history being repeated?

2. Was the 12th General Election a flash in the pan?

3. Are we finally going to see the end of the rule of the same government that Malaysia has had for the last half century?

4. Have Malaysians finally buried the spectre of 'May 13' and is it now no longer a factor in Malaysian politics (and hence has become a blunt weapon)?

5. Has Malaysian politics been reduced to that of the United States Presidential elections?

6. Whose propaganda machinery and political strategy is better, Barisan Nasional's or Pakatan Rakyat's?

7. Have the political surveys and opinion polls done over the last couple of years been accurate in assessing the mindset of Malaysians?

8. Are we still retaining the political culture of the last 30 years or is that now a thing of the past?

I suppose my list of questions can go up to a dozen or more but for purposes of today's discussion allow me to focus on just those eight. My list is not in order of priority or importance and I am going to address them not in the sequence above.

Most likely Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak would be requesting an audience with His Majesty the Agong early next year to request His Majesty's consent to dissolve Parliament. Thereafter the Election Commission (SPR) will take over and has 60 days in which to hold the elections.

Most likely, also, SPR will allow a ten-day campaign period. Hence, while Nomination Day could be about a month after Parliament is dissolved, Polling Day would be just ten days after that.

Now, Malaysians feel that this is unfair. A ten-day campaign period is too short, they say. In actual fact, if the 13th General Election were held, say, in March 2013, then the campaign period would be five years rather than ten days. Hence it really makes no difference whether the 'official' campaign period is ten days or ten weeks. The reality would be the campaign would have been going on for five years, making Malaysia the only country in the world where the campaign period is five years.

Do I need to explain this? Well, considering the comprehension level of most Malaysians maybe I do. You see, it is like this: both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat have been on the campaign trail since 9th March 2008, the day after the 12th General Election. They started campaigning the very morning after Polling Day of 8th March 2008 and have never stopped campaigning ever since.

More importantly, though, the campaigning is not really about which will make a better government, Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat? It is about who will make a better Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak or Anwar Ibrahim? Hence, when Malaysians go to the polling booths on Polling Day, many people will be voting not so much based on which political party they support but on who they want as the Prime Minister.

For example, say Pakatan Rakyat announces that if it wins the general election Anwar Ibrahim will not become the Prime Minister but Hadi Awang will instead. How many Chinese will still vote Pakatan Rakyat? Or, say, Pakatan Rakyat announces that Lim Kit Siang is going to be the Prime Minister (which is allowed under the law). Would many Malays still vote Pakatan Rakyat?

The factor, therefore, is Anwar. It is because Anwar is going to be Prime Minister that these people will vote Pakatan Rakyat. And they will vote Pakatan Rakyat because they do not want Najib rather than because they want Anwar. It is about what you don't want and not about what you want. Hence ABU (anything but Umno) may work because ABU is about what you don't want, meaning Umno.

Say Umno announces that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah will be taking over as Prime Minister after the 13th General Election. Najib will retire and hand the reins to Ku Li. Will all those who intend to vote Pakatan Rakyat still vote Pakatan Rakyat since the main reason they are voting Pakatan Rakyat is because they are pissed with Najib and Rosmah?

So, the criteria here is vote the other side of what you don't want. This makes it easier to ignore and close your eyes to who or what you are voting for. You just decide who or what you don't want then close your eyes and vote the opposite to that.

And this is partly the fault of the political parties themselves. The campaigning has not been about what they can do for the country but about the bad points of the other side. Barisan Nasional has been going out of their way to point out the bad points and faults of the Pakatan Rakyat leaders, in particular Anwar Ibrahim, while Pakatan Rakyat has been doing the same about Barisan Nasional, in particular regarding Najib and Rosmah Mansor.

In fact, the 13th General Election is not even about Anwar and Najib. It is about Anwar and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. And to understand this we need to rewind 30 years to 1982 when Anwar first joined Umno.

While Anwar may be the de facto leader of PKR (plus opposition leader as well because of that), Dr Mahathir is the de facto government leader (the power behind the throne so to speak). Basically, Najib is Dr Mahathir's proxy. Hence if you hate Dr Mahathir (assuming hating Najib and Rosmah is not enough reason to reject Umno), then you vote for Anwar (meaning vote Pakatan Rakyat).

Many may not be aware that it was Ku Li who brought Anwar into Umno back in 1982. Dr Mahathir actually did not want Anwar but Ku Li was persistent and Dr Mahathir eventually relented.

The main concern was that if Umno does not take Anwar then he might join PAS (which was seriously courting him). So better Umno takes Anwar then he goes to PAS. At least in Umno Anwar could be controlled.

Dr Mahathir actually admitted this in an interview in Japan some years back. He said he agreed to allow Anwar to join Umno to prevent him from joining PAS. Dr Mahathir added that he thought he could control Anwar once he was in Umno but then he discovered that Anwar was conspiring to oust him so he had no choice but to get rid of Anwar.

Hence Dr Mahathir admitted that he did not actually want Anwar and he got rid of Anwar not because of the sodomy allegation but because he (Anwar) was conspiring to oust him (Dr Mahathir). We can assume, therefore, that the sodomy allegation was the excuse rather than the reason.

It is, therefore, to Dr Mahathir's interest that he ensure Anwar does not take over as Prime Minister. It has become something very personal between Dr Mahathir and Anwar. This is a vendetta, an old score to settle, not about better governance, etc. And if Anwar succeeds in taking over he would do what he had intended to do back in 1998 but failed. Dr Mahathir is going to go to jail. And if Anwar fails to take over then he is going to jail instead. Dr Mahathir will make sure of that.

Hence the 13th General Election is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar is going to win while the loser, whoever that may be, is going to end up in jail. It is winner takes all and loser loses all type of situation -- the Malaysian political culture.

This is a high stakes game. This is about who is going to sit in Putrajaya and who is going to die in jail. And the fact that Pakatan Rakyat has promised that if it takes over the federal government it is going to korek (dig) all the wrongdoings and transgressions of those currently in power (including those already retired) means Pakatan Rakyat (meaning Anwar Ibrahim) cannot take over at all costs, even at the cost of bloodshed.

Well, it is either my blood or your blood, so better your blood.

So it may have been better if Pakatan Rakyat had not made so much noise about the witch hunt they are going to launch once (not 'if') they take over. Promising revenge and retribution have made not only the politicians but the civil service, police, judiciary, military, etc., scared shit. They visual a Pakatan Rakyat takeover as translating to the death of many who walk and sit in the corridors of power in Putrajaya -- not confined to just the elected officials or politicians.

It may have been prudent if Pakatan Rakyat had announced an amnesty and period or reconciliation instead. Promising revenge has turned this into a deadly game. It is kill or be killed.

I remember once speaking to Zakaria Chik, the then CPO of Johor (whom I knew when he was in Terengganu). I congratulated him on his success at combating crime in Johore. I then asked him why all the robbers and kidnappers seem to have been shot dead. You do not seem to arrest anyone, I said. All are shot dead.

Zakaria replied that he told his police officers he does not want any prisoners, only bodies. Any police officer that brings back a live prisoner would be transferred to traffic duty. Hence they don't make any arrest. They shoot on sight.

The criminals, too, knew that they were not going to be arrested or taken alive. They were going to be shot dead even if they surrendered. So why surrender? Better they try to escape by shooting their way out.

So the criminal would never surrender. They will shoot at the police. And the police too have to shoot back. So it is a 'kill or be killed' situation -- and most times the police win.

And that is what the 13th General Election is all about. It is about kill or be killed. It is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar will win. It is about who is going to jail, Dr Mahathir or Anwar. And if Anwar wins then Dr Mahathir is not going to go to jail alone. Pakatan Rakyat has promised to go after everyone who is corrupt and has committed a crime. So, many people have something to lose. Anwar has to die so that so many others can live.

In 1999, the opposition did very well. And the factor was Dr Mahathir. Many people hated Dr Mahathir and were angry at what he did to Anwar.

In 2004, the opposition did very badly. The factor, again, was Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir had retired and had handed the reins to Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. So no more hate Dr Mahathir factor. Let's give Pak Lah a chance.

In 2008, the opposition did well again. And, yet again, the factor was Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir had resigned from Umno and had asked the Malays and Umno members to punish Umno by voting for the opposition.

So what is 2013 going to look like? Is Dr Mahathir still a factor? Are we going to see the 1999 scenario, the 2004 scenario, or the 2008 scenario? And how strong is the Dr Mahathir factor or is he no longer relevant or significant?

Umno is now like a trapped animal. And trapped animals can be very desperate and vicious. Umno and the Umno leaders (plus those in government such as the civil servants) have been promised that once Pakatan Rakyat takes over it is going to be payback time. Heads are going to roll. Jails are going to be full. There may not be enough jails for everyone.

Do you think it was wise to make such a promise? Do you think these people should have been made to feel like a trapped animal? Do you think they will allow Pakatam Rakyat to take over if their heads depend on Pakatan Rakyat not taking over? When it is either kill or be killed how do you think your enemy is going to fight? If you are going to die anyway and there are not going to be any prisoners you might as well come out with both guns blazing.

That is what the 13th General Election has been reduced to. But maybe Pakatan Rakyat is so confident it is going to win it need not care about the 'death threat' to the losers once Pakatan Rakyat takes over.

But the thing is the votes have not been counted yet and there is many a slip between the cup and the lip. So anything can happen. And as they also say, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. Oh, that's right, the fat lady did sing, on Hari Raya. Okay, maybe it is over; but let's see.

Anyway, I will stop here and maybe I can continue with part 3 another day, if I am in the mood for it.

 
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


A country of extremists

Posted: 23 Sep 2012 11:07 AM PDT

http://dailynewsegypt.com/beta/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/20120918_sandmonkey-column_Mahmoud-Salem-215x300.jpg

Given that this is a Muslim country, one should call Egyptian "Islamists" on who they really are: a bunch of shrill, patriarchal, misogynistic, violent extremists who are using Islam as a cover for their behaviour.

Mahmoud Salem, The Daily News Egypt

Like many of you, I have been horrified with the phone call made by constituent assembly member, Mohamed Saad El Azhary, to the 10 pm show on Dream, where he stated his intention to change the Egyptian constitution to allow the age of consent for marriage for females to be the age at which they reach puberty and have their first period, even if this age is as low as 9 years-old. He stated that the current legal age to be inappropriate with Egyptian cultural values, which always encourage marriage at a young age for certain segments of Egyptian society, and that the international treaties regarding human rights and women's rights to be a product of western values that are not suitable for Muslim Nations, and therefore should not be followed by us. This is coming on the heels of the week that had both the prophet movie crisis, the attack on the US embassy with people carrying an Al-Qaeda flag and the ensuing political fallout with the US, where we were described, for the first time in almost 40 years, as "not an ally". It has been a splendid week, as you can imagine.

It is safe to say that Egypt is going through its own version of a culture war, except that unlike the US for example, it is a culture war in which one side always attacks and the other side scampers for cover. The amount of people who told me that this is the week where they have lost all hope and decided to leave the country is ridiculous. For some odd reason, the same people that should stay and engage in this culture war are the same people who are thinking of running away from it, thus allowing the other side to win by default. Nothing showcases this more than the case of Albier Saber.

Albier is a 25 year-old Copt who got arrested by the Egyptian police for the crime of posting the trailer of the movie Innocence of Muslims on his Facebook page, and he is currently being accused of disdain for religion and has been attacked in his holding cell by other inmates for it. One would think that such action would be considered preposterous by the non-Islamist population because 1) the trailer was shown on TV, and introduced to the Egyptian population, by Salafi TV presenter Khaled Abdallah, and yet he didn't face any charges and 2) Since when is sharing content on our own Facebook pages a crime? and 3) The irony that the police operating under a government that exists only due to a revolution that got organised by a Facebook page that published content that the previous government thought was offensive and dangerous for the country's unity is now doing the same thing and arresting such Facebook offenders as well? Nope, such points are usually only found on Twitter, but everyone, with the exception of some human rights NGOs , are shying away from defending Albier, as if fearing that they would be labeled Prophet Haters by the Islamist camp or something. And none of them seems to think that them standing up in those specific battles is the only thing that will stop the sum of their fears from actually happening. They have willingly given the Islamists the right to speak in the name of Islam, and step on eggshells in order not to confront them, even though confronting them is fairly easy, and it starts with calling them out on their bullshit.

First of all, given that this is a Muslim country, one should call Egyptian "Islamists" on who they really are: a bunch of shrill, patriarchal, misogynistic, violent extremists who are using Islam as a cover for their behaviour. That in reality we don't have "islamists" as much as people with unresolved sexual and personal issues that have found in certain Islamic schools an excuse to carry out their convoluted fantasies about sex, control and mental lock-down. That their so called fundamentalism is synthetic and created primarily to excuse their behaviour, and that their "back to basics" mantra that romanticises a time where they believe that their social rules, intellectual walls and sexual fantasies were part of society's norm and wishes to bring it back is obviously a crock and wishful thinking.

Read more at: http://dailynewsegypt.com/2012/09/18/a-country-of-extremists/

In defense of the right to offend

Posted: 23 Sep 2012 11:05 AM PDT

Charles C. Haynes


Photographers take pictures outside the home of Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who has been linked by news organizations to the production of the controversial video, "Innocence of Muslims", in Cerritos, Calif. on Sept. 14, 2012. The Coptic bishop for Los Angeles, Bishop Serapion, told Reuters that Nakoula called him, denying any link to the film and saying he had been a victim of mistaken identity by the media. (REUTERS)
Extremists of all stripes are having a field day.

(Washington Post) - Loony rabble-rousers at home – the people behind "Innocence of Muslims," the now infamous film insulting the prophet Muhammad – have succeeded in giving loony rabble-rousers abroad a golden opportunity to promote violence in the name of their own sick, twisted vision of Islam and the world.

The filmmakers join the ranks of Terry Jones, Fred Phelps and other American extremists who will say and do anything to make headlines and provoke outrage.

But however vile the filmmakers' motives and however odious their speech, we must defend the indefensible by upholding their right to freedom of expression.

Needless to say, much of the world doesn't agree.

From the president of Egypt (who is calling for the makers of the film to be punished) to some pundits in Europe (who are asking once again why Americans tolerate hate speech), the American commitment to robust free speech is being widely questioned and debated.

Even in the land of the free, protecting the right to offend is an increasingly tough sell. A disturbing 43 percent of Americans do not think people should be allowed to say things in public that might be offensive to religious groups, according to a 2009 survey conducted by the First Amendment Center.

The U.S. Supreme Court does, of course, allow some restrictions on speech under the First Amendment, including speech intended to incite imminent violence. But this film doesn't meet that test.

Although the filmmakers surely knew that their film would provoke angry protests (and no doubt that was part of their intent), they aren't responsible for radical groups halfway around the world using the film as an excuse to kill American officials and attack Western embassies.

If the United States were to react to this violence by attempting to censor speech that deeply offends religions (as in some European countries) or speech that is blasphemous (as in some Muslim majority countries), Americans would forfeit the right to freedom of speech and religion.

Once government has the power to punish speech deemed "offensive" or "hateful," the First Amendment is effectively repealed and no one's speech is safe from prosecution and no one's religion is safe from governmental interference.

Read more at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/in-defense-of-the-right-to-offend/2012/09/20/3779853e-0336-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html

How to torpedo a submarine investigation

Posted: 23 Sep 2012 01:00 AM PDT

 

The Malaysian government, therefore, now has to defend itself against a possible legal action. And to do that it has to bring into question Suaram's status as an international NGO. And if the Malaysian government can prove that Suaram is not an international NGO but is a registered company (and hence profit-motivated) then it may be able to torpedo the submarine investigation. Hmm…torpedo a submarine investigation…I like that.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

CM slams 'revenge' probe on Suaram

Lim Guan Eng says the ulterior motive is apparent since the authorities chose to act on Suaram only now despite the organisation being in existence for 23 years.

(Free Malaysia Today) - DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng has criticised the federal government's investigation on human rights organisation Suaram, calling it a "clear act of political revenge".

By picking on Suaram, the Penang chief minister said Putrajaya had again demonstrated double standard with its selective prosecution. He was curious why Barisan Nasional did not give the same attention to many companies that had committed more serious financial irregularities.

He noted that Domestic Trade, Co-operative and Consumerism Minister Ismail Sabri had said that Suaram would soon face prosecution for its "confusing" and "misleading financial accounts". Lim said Sabri's statement intensified the attack on Suaram while the BN government's selective prosecution of Suaram had exposed its penchant for punishing whistle-blowers.

He was convinced that the selective prosecution of Suaram was a political revenge to distract attention from the Scorpene and National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) scandals. He recalled that PKR election strategy director Rafizi Ramli was arrested for revealing bank account details that led to the charges against NFC chairman Mohamed Salleh Ismail. "Suaram appears to have been victimised for its role in publicly highlighting and assisting in the Scorpene corruption trial in France," he added.

According to press reports, the Companies Commission of Malaysia (CCM) was supposed to have made a recommendation early this week to the Attorney-General's Office to press charges against Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd, a company linked to Suaram, for unexplained financial irregularities.

Lim asked why a privately-funded human rights NGO was being electively victimised over supposed financial irregularities when there were a multitude of high-profile and scandalous cases of alleged corruption and mismanagement of public funds such as the RM500 million commission for the purchase of two Scorpene submarines and the RM250 million NFC scandal.

"No minister ever talked of investigating the accounts of the companies involved in the two alleged scandals," he added. He said Suaram's accounts had been audited and submitted routinely every year and even the NGO leaders publicly declared they had nothing to hide. "As Suaram was formed in 1989, why take action only now but not for the previous 23 years? Is it an act of vengeance?" he asked.

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

An EXCLUSIVE insider report by YL Chong, a.k.a. Desiderata

Some time in early 2001, the Far Eastern Review ran a short report saying that Malaysiakini was receiving money from "purported" rogue trader (as alleged by several Malaysian leaders including the then Prime Minister), George Soros. FEER claimed the money was channelled through South East Asia Press Alliance (SEAPA). Yes, Premesh denied this report of George Soros funding, whether "direct of indirect".

I later found out at a company meeting that Premesh was not being truthful. I wrote later that while FEER was barking up the right tree, it was standing on the wrong branch. The investment money came NOT from SEAPA but from the Media Development Loan Fund (MDLF), via a George Soros unit called the Open Society Institute (OSI), which has many offices outside of the United States.

I was then News Editor, and hence privy to information raised at Malaysiakini's meetings, and I had learned that indeed Malaysiakini had received an initial 10 percent down payment of RM188,000 for a 10 percent interest in Malaysiakini. At a weekend meeting, I told the top two guns -- Steven Gan and Premesh Chandran -- they had better come clean by telling the "full story" and not half-truths. I said how the investment money came through from George Soros -- direct or indirect -- was not important. The truth was indeed that RM188,000 came as initial investment from MDLF, a Soros unit.

I told them since Malaysiakini flagged itself as promoting transparency and openness, it was not right to hide the fact. I said I had no problem with funding from Soros into the news portal -- as long as we practised ethical journalism.

Since the top two guns did not agree with me -- in fact Steven Gan said it would be the death of Malaysiakini if they admitted to receiving this Soros funding! -- I was given Hobson's choice but told them I would hand in my resignation the following Monday (two days later).

Premesh in a following press statement kept on insisting it was NOT true when I said indeed, the FEER story was correct in essence -- barking up the right tree but wrong branch was my metaphoric narrative! -- disclosed when I went public on why I resigned. Premesh still vehemently denied the story of Malaysiakini having received money from George Soros, and defamed me by saying I resigned over dissatisfaction over my "pay"!

I believe it was some 10 to 11 months later, MDLF paid the remaining 90 percent of its investment, or more than the 1.88 million initially indicated at the time of my resignation) or MORE for a 30 percent (I stand corrected on this point on the numbers). I drew the NST attention to this development and it ran an update story on this development.

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

Inspector Clouseau, where are you?

There appears to be some confusion as to what is currently going on in Paris. We are being told that there is an on-going trial in Paris and that the French police are about to arrest and extradite Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to France to face charges and whatnot. This sounds like a Manuel Noriega of Panama episode all over again. Are we going to see a planeload of French commandos parachuting into Putrajaya to whisk Najib out of bed?

Actually, this is not an open court hearing but merely an application by Suaram who filed a criminal complaint, together with an application to join the proceedings as a civil party -- Civil Party Petition -- before a judge in chambers. The judge will first have to look through the evidence and determine whether a crime has been committed before ordering a trial.

Based on Suaram's application, the prosecutor ordered the Tribunal De Grande Instance in Paris to investigate the allegations of impropriety in the submarine contract. The result of this police investigation runs into hundreds of pages from D1 to D153, which you can read below.

The idea to initiate a campaign to keep the Scorpene submarines issue alive until the 13th General Election was mooted by R. Sivarasa and Tian Chua some time back in 2009. Sivarasa and Tian Chua discussed the matter with Anwar Ibrahim who decided that Suaram would be the best vehicle to use to initiate the action.

French lawyers were then engaged to act on behalf of Suaram to apply to the French court for a probe to be conducted on all the companies and personalities involved in the submarines contract. This was a sort of 'class action suit' to be taken by Suaram but Suaram had to first convince the court that it had locus standi on the matter. Suaram was presented to the court as an international NGO similar in status to Amnesty International whose job is to uphold democracy and human rights. This pleading to the court can be seen in the first document, document D1, below. (Malaysia Today, 26 June 2012)

(READ MORE HERE)

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

Okay, so what is really going on here?

First of all, it was Desmond YL Chong of Malaysia Chronicle, a.k.a. Suara Tian Chua, who revealed that Malaysiakini was receiving foreign funding. And Chong pointed out that this is wrong and he went on to explain why that prompted him to resign from Malaysiakini two days after he discovered this 'scandal'.

Hence it was Tian Chua's 'running dog' who first triggered this problem resulting in the shit hitting the fan.

Now, these people funding Malaysiakini are the same people who are funding Suaram. Hence, if Chong feels that it is wrong for Malaysiakini to receive funding from these people, then, according to the government, it should be equally wrong for Suaram to do so as well.

That is point number one.

The next point is regarding what is going on in Paris, which you can read about above. The crucial part of this French investigation is in document D1: http://www.malaysia-today.net/files/scorpene/D00001.pdf

And the part you must note in that document (D1) is as follows:

SUARAM est une organisation non gouvernementale fondée en 1989 (SUARAM is a non-governmental organization founded in 1989).

Il ne fait donc pas le moindre doute qu'eu égard à l'article 2 du code de procédure pénale français SUARAM est tout à fait recevable à ester en justice pour obtenir réparation des atteintes qu'elle a personnellement subie de par l'évident phénomène corruptif entourant la vente de ces sous-marins (There is therefore no doubt that, with regards to Article 2 of the French Code of Criminal Procedure, SUARAM is quite admissible to sue for compensation for she has personally suffered damage because of the obvious phenomenon surrounding the corrupt sale of these submarines).

The French investigation into the sale of the two submarines to Malaysia was launched mainly because of an application made by Suaram. Suaram had applied to the French court for this investigation to be launched on the basis that Suaram is an international NGO that has suffered damage because France sold two submarines to Malaysia. And Suaram is seeking compensation.

Hence Suaram is the complainant cum applicant and the defendant in this case is the Malaysian government. But the action is being taken in a French court, not in Malaysia. And Suaram has managed to convince the French court that it is an International NGO and therefore has locus standi to take this 'class action suit' against the Malaysian government.

The Malaysian government, therefore, now has to defend itself against a possible legal action. And to do that it has to bring into question Suaram's status as an international NGO. And if the Malaysian government can prove that Suaram is not an international NGO but is a registered company (and hence profit-motivated) then it may be able to torpedo the submarine investigation. Hmm…torpedo a submarine investigation…I like that.

And that is why the Malaysian government is going after Suaram. The Malaysian government has to rip to shreds Suaram's 'status' so that it can argue that not only is Suaram a profit-motivated company and not an international NGO, but it also has no locus standi in this 'class action suit'.

I would say that this is a very clever 'defend by attacking' strategy, which I would also use if I were placed in that same situation.

Well, as they say, all is fair in love and war.

(MORE DOCUMENTS CAN BE SEEN HERE: D1-D153)

 

Pakatan must prove its worth to win GE13, says Guan Eng

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 06:29 PM PDT

Liza J. Ariffin, The Malaysian Insider

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) needs to convince voters of its ability to form a formidable federal government and to cooperate as a unified pact to win its place in Putrajaya in the coming polls, Lim Guan Eng said today.

The DAP secretary-general accused the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) of perpetuating three "myths" about the opposition to spread doubt over its readiness to govern — that PR leaders cannot work together much less co-operate when in power; PR is not capable of administrating a nation; and PR does not have the people's interests at heart and are only power crazy.

Lim said the Najib administration has been using "extremist, racial and religious rhetoric" to mask failures of the BN government and to win votes in the upcoming general election.

The Penang chief minister also moved to dispel three "lies" he claimed were spun by the government to distract attention from BN's failure to fight corruption and its lack of "competency, accountability and transparency in governance".

"The first lie is that Malaysia would go bankrupt if PR wins because we can not afford to deliver all our promises," Lim said today during the Perak DAP state annual convention in Ipoh.

"Our competent performance in the four PR states clearly disproves this lie as no PR states went bankrupt, instead recorded large surpluses," he added.

Lim said the second lie was MCA's claims that a PR victory would lead to an Islamic state under PAS, while Umno claims a Christian state would be formed under DAP.

"This lie by MCA and Umno is self-contradictory. The clearest rebuttal is that there is no mention of an Islamic or a Christian state in the PR's common policy," he said.

Lim then claimed BN's third lie was a reoccurrence of the May 13 racial riots if there is a change of government.

"Such threats are intended to frighten non-Malays even though BN and Umno know that a change of government can only happen if the Malay voters desire change as Malays form the majority of voters," he said.

"The 2008 general elections show that Malaysian voters are mature and there were no racial incidents even though there was a change of state governments in five states.

"As the last three Bersih rallies have shown, the desire for clean elections has strong support from Malays who made up the majority of the peaceful demonstrators," he added.

Lim, however, believed Putrajaya's "reliance on playing extremist racial and religious sentiments will be rejected by Malaysians".

"I believe that Malaysians would choose a new government that delivers on economic performance, prosperity for all and reversing the brain drain and reject an unchanged government that exploits race and religious extremist sentiments to hide its corruption and cronyism," he said.

Lim then urged PR leaders to emphasise integrity, clean leadership and good governance to reflect good performance in PR states.

"We must institutionalise open tenders and publicly declare our assets to show we have nothing to hide just as PR leaders have done in Penang."

READ MORE HERE

 

Selangor govt confusing people on water issues, says Cassa

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 06:19 PM PDT

Cassa says most people in the state are not sure who is right and wrong.

(Bernama) - Wat-er confusion! The Selangor government is confusing the people over water issues in the state to suit its political agenda, and at the expense of consumers and the economy, a prominent consumer activist charged today.

Consumer Association of Subang and Shah Alam (Cassa) president Jacob George said, based on feedback he had received, most people in Selangor were confused over who was right and wrong.

Amidst this confusion, he said the state government had also injected, as an after-thought, a new dimension to the water issue – that water tariffs would increase if the federal government went ahead with building the Langat 2 water treatment plant.

George also lamented that a number of executive councillors (excos) in the Selangor government were formerly non-governmental organisation (NGO) activists who had been looking at things negatively, no matter how well-intentioned the federal government plans were, to improve conditions in the country.

"I have been involved with various NGOs for 37 years. I could see their game-plan [over water issues], their strategies and that's why they are bringing up irrelevant matters just to block what the federal government is trying to do," he told Bernama in an interview.

In addition, George claimed the state government was also bringing in issues between it and Puncak Niaga Holdings Bhd into the picture, whereas they should be resolved in a different platform.

He said this unnecessary time-wasting should have been spent on resolving the impending water crisis in Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya.

"So, why is the state government doing all these? Don't mix these up and place it in one basket. This is not right. This is for our future, not just for the people of Selangor but for our neighbours [in Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya], as well, because it [water crisis] would have serious implications," he added.

On the Langat 2 treatment plant which the state government was opposed to, the Cassa president said, all studies by experts showed the project had to be implemented without further delay due to a serious shortfall in treated water production, as the existing 34 plants in Selangor were operating at maximum capacity.

Here again, he said, the state government confused consumers by stating that the reservoirs were full of water, and that there was no crisis even in the future, although the argument was about adequate supply of treated water.

What the federal government was concerned about, he noted, was with long-term planning addressing an impending water crisis, given the rapid population growth and the needs of industries.

"The plans are for 10, 15 or 20 years ahead, and when you talk about water, there's definitely going to be problems. It is a global issue now, and every country is facing it, coupled with weather, environmental and pollution problems setting in," he said.

Cassa snubbed

George said projects like the Langat 2 plant could not be implemented overnight and further delays fuelled by politicking, could push the cost of the project higher by as much as 70%.

In the first place, he said, there was no need to politicise the issue as it was a human rights issue, and in facing an issue such as consumer rights, all sides must remain level-headed and focus on the core issue.

George revealed that Cassa had offered to mediate in the federal-state conflict over the issue but the Selangor government had snubbed the offer, although the federal government gave positive response.

"We have sent many letters to them (Selangor government), giving them the feedback from consumers and they didn't respond even once. So, we know that they don't want Cassa to intervene but that's their choice.

"We accept it but don't say that we don't know the ground feeling. We have gone to the ground, talking to various groups of society and everyone agrees that a water crisis is just round the corner," he said.

He also took to task the National Water Services Commission (Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara or SPAN), for its relatively muted silence over water issues in Selangor, and this added to the confusion, as well.

"Cassa is very disappointed with the stand taken by SPAN and public perception of SPAN is rather negative, as if it doesn't exist. Many times, we have inivited them to debates on water issues, but they didn't attend.

"If they continue to be disinterested in playing a role, then it defeats the purpose of setting up SPAN.

"SPAN, with all its powers, should be in the forefront in trying to resolve such issues and the confusion arising from them. So far, they have failed to do this," claimed George.

 

Dr M: Hudud law will create injustice

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 06:17 PM PDT

The former prime minister says hudud with its shortcomings cannot fit into multi-racial countries like Malaysia.

Leven Woon, FMT

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad made his strongest ever objections on hudud law today, saying that its implementation will create an unjust judiciary system in Malaysia.

Speaking at the Islam and Women's Health forum today, he said hudud with its shortcomings cannot fit into multi-racial countries like Malaysia, as it only punishes the Muslims.

"In hudud, if you steal, you can have your hand chopped off. But they want to chop off only Muslims' hand, not the non-Muslim who steal same amount of money. Surely it's not justice," he told the audience during the question-and-answer session.

He also took a swipe at the hudud's condition on rape offence, whereby four witnesses are required to convict a perpetrator.

"Today we have the modern equivalent tool of DNA. You can collect evidence of rape through collecting DNA samples and compare them with the offender.

"Surely, we can accept circumstantial evidence even if there are no four witnesses.

"In Islam, the most important thing is justice. When you judge, you must make sure justice has been served. If you judge knowing clearly that this is unjust, then I think it is un-Islamic," he said.

Mahathir' comment came amid repeated statements by PAS lately to implement the stringent law should it come into federal power.

Earlier, the longest-serving prime minister said that the hudud debate came about because certain individuals wanted to be stringent to show they are more "Islamic".

"There is no mention in the Quran about stoning to death, or shooting with M16 gun, but this is regarded as the most appropriate [by some individuals].

"This shows we prefer the most extreme interpretation of Quran as against the norm of the day," he said.
He urged Muslims to follow the Quran instead of the Sunnah or Hadith, which are merely "optional" interpretations of the Quran.

"In Islam, certain things are compulsory and certain [things] are optional; if we don't accept the optional ones, that is not wrong for us," he said.

 

Dr M: Soros wants to install puppet PM

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 06:15 PM PDT

(FMT) - American tycoon George Soros is funding several NGOs and companies in Malaysia to influence local politics and gear the country towards a regime change, claimed former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

"He tries to control our politics, and select his people to be the prime minister," Mahathir told reporters here after a forum on "Islam and Women's Health"

He was commenting on the recent reports by Umno-controlled newspapers that the US-based National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is funding local NGOs and online news portal Malaysiakini.

TV3 aired a similar report on Thursday suggesting that the foreign funding, such as Soros' Open Society Foundation, uses the NGOs to topple governments around the world and replace them with Soros' proxies.

Mahathir said such a move was always done in the name of "promotion of democracy and freedom".

"So apparently we don't have freedom here. Soros wants a puppet prime minister, that's why he wants to see a regime change in Malaysia," he said.

NGOs such as human rights pressure group Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) have been bearing the brunt of criticism over its funding and organisational structure. The government has accused it of being funded by foreign powers to "destabilise the peace of the country".

On Tuesday, Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob said that six government agencies are taking action against Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd, the operating entity of Suaram, for breaching five sections of the Companies Act 1965.

Suaram has consistently denied any wrongdoings, while Pakatan Rakyat leaders such as Lim Guan Eng labelled the authorities' action on Suaram as "clear act of political revenge".

Suaram is instrumental behind the Scorpene corruption trial in France, a deal which allegedly implicated Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. The case also involved Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian interpreter and model who was murdered near Kuala Lumpur in 2006.

 

Like a trapped animal (part 2)

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 05:27 PM PDT

 

And that is what the 13th General Election is all about. It is about kill or be killed. It is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar will win. It is about who is going to jail, Dr Mahathir or Anwar. And if Anwar wins then Dr Mahathir is not going to go to jail alone. Pakatan Rakyat has promised to go for everyone who is corrupt and has committed a crime. So, many people have something to lose. Anwar has to die so that so many others can live.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dr M: Malays will lose political power if PR takes over

(The Malaysian Insider) - Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has called the Malays "ungrateful" and "lacking intelligence", warning that the greed of a few power-hungry Malays in the opposition would see the country's dominant race lose its political power.

"If any of these Malay (opposition) parties win the elections and forms the government, this government would have to follow the dictates of other (races). The Malays will no longer hold dominance in the government that they were so willing to share with others," he said in a special column titled "Suara Hati Mahathir" published in Mingguan Malaysia today, the weekend edition of Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia. 

In his lengthy tirade against the Malays, the former prime minister expressed sadness that the Malays were now purportedly split into three factions and said that this has resulted in them "begging" for support from the other races.

"It has forced them to beg for support... even from those who have all this time been fighting against efforts to uplift the positions of the Malays and make them equal to the others. But this support is not given for free," he warned.

"Who brought on this disaster? No other than the Malays themselves ― greedy Malays, Malays lacking in intelligence, Malays easily influenced by lust, easily dominated by hatred when agitated," he continued in typical no-holds-barred fashion.

Dr Mahathir took pains to remind the Malays of their colonised past in the decades before independence, detailing horror stories of how the British had called them lazy and stupid, enslaving them in their own country. He said the Malays were only allowed to take on menial labour jobs and were made into drivers and orderlies or clerks and office boys at most.

"There were assumed to be incapable of holding any responsibility. The Chinese and the Indians were even brought into the country to solve this problem of the Malays being stupid and incompetent," the veteran politician recalled.

When the Japanese arrived, Dr Mahathir said the Malays even lost their lowly office jobs and were forced to become petty roadside traders selling goods like bananas. If they failed to bow their heads low when walking by a Japanese soldier, they would be forced to balance large chunks of rocks on their heads and shoulders until they would collapse from dizziness, he said.

"They would be ordered to climb tall coconut trees to get the fruits for these Japanese soldiers. If they failed, they would be slapped and would have to crouch to seek forgiveness," Dr Mahathir continued.

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

The 13th General Election, which most expect in February-March next year, is going to be very interesting. It is going to be interesting because of a few reasons. The pertinent questions I would ask would be:

1. Are we going to see history being repeated?

2. Was the 12th General Election a flash in the pan?

3. Are we finally going to see the end of the rule of the same government that Malaysia has had for the last half century?

4. Have Malaysians finally buried the spectre of 'May 13' and is it now no longer a factor in Malaysian politics (and hence has become a blunt weapon)?

5. Has Malaysian politics been reduced to that of the United States Presidential elections?

6. Whose propaganda machinery and political strategy is better, Barisan Nasional's or Pakatan Rakyat's?

7. Have the political surveys and opinion polls done over the last couple of years been accurate in assessing the mindset of Malaysians?

8. Are we still retaining the political culture of the last 30 years or is that now a thing of the past?

I suppose my list of questions can go up to a dozen or more but for purposes of today's discussion allow me to focus on just those eight. My list is not in order of priority or importance and I am going to address them not in the sequence above.

Most likely Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak would be requesting an audience with His Majesty the Agong early next year to request His Majesty's consent to dissolve Parliament. Thereafter the Election Commission (SPR) will take over and has 60 days in which to hold the elections.

Most likely, also, SPR will allow a ten-day campaign period. Hence, while Nomination Day could be about a month after Parliament is dissolved, Polling Day would be just ten days after that.

Now, Malaysians feel that this is unfair. A ten-day campaign period is too short, they say. In actual fact, if the 13th General Election were held, say, in March 2013, then the campaign period would be five years rather than ten days. Hence it really makes no difference whether the 'official' campaign period is ten days or ten weeks. The reality would be the campaign would have been going on for five years, making Malaysia the only country in the world where the campaign period is five years.

Do I need to explain this? Well, considering the comprehension level of most Malaysians maybe I do. You see, it is like this: both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat have been on the campaign trail since 9th March 2008, the day after the 12th General Election. They started campaigning the very morning after Polling Day of 8th March 2008 and have never stopped campaigning ever since.

More importantly, though, the campaigning is not really about which will make a better government, Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat? It is about who will make a better Prime Minister, Najib Tun Razak or Anwar Ibrahim? Hence, when Malaysians go to the polling booths on Polling Day, many people will be voting not so much based on which political party they support but on who they want as the Prime Minister.

For example, say Pakatan Rakyat announces that if it wins the general election Anwar Ibrahim will not become the Prime Minister but Hadi Awang will instead. How many Chinese will still vote Pakatan Rakyat? Or, say, Pakatan Rakyat announces that Lim Kit Siang is going to be the Prime Minister (which is allowed under the law). Would many Malays still vote Pakatan Rakyat?

The factor, therefore, is Anwar. It is because Anwar is going to be Prime Minister that these people will vote Pakatan Rakyat. And they will vote Pakatan Rakyat because they do not want Najib rather than because they want Anwar. It is about what you don't want and not about what you want. Hence ABU (anything but Umno) may work because ABU is about what you don't want, meaning Umno.

Say Umno announces that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah will be taking over as Prime Minister after the 13th General Election. Najib will retire and hand the reins to Ku Li. Will all those who intend to vote Pakatan Rakyat still vote Pakatan Rakyat since the main reason they are voting Pakatan Rakyat is because they are pissed with Najib and Rosmah?

So, the criteria here is vote the other side of what you don't want. This makes it easier to ignore and close your eyes to who or what you are voting for. You just decide who or what you don't want then close your eyes and vote the opposite to that.

And this is partly the fault of the political parties themselves. The campaigning has not been about what they can do for the country but about the bad points of the other side. Barisan Nasional has been going out of their way to point out the bad points and faults of the Pakatan Rakyat leaders, in particular Anwar Ibrahim, while Pakatan Rakyat has been doing the same about Barisan Nasional, in particular regarding Najib and Rosmah Mansor.

In fact, the 13th General Election is not even about Anwar and Najib. It is about Anwar and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. And to understand this we need to rewind 30 years to 1982 when Anwar first joined Umno.

While Anwar may be the de facto leader of PKR (plus opposition leader as well because of that), Dr Mahathir is the de facto government leader (the power behind the throne so to speak). Basically, Najib is Dr Mahathir's proxy. Hence if you hate Dr Mahathir (assuming hating Najib and Rosmah is not enough reason to reject Umno), then you vote for Anwar (meaning vote Pakatan Rakyat).

Many may not be aware that it was Ku Li who brought Anwar into Umno back in 1982. Dr Mahathir actually did not want Anwar but Ku Li was persistent and Dr Mahathir eventually relented.

The main concern was that if Umno does not take Anwar then he might join PAS (which was seriously courting him). So better Umno takes Anwar then he goes to PAS. At least in Umno Anwar could be controlled.

Dr Mahathir actually admitted this in an interview in Japan some years back. He said he agreed to allow Anwar to join Umno to prevent him from joining PAS. Dr Mahathir added that he thought he could control Anwar once he was in Umno but then he discovered that Anwar was conspiring to oust him so he had no choice but to get rid of Anwar.

Hence Dr Mahathir admitted that he did not actually want Anwar and he got rid of Anwar not because of the sodomy allegation but because he (Anwar) was conspiring to oust him (Dr Mahathir). We can assume, therefore, that the sodomy allegation was the excuse rather than the reason.

It is, therefore, to Dr Mahathir's interest that he ensure Anwar does not take over as Prime Minister. It has become something very personal between Dr Mahathir and Anwar. This is a vendetta, an old score to settle, not about better governance, etc. And if Anwar succeeds in taking over he would do what he had intended to do back in 1998 but failed. Dr Mahathir is going to go to jail. And if Anwar fails to take over then he is going to jail instead. Dr Mahathir will make sure of that.

Hence the 13th General Election is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar is going to win while the loser, whoever that may be, is going to end up in jail. It is winner takes all and loser loses all type of situation -- the Malaysian political culture.

This is a high stakes game. This is about who is going to sit in Putrajaya and who is going to die in jail. And the fact that Pakatan Rakyat has promised that if it takes over the federal government it is going to korek (dig) all the wrongdoings and transgressions of those currently in power (including those already retired) means Pakatan Rakyat (meaning Anwar Ibrahim) cannot take over at all costs, even at the cost of bloodshed.

Well, it is either my blood or your blood, so better your blood.

So it may have been better if Pakatan Rakyat had not made so much noise about the witch hunt they are going to launch once (not 'if') they take over. Promising revenge and retribution have made not only the politicians but the civil service, police, judiciary, military, etc., scared shit. They visual a Pakatan Rakyat takeover as translating to the death of many who walk and sit in the corridors of power in Putrajaya -- not confined to just the elected officials or politicians.

It may have been prudent if Pakatan Rakyat had announced an amnesty and period or reconciliation instead. Promising revenge has turned this into a deadly game. It is kill or be killed.

I remember once speaking to Zakaria Chik, the then CPO of Johor (whom I knew when he was in Terengganu). I congratulated him on his success at combating crime in Johore. I then asked him why all the robbers and kidnappers seem to have been shot dead. You do not seem to arrest anyone, I said. All are shot dead.

Zakaria replied that he told his police officers he does not want any prisoners, only bodies. Any police officer that brings back a live prisoner would be transferred to traffic duty. Hence they don't make any arrest. They shoot on sight.

The criminals, too, knew that they were not going to be arrested or taken alive. They were going to be shot dead even if they surrendered. So why surrender? Better they try to escape by shooting their way out.

So the criminal would never surrender. They will shoot at the police. And the police too have to shoot back. So it is a 'kill or be killed' situation -- and most times the police win.

And that is what the 13th General Election is all about. It is about kill or be killed. It is about whether Dr Mahathir or Anwar will win. It is about who is going to jail, Dr Mahathir or Anwar. And if Anwar wins then Dr Mahathir is not going to go to jail alone. Pakatan Rakyat has promised to go after everyone who is corrupt and has committed a crime. So, many people have something to lose. Anwar has to die so that so many others can live.

In 1999, the opposition did very well. And the factor was Dr Mahathir. Many people hated Dr Mahathir and were angry at what he did to Anwar.

In 2004, the opposition did very badly. The factor, again, was Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir had retired and had handed the reins to Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. So no more hate Dr Mahathir factor. Let's give Pak Lah a chance.

In 2008, the opposition did well again. And, yet again, the factor was Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir had resigned from Umno and had asked the Malays and Umno members to punish Umno by voting for the opposition.

So what is 2013 going to look like? Is Dr Mahathir still a factor? Are we going to see the 1999 scenario, the 2004 scenario, or the 2008 scenario? And how strong is the Dr Mahathir factor or is he no longer relevant or significant?

Umno is now like a trapped animal. And trapped animals can be very desperate and vicious. Umno and the Umno leaders (plus those in government such as the civil servants) have been promised that once Pakatan Rakyat takes over it is going to be payback time. Heads are going to roll. Jails are going to be full. There may not be enough jails for everyone.

Do you think it was wise to make such a promise? Do you think these people should have been made to feel like a trapped animal? Do you think they will allow Pakatam Rakyat to take over if their heads depend on Pakatan Rakyat not taking over? When it is either kill or be killed how do you think your enemy is going to fight? If you are going to die anyway and there are not going to be any prisoners you might as well come out with both guns blazing.

That is what the 13th General Election has been reduced to. But maybe Pakatan Rakyat is so confident it is going to win it need not care about the 'death threat' to the losers once Pakatan Rakyat takes over.

But the thing is the votes have not been counted yet and there is many a slip between the cup and the lip. So anything can happen. And as they also say, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. Oh, that's right, the fat lady did sing, on Hari Raya. Okay, maybe it is over; but let's see.

Anyway, I will stop here and maybe I can continue with part 3 another day, if I am in the mood for it.

 

Dr M: Melayu tidak ‘bersyukur’ akan hilang kuasa dibawah pemerintahan PR

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 02:26 PM PDT

Md Izwan, The Malaysian Insider

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad melabel orang Melayu yang "tidak bersyukur" dan "kurang berilmu" akan mengakibatkan mereka kehilangan kuasa memerintah jika Pakatan Rakyat (PR) memerintah kelak.

Mantan perdana menteri (PM) tersebut juga meluahkan rasa kesal melihat bangsanya bergaduh sesama sendiri hanya kerana merebut kuasa. 

"Saya rasa sedih melihat bangsa sendiri tidak tahu bersyukur, begitu sekali mudah lupa, begitu sekali mudah dipengaruhi dan diperalat oleh orang lain sehingga sanggup memburukkan bangsa sendiri," kata Dr Mahathir dalam Mingguan Malaysia, akhbar milik Umno. 

Dalam artikelnya lagi, Dr Mahathir memberi peringatan kepada orang Melayu agar tidak lupa diri hingga mereka dihina lagi seperti zaman British dahulu. 

"Orang Melayu sudah lupa akan betapa hinanya mereka semasa dijajah dahulu. 

"Mereka tidak pun mengakui akan nikmat yang banyak yang dinikmati oleh mereka setelah merdeka dan mereka menerajui kerajaan-kerajaan Malaysia merdeka," katanya. 

Kemerdekaan negara dikecapi menurut Mahathir adalah hasil kekuatan orang Melayu yang menyokong Umno dan rakannya dalam Perikatan. 

Dr Mahathir juga berkata perpecahan dikalangan orang Melayu ketika ini sangat membimbangkan. 

"Sekarang orang Melayu berpecah kepada tiga kumpulan kecil yang terpaksa mengemis untuk mendapat sokongan orang lain. 

Beliau juga tidak menolak suatu hari nanti orang Melayu terpaksa mengikut telunjuk orang lain jika keadaan ini berterusan. 

"Jika mana-mana daripada parti Melayu ini memenangi pilihan raya dan mendirikan kerajaan, tak dapat tidak kerajaan ini akan terpaksa mengikuti telunjuk orang lain. 

"Melayu tidak lagi akan menjadi tunggak kepada pemerintahan negara yang mereka rela berkongsi dengan orang lain," tambah Dr Mahathir lagi. 

Dr Mahathir mendakwa negara tidak akan mencapai kemerdekaan pada 1957 jika parti serpihan daripada ulama dalam Umno menang pilihanraya pertama semasa zaman Tunku Abdul Rahman. 

"Kumpulan pertama yang menubuh parti serpihan terdiri daripada ulama dalam Umno yang kecewa kerana permintaan mereka supaya 10 daripada mereka dicalonkan oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman ditolak olehnya dan hanya satu sahaja yang diberi kepada kumpulan ini. 

"Jika Parti Islam mendapat lebih daripada satu kerusi, nescaya kemerdekaan tidak tercapai pada 1957," kata Mahathir lagi. 

Dr Mahathir berharap nasihat yang diberikannya menjadi panduan dan iktibar kepada orang Melayu agar perkara sama tidak berulang semasa zaman penjajahan. 

"Bangsa saya jelas tidak dapat menangani kejayaan. Bangsa saya mudah lupa. Bangsa saya tidak tahu bersyukur. 

"Bangsa saya tidak tahu mengambil iktibar daripada nasib yang menimpa kaum sebangsa yang hari ini tinggal di wilayah yang dikuasai orang lain," katanya.

 

Pakistan minister places bounty on anti-Islam filmmaker

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 02:18 PM PDT

(AFP) - A Pakistani official on Saturday placed a US$100,000 bounty on the head of the maker of an anti-Islam film that has sparked a wave of violence and anger, as Muslims mounted fresh protests worlwide.

Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmed Bilour also called on the Taliban and  Al-Qaeda to join the hunt and help accomplish the "noble deed."
 
Bilour spoke to reporters in the northwestern city of Peshawar a day after  violent nationwide demonstrations against the "Innocence of Muslims" film left  21 people dead and more than 200 injured.
 
"I announce today that this blasphemer who has abused the holy prophet, if  somebody will kill him, I will give that person a prize of $100,000," Bilour  said, urging others to shower the killer with cash and gold.
 
"I also invite Taliban and Al-Qaeda brothers to be partners in this noble  deed," he added. "I also announce that if the government hands this person over  to me, my heart says I will finish him with my own hands and then they can hang  me."    Protests against the low-budget film, which mocks Islam, have erupted  across the Muslim world, leading to more than 50 deaths since the first  demonstrations on September 11.
 
A French satirical magazine's publication this week of cartoons mocking the  Prophet Mohammed has further stoked anger.
 
The producer of the film, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, is reportedly a Los  Angeles-based 55-year-old Egyptian Copt and convicted fraudster, currently out  on parole.
 
US media reports say Nakoula wrote and produced the film, using the  pseudonym Sam Bacile before being identified. Police questioned him before he  went into hiding with his family.
 
Thousands of Islamist activists in Pakistan staged demonstrations again  Saturday but there was no repeat of the previous day's widespread violence.
 
More than 5,000 protesters, including hundreds of women, marched towards  the parliament in Islamabad chanting "We love our Holy Prophet" and "Punishment  for those who humiliated our Prophet".
 
Some 1,500 people from the hardline Islamist Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Sunni  religious groups rallied in front of the US consulate in the eastern city of  Lahore, chanting "The US deserves only one remedy — jihad, jihad"
 
Smaller protests took place in the southwestern city of Quetta, as well as  in Peshawar, where six people died in Friday's protests, and in the southern  port city of Karachi, where 15 people were killed Friday.
 
Witnesses estimated that more than 45,000 people joined Friday's nationwide  rallies, mainly members of right-wing religious parties and supporters of  banned terror groups.
 
Those numbers, however, were still considered small in a country of 180  million.
 
Four more people died overnight from wounds they received during the  protests, taking toll of those killed across Pakistan on Friday to 21, health  officials said. 
 
The combined total of wounded in Karachi, Peshawar and the capital  Islamabad was 229.
 
In Nigeria, meanwhile, tens of thousands of people protested in the second  city of Kano, burning images of US President Barack Obama and stomping on the  American flag.
 
The procession of men, veiled women and children stretched for several  kilometres (miles) through the city, the largest in Nigeria's mainly Muslim  north.
 
They shouted "death to America, death to Israel and death to the enemies of  Islam". There were no reports of violence.
 
The demonstration was organised by the Islamic Movement of Nigeria, a  pro-Iranian group that adheres to the Shiite branch of Islam.
 
In Lebanon, thousands of supporters of the Shiite Hezbollah movement took  to the streets in the southern town of Bint Jbeil.
 
Women in black chadors carried colourful Islamist flags alongside young  children holding the Koran, the Muslim holy book.
 
Hezbollah parliamentary representative Nawaf al-Moussawi told the crowd the  film was "... not merely a trivial creation carried out by a group, but  American politics intended to be disseminated to the Western world."
 
He also warned against reprisal attacks on the Christian community.
 
In east Jerusalem about 500 Palestinians, accompanied by a marching band,  protested against both the film and the cartoons in the French satirical weekly  Charlie Hebdo.
 
In Germany, 1,500 people staged a peaceful protest in the western city of  Dortmund, a day after similar demonstrations in other German cities.
 
A German far-right group's threat to screen the video has prompted heated  debate over whether or not the authorities should ban the film on security  grounds.
 
In neighboring Austria, about 500 people protested outside the US embassy  in the capital Vienna.
 
In France, riot police were out in force in several parts of Paris to  enforce a ban on protests, a week after an unauthorised demonstration against  the film led to 150 arrests.
 
Social networks had been awash with appeals for French Muslims to defy the  ban and hold fresh protests.
 
French police have arrested a man in the western city of La Rochelle for  having allegedly called on a jihadi website for Stephane Charbonnier, chief of  satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, to be decapitated.

Liverpool, United add respect to rivalry

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 02:15 PM PDT

(AFP) - Matches between Liverpool and Manchester United have always contained incredible history and rivalry, on and off the pitch.

But when the two sides meet at Anfield on today, there will be a huge amount of respect on show at the end of what has been an emotional fortnight for Liverpool.

The match is the first at their home ground since the release of a damning report into the Hillsborough disaster, in which 96 Liverpool fans were crushed to death before an FA Cup tie on April 15, 1989.

The report absolved the fans of any blame, slamming the police and politicians for overseeing a cover-up of the facts. Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers said his side were ready to cope with all that comes with the day.

"I'm very much looking forward to it," he said. "It's a game I've grown up watching all of my life," he said.

"Two massive clubs and it's a great opportunity to be involved in such a game.

"But, first and foremost, it's a great opportunity for us as a club to commemorate and to pay tribute to the families and the people involved with Hillsborough, and show and pay our respects to the families at the game.

"Hopefully we can then go on and get three points, which would set off what would hopefully be a great day for us."

United manager Sir Alex Ferguson took the unprecedented step of writing a letter to his fans, urging them to show their respect by not singing the kind of offensive chants a minority of their supporters have indulged in, in the past.

"Our rivalry with Liverpool is based on a determination to come out on top – a wish to see us crowned the best against a team that held that honour for so long," he said.

"It cannot and should never be based on personal hatred. Just ten days ago, we heard the terrible, damning truth about the deaths of 96 fans who went to watch their team try and reach the FA Cup final and never came back.

"What happened to them should wake the conscience of everyone connected with the game. Our great club stands with our great neighbours Liverpool today to remember that loss and pay tribute to their campaign for justice."

When the two sides met last year, there was a huge moment of controversy when Liverpool's Luis Suarez was alleged to have racially abused United full back Patrice Evra.

Suarez was later banned for eight matches and when the two sides met again at Old Trafford, they refused to take part in the pre-match handshake.

This time, the two teams have promised to shake hands while former Liverpool striker Robbie Fowler has suggested they go even further.

"It would be nice for Luis Suarez to put some flowers at the United end regarding (the) Munich (air disaster, when seven United players were among 21 people killed), and for Patrice Evra to do so at the Kop," Fowler said.

"The two clubs do have a rivalry, but some things are far more important than football and this is one of them."

Six players have been sent off in the past 11 matches between the two and Ferguson said it was crucial his side behave well.

"There's a great atmosphere, fantastic, and the kind of atmosphere you want to be involved in," he said. "It does get emotive, but you just have to handle that".

 

Karpal: You don’t have be a Penangite to be CM

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 02:10 PM PDT

(The Star) - DAP chairman Karpal Singh has fended off criticisms that Lim Guan Eng should not be the Chief Minister because he is not a Penangite.

He said election laws were clear on this issue, adding that an election candidate only needed to be a resident and a Malaysian citizen to stand in any state.

"To stand as a candidate in any state in Malaysia, one just has to be a resident that is the qualification and, of course, a citizen of the country.

"The Lim family has a residence in Penang. No doubt, (Penang Chief Minister) Lim (Guan Eng) was born in Batu Pahat but his connection with Penang is sufficient for him to be the right choice for the post of Chief Minister," he said here yesterday.

Karpal was responding to a statement by former DAP vice-chairman Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim that the Penang Chief Minister should be a local instead of Lim, who is from Batu Pahat.

In a recent ceramah, Tunku Abdul Aziz, who quit DAP in May, had called on Penangites to ensure that their Chief Minister come from among the crop of local leaders instead of someone "parachuted" in from other states.

Tunku Abdul Aziz had said that Chow Kon Yeow, who is the state DAP chairman, should have been the Chief Minister, adding that he was a "nice man" and "not arrogant".

When contacted, Chow said it was up to the people to "choose the party the Chief Minister is from".

Asked about the meeting between DAP leaders at the Red Rock Hotel after the party took over the state, during which Lim had allegedly nominated himself for the top post, Chow said this was the consensus reached among them.

Penang Barisan Nasional chairman Teng Chang Yeow, who was born in Batu Pahat, said everybody had the freedom to express their views and opinions on the matter.

"Let the voters decide on who they think is right," said Teng.

Penang Chinese Town Hall chairman Datuk Lam Wu Chong said there was no such rule that the Chief Minister must be a local-born Penangite.

However, a Penang-born engineer, who only wanted to be known as James, said he would prefer to have a local as a Chief Minister.

"It would be better if we are led by a Penangite as the person shares a similar sentiment about the state and can easily meet our expectations," said the 31-year-old.

 

Karpal gets support for anti-hopping bill

Posted: 22 Sep 2012 01:57 PM PDT

The DAP national chairman will table a private member's bill to stop party-hopping and he has got an unlikely ally in an independent MP.

Athi Shankar, FMT

GEORGE TOWN: DAP national chairman Karpal Singh will table a private members' bill to stop party hopping in Parliament next week and he has got an unlikely ally in independent MP Tan Tee Beng.

Tan, the Nibong Tebal MP, has declared his support for Karpal's initiatives to amend Articles 10 and 48 of the Federal Constitution to pave way for the anti-hopping legislation to stop party-hopping.

Tan said he would back Karpal because he does not believe in political coup d'etat to form governments by defections.

"I am against turning around the government and country through this bad tactic. It's an unethical practice and a dangerous trend.

"The government should only be formed through legitimate elections," he told FMT.

Karpal said that he would table a private member's bill during the budget sitting of the final parliamentary session of the year that would start next week to amend both constitutional provisions.

Both provisions are considered as stumbling blocks against legislating anti-hopping law to prevent elected representatives from defecting from one party to another.

Tan won Nibong Tebal seat under PKR ticket in 2008 general election but left the party in March 2010 to become an independent MP.

Tan said he was always against part-hopping and he insisted that he only left PKR due to political differences with party supremo Anwar Ibrahim.

He said he had never declared himself as a BN-friendly independent unlike other defecting MPs.

"It's my critics and media who claimed that I'm BN-friendly. I have never said it," he said.

Fall-out with Anwar

He pointed out that his fall-out with Anwar was over the unwarranted "916 episode" where the PKR supremo leader wanted to capture Putrajaya via defections of 30 Barisan Nasional MPs, mostly from Sabah and Sarawak.

"I never agreed with Anwar on Sept 16 date. I told him that I would rather prefer to be opposition MP than take over the government by default," said Tan.

He said this can be clarified with PKR MPs – Ampang's Zuraida Kamaruddin, Balik Pulau's Yusmadi Yusoff, Indera Makhota's Azan Ismail, Kelana Jaya's Loh Gwo Burne and Telok Kemang's Kamarul Bahrin Abas – as they were witnesses over his argument with Anwar in the opposition leader's Segambut home.

READ MORE HERE

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved