Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Like a trapped animal (part 4)
Like a trapped animal (part 3)
How to torpedo a submarine investigation
Like a trapped animal (part 2)
Like a trapped animal (part 1)
How the knife cuts both ways
The Kuching Declaration: all dressed up and nowhere to go
How to die by the sword
It’s in the soul
To call or not to call, that is the question

Posted: 24 Sep 2012 06:31 PM PDT

To Pakatan Rakyat, this may just be about winning or losing an election. To Umno, it is about the life and death of Barisan Nasional. Pakatan Rakyat can lose the election and still continue to exist as an opposition grouping. Barisan Nasional cannot lose the election and continue to exist as an opposition coalition. Barisan Nasional would be hit with a double whammy. Death will follow its defeat, a danger that Pakatan Rakyat does not face.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Record number of new voters to impact upcoming elections

(The Star) - A record number of first-time voters will have a huge impact on the outcome of the 13th general election.

With new voters now making up one in five of the country's 13.1 million voters or about 22% (2.9 million) of the electorate, both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat are expected to focus on wooing them over in their campaign strategies.

A total of 2,920,828 Malaysians have registered as voters between 2008 and June 30 this year.

"This is the highest figure so far. Over the last four years, we have been going all out to reduce the number of unregistered Malaysian voters," Election Commission deputy chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar said in an interview.

He said the 2.9 million first-time voters were almost equally divided between those aged below 39 and those 40 and above.

"It can't be denied that new voters will have a major influence on the outcome of the next general election but whether they are youths or senior citizens, each vote will count," Wan Ahmad said.

A total of 155,420 Malaysians signed up as voters in 2008. The numbers have progressively increased with 279,270 in 2009, 826,462 in 2010 and 1,221,635 last year. An additional 438,041 people registered as voters between Jan 1 and June 30 this year.

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

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak will not want to call for the 13th General Election independent of the state elections, in particular the four Pakatan Rakyat-led states. Umno would like to dilute the opposition election machinery and one way would be to hold simultaneous federal and state elections involving all the states -- save Sarawak, which already held its state election in April last year.

When nationwide elections are held at both federal and state levels, everyone would focus on defending their own fort, or attacking their opponent's fort in their own constituency. Very few, other than key federal leaders, would have the time to criss-cross the country to help campaign in other constituencies. As the Malays would say: jaga kawasan sendiri.

I remember back in 2004 when I was heading the election campaign for the then PKR Deputy President, Abdul Rahman Othman. Haji Rahman was contesting against the Member of Parliament for Putrajaya, Tunku Adnan Tunku Mansor. We were heavily outgunned and even the police were giving us a hard time.

Haji Rahman's son was beaten up as he distributed pamphlets and I was surrounded by two carloads of Umno 'bouncers'. I had to pull out a knife to keep the Umno toughies at bay. They phoned for the police, who arrived almost immediately. When we made a police report regarding Haji Rahman's son's beating they ignored us. Hence it was clear that the police were part of the Umno campaign. And that was not the first time, mind you. That happened also in the election before that in 1999.

I sent out SOS messages calling for reinforcements. No one came to our aid. Everyone was busy fighting losing battles in their own constituencies. And boy, did we get whacked good and proper in 2004? That was the worse performance ever for the opposition.

Anyway, the point is, in a nationwide election campaign, Barisan Nasional has a more formidable army compared to Pakatan Rakyat. Pakatan Rakyat is an expert at guerrilla warfare. In conventional warfare where firepower is crucial, Pakatan Rakyat will lose out. And that would be how Najib hopes to retain power.

The weapon Umno will use, of course, will be race and religion. This has worked for 66 years since 1946, meaning five generations. So why can't it continue to work? And, as they say, why fix something that is not broken?

By the way, I say five generation because 1946 was during my grandfather's time and I am now a grandfather myself. So that makes five generations.

Umno has accepted the fact that it has lost the Chinese support. It is confident that it can win back some Indian support, though. Nevertheless, MCA, MIC, Gerakan and PPP are doomed and we may see, in the end, Barisan Nasional in Peninsular Malaysia being just Umno with maybe ten or less seats for MCA. But that would be about it.

Hence, for Barisan Nasional to continue to exist, Umno will have to depend on the non-Umno partners from East Malaysia. If Barisan Nasional fails in East Malaysia and Sabah and Sarawak fall to Pakatan Rakyat, then Barisan Nasional will be reduced to just Umno. For all intents and purposes, Barisan Nasional will cease to exist other than in name only.

Hence, also, Umno cannot afford to lose Sabah and Sarawak. First, that would mean Pakatan Rakyat would be able to form the federal government. Secondly, it would mean Barisan Nasional might as well disband and Umno continue as a 'solo' party. So there is so much at stake here, not only the federal government, but also the legitimacy of Barisan Nasional to continue to exist.

Hence we are talking about two very different 'value systems' here.

Allow me to use the following analogy. When a fox chases a hare, the hare will have to be faster and cleverer. The hare will feel more desperate than the fox. The fox is just running for its dinner. If it fails to catch the hare it just misses its dinner, that's all. The hare, however, is running for its life. If it fails to escape it loses its life.

So which is more crucial, your dinner or your life? And who do you think will fight harder, he who is about to lose his dinner or he who is about to lose his life?

Malaysia now has about 13 million voters, about three million of them newly registered since March 2008. I expect about 9.5 million to 10 million of these registered voters to come out to vote in the coming general election. That would be roughly 1.5-2 million more voters than in March 2008.

Let us assume that a few more Chinese voters swing to Pakatan Rakyat compared to March 2008. So the number of Chinese voters who vote opposition increases slightly. Najib is hoping that the Indian voters who swing back to Barisan Nasional can offset this increase in Chinese voters for Pakatan Rakyat. In other words, the Indian votes will cancel off the Chinese votes -- so you are back to square one.

If this happens, as what Najib thinks and hopes will happen, it would then all depend on the Malay voters for Barisan Nasional to retain power. And for this to happen race and religion would become a very crucial weapon.

Malays are actually more parochial and regionalistic than racial. For example it would be very difficult for a Malay (meaning Muslim as well) from Kemaman, Terengganu, to contest and win in Besut, also in Terengganu. Never mind he is a fellow Malay-Muslim from Terengganu. As far as the Besut people are concerned, he is not from Besut but from Kemaman.

Hence the Malays are worse than the Chinese in that sense. People like Lim Kit Siang or Lim Guan Eng can contest in Penang, Selangor, Perak, Melaka, Johor, or wherever, and still win. Never mind where Kit Siang or Guan Eng were born. They can even become Chief Minister of Penang or Melaka and that would not be a problem with the Chinese.

The Malays cannot accept that. Can a Penang Malay become the Menteri Besar of Kelantan or a Kelantan Malay become the Menteri Besar of Johor? No way Jose! That would be unthinkable.

So it is not just about whether the person must be Malay, Chinese or Indian. Even if he is Malay, the question is: a Malay from which state? And for some states, say like Terengganu, being a Malay from Terengganu is not enough. Which part of Terengganu also matters. Kemaman is Kemaman and Besut is Besut, both in Terengganu but different parts of Terengganu.

You might say that race and religion no longer matters. You might say that Malaysians, especially those 'new' three million voters who registered to vote since 2008, have put race and region behind them. If you say this then you are most likely Chinese and are thinking like a Chinese.

Let us put that theory to a test. The Malaysian Constitution does not stipulate the race, religion and gender of the Prime Minister. Can the Chinese and Indians accept Nurul Izzah Anwar as the Prime Minister? Most likely they can -- say given a few more years experience as a Member of Parliament and by the time she is, say, 50 or so. But since she is a woman the Malays would find it difficult to accept her as the Prime Minister even though according to the Constitution that is perfectly legal.

What about Lim Guan Eng as the Prime Minister? The Chinese will be delighted. The Malays, however, will be appalled. And let Pakatan Rakyat try to announce that if they win the next general election Anwar Ibrahim is going to be Prime Minister and if they win again in 2018 Lim Guan Eng will take over as Prime Minister.

That would be the end of Pakatan Rakyat. Pakatan Rakyat would be dead meat. Even the army and police would take to the streets to engage Malaysia in a civil war.

Note, though, that not only the Malays are like this. Say Pakatan Rakyat announces that if they can retain Penang in the coming general election a Malay is going to take over as the Chief Minister of Penang. Barisan Nasional then announces that if they win Penang they will make sure that a Chinese from either MCA or Gerakan (depending on who wins the most number of seats) will become the Chief Minister.

I say that Barisan Nasional will take back Penang hands down.

I remember back when Anwar Ibrahim was in the government and his political secretary, Dr Ibrahim Saad, for the first time contested a state seat in Penang and won. He then lobbied to become the new Chief Minister and Anwar scolded him and said he was crazy. If we appoint a Malay Chief Minister the Chinese will punish us and Penang is going to fall to DAP. Even if Gerakan wins just one seat and MCA gets nothing, we will still have to appoint a Chinese Chief Minister, said Anwar.

To pacify him, Ibrahim Saad was appointed the Deputy Chief Minister.

So there you have it. Do you think this is only a Malay 'problem'? Even if Umno sweeps most of the seats and Gerakan and MCA combined win less seats than Umno, the Chief Minister must still be Chinese.

Okay, let's do another experiment. Pakatan Rakyat announces that not only will a Malay take over as the Penang Chief Minister, but a non-Muslim Chinese will take over from Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat as the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Do you think Pakatan Rakyat can retain Penang and Kelantan?

Okay, forget about appointing a non-Muslim Chinese as the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Appoint a Muslim but a Muslim from Sabah as the Menteri Besar of Kelantan. Announce that before the election and let's see if PAS can retain Kelantan.

So Malaysians are not really as liberal as they pretend to be, even the so-called liberals reading Malaysia Today. We are all still very racial and parochial. And that will decide how the people are going to vote. And anyone who says otherwise is in denial mode. They are just lying to themselves. And until the Chinese in Penang can agree to a Malay Chief Minister then the Chinese are just as bad as the Malays but are masquerading as liberals.

And do you think DAP can do it alone without the Malays? DAP needs the Malays. Without the Malays DAP is as dead as MCA, MIC, Gerakan and PPP. I have read many comments posted in Malaysia Today by readers who say that the Chinese do not need the Malays. In fact, I have deleted scores of such comments because they only serve to rub the Malays the wrong way and does not help Pakatan Rakyat's cause one bit.

Do you really believe this? Well, look at the table below and tell me whether you still think so. See what happened over the last ten general elections. If DAP depends just on the Chinese voters, at best it can win only 20-25 Parliament seats. That means only 10% or so of the number of seats in Parliament. Who then, contributes the balance 90%?

Something to think about, no?

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

Parliament seats won by DAP

1969: 13 out of 49 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 50.7%)

1974: 9 out of 19 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 39.3%)

1978: 16 out of 24 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 42.8%)

1982: 9 out of 22 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 39.5%)

1986: 24 out of 29 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 41.5%)

1990: 20 out of 53 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 46.6%)

1995: 9 out of 30 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 34.8%)

1999: 10 out of 45 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 43.5%)

2004: 12 out of 21 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 36.1%)

2008: 28 out of 82 (total popular votes garnered by the opposition: 46.75%)

Like a trapped animal (part 3)

Posted: 23 Sep 2012 07:35 PM PDT

And the most crucial term and condition, which Dr Mahathir announced in a gathering of about 1,000 Umno members in Petaling Jaya, was that the next Prime Minister after Pak Lah would be 'guided' by a President's Council. Who the members of that President's Council are and who would be heading it was not revealed in that announcement but everyone in the audience was able to guess the answer.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

That Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Pak Lah) was going to be ousted soon after the 12th General Election of March 2008 is indisputable. That was the game plan. The needling question, though, was: once Pak Lah is ousted, who is going to replace him?

Barisan Nasional was supposed to do 'not too good' in that general election -- after Barisan Nasional's historical and most impressive performance in the March 2004 general election before that. That, too, was part of the game plan. But for that to happen it would have to be an 'inside job'. And that is a story that has already been told.

And that is why of late the Umno leaders have been warning its members that the party will not tolerate any sabotage in the coming general election. They are worried that history will repeat itself. They know that for Pakatan Rakyat to bring down Barisan Nasional is not too easy, although not impossible. But if internal sabotage is involved, just like in March 2008, then the possibility increases.

The deal struck between Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Pak Lah soon after the former announced his 'retirement' during the Umno general assembly in mid-2002 was that the latter would be a one-term Prime Minister. After that he would step down. Furthermore, he would not 'disturb' all the projects and programmes that Dr Mahathir had implemented. In short, Pak Lah would keep Dr Mahathir's 'legacy' intact.

However, after taking the reins of power on 1st November 2003, Pak Lah reneged on his word. The first thing he did was he dismantled Dr Mahathir's 'monuments'. Then, with a stiff upper lip, he announced that he is not a one-term Prime Minister.

"Who says I am a one-term Prime Minister?" he indignantly asked. He then swore to prove his detractors wrong.

And that was when Dr Mahathir decided that Pak Lah would have to be brought down. But for that to happen it would have to be Umno that brings him down, not the opposition. If it were the opposition that brings him down that would be bad news because it would have meant that Anwar Ibrahim would be taking over as Prime Minister.

Bringing down Pak Lah was just the first step. More important would be who is going to replace him. Dr Mahathir's main grievance against Pak Lah -- other than his going back on his word regarding Dr Mahathir's legacy and the serve one-term only -- was Khairy Jamaluddin. By Pak Lah's own admission, Khairy and his 'Fourth Floor Boys' were running the country. Pak Lah admitted this to his close circle of friends; so that was no secret.

Dr Mahathir's concern (if this matter were not handled properly) was that it would just be an 'out of the frying pan and into the fire' situation. They oust Pak Lah to be rid of Khairy and end up getting Rosmah Mansor instead when they appoint Najib Tun Razak as successor. How to ensure that they were not merely replacing Khairy with Rosmah -- an even worse proposition?

Dr Mahathir tried to advise Najib that before he can be considered for the job of Prime Minister of Malaysia he would first need to solve the 'problem' of Rosmah. Najib may even have to choose between becoming Prime Minister and staying married to Rosmah. Both are not compatible.

This upset Najib who told Dr Mahathir's 'emissary' to butt out of his personal life. His marriage and the matter of his wife were not open to negotiation. Clearly the subject of Rosmah was a sacred cow (no pun intended). Najib made that point very clear.

Najib would have to be taught a lesson. He was beginning to think that his succession was a God-given right and that once Pak Lah steps down he automatically takes over. Najib will have to learn that whomsoever takes over as Prime Minister would be whatever Dr Mahathir decides and there are no two ways about it.

Dr Mahathir then started talking to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li) and Dr Mahathir made sure that Najib knew about it. So now Dr Mahathir had two candidates for Prime Minister and successor to Pak Lah -- Najib and Ku Li. Whom it was going to be would all depend on who is prepared to accept the terms and conditions.

Ku Li was adamant that he would not accept the role of 'proxy' Prime Minister with a de facto Prime Minister telling him what to do -- so absolutely no President's Council to 'guide' him. If he becomes Prime Minister then he will decide how the country should be run, not someone behind him pulling the strings and telling him what to do.

A few meetings were held between Dr Mahathir and Ku Li and it appeared like the matter was making no progress. Both Dr Mahathir and Ku Li were very stubborn and were not able to put their very large egos aside. There was also the matter of old wounds that had not quite healed.

Finally it ended with both sticking to their guns and refusing to budge. As far as Dr Mahathir was concerned, if Ku Li wanted the job of Prime Minister, he (Ku Li) would have to crawl to him (Dr Mahathir) and beg for it. Ku Li also felt the same way. If Dr Mahathir wants him as Prime Minister he (Dr Mahathir) would have to crawl to him (Ku Li) and beg him (Ku Li) to accept the job.

The matter appeared to have reached a deadlock and those of us caught in the middle who were putting in a lot of effort to make sure that Ku Li and not Najib takes over as Prime Minister were getting quite exasperated. Why won't one of them remove his chip from his shoulder and kowtow to the other? This matter will never be resolved if both remain stubborn.

When it appeared that Ku Li was not going to play ball, Dr Mahathir reverted to Najib. In that final meeting of many that we had with Ku Li (one meeting where Haris Ibrahim and Malik Imtiaz attended), he told us that it looks like he is already out of the race. Without a doubt Dr Mahathir is going to make Najib the Prime Minister. It is not going to be him (Ku Li) after all. So we will have to come up with a plan on how to torpedo Najib's chances.

That 'plan' offered itself in the form of the revelation by the Deputy Head of the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence regarding Rosmah's involvement in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder. And it was decided that I would sign a Statutory Declaration regarding the matter (but that is a story I have already related many times so no need to go into all the details again).

The day after my Statutory Declaration was made public, Dr Mahathir summoned Sanusi Junid to his office to ask him whether he had read what I said in my Statutory Declaration. Sanusi said he had not and Dr Mahathir gave him a copy to read (how Dr Mahathir managed to get a copy so fast I do not know until today).

Sanusi just said, "Oh my God! Why did he do this?" and Dr Mahathir replied, "Raja Petra had just broken the legs of our horse. It looks like we will have to look for a new horse."

But that 'new horse', Ku Li, who saw that Najib's chances of becoming Prime Minister had reduced somewhat, still refused to play ball. Aiyoh, anak Raja ni! Degil sangat!

"Why can't you just agree to Dr Mahathir's terms and conditions and once you become Prime Minister you do a U-turn and tell him to go screw himself, like what Pak Lah did?" we asked him.

But then Ku Li is too much of a gentleman to do that. A deal is a deal and once he agrees to something he would never renege on his word. So he would never deceive Dr Mahathir by saying yes and then shaft Dr Mahathir later once he becomes Prime Minister.

Aiyah! Why so honest one? Politics cannot be played like that! Sometimes we need to use tricks and deception. Say yes and grab the job first. Later we can do a dirty on Dr Mahathir. Once you are Prime Minister and power is in your hands what can Dr Mahathir do about it? If he talks too much just arrest him and put him in jail. That is what I would do.

But that is not Ku Li and he refused to play Dr Mahathir for a sucker. That messed up Ku Li's chances of becoming Prime Minister and, tainted or not, it would have to be Najib who takes over. But before that they would have to discredit my Statutory Declaration.

And that was when they arrested me and charged me for criminal defamation. As much as I protested and explained that I never made any allegation against Rosmah but instead I made an allegation against the Deputy Head of the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence, they still charged me for three counts of criminal defamation.

Once they succeeded in raising doubts as to what they alleged was my accusation against Rosmah, Pak Lah was forced out of office and Najib took over as Prime Minister.

The question now is: is Najib going to remain the Prime Minister or is he on the way out? Of course, if Pakatan Rakyat takes over in the coming general election, certainly Najib would be out. There is no doubt about that. But what if Barisan Nasional manages to hold on to power? Will Najib still remain the Prime Minister or is he going to suffer the same fate as Pak Lah?

I suppose that will have to be another story for another time, if I decide to write it. Anyway, in the meantime stay tuned, in case.

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.

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.

Like a trapped animal (part 1)

Posted: 21 Sep 2012 08:49 PM PDT

My friends told me I was crazy. "What are you going to do if your prediction does not come true?" they asked me. "Well, I suppose I will quietly leave the country," I joked. "Never fear, though," I told them. "There is such a thing called a self-fulfilling prophecy. If enough people believe it, it will happen."

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Who prevails in Umno?

(The Malaysian Insider) - Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah can talk about a better Malaysia, and we don't doubt his sincerity. He has been principled on many issues, and speaks of the knowledge of authority, not the authority of knowledge.

That is the gist of his speech this past week in Melbourne.

"It's not about numbers, it's about qualitative change. There are many paths to a better Malaysia," he told a mixed audience of about 130 at the annual Seminar Pembangunan Insan (Seminar on Human Development) at Melbourne Umno Club (KUAM) on Thursday.

Saifuddin identified four features for the participatory democracy needed to respond to today's new social consciousness, especially among the young — integrity, governance, innovations in democracy, and progressive political thought.

Do the others in Umno or Barisan Nasional (BN) speak of the same things?

Does he speak for Umno or BN for that matter?

The thing is, Saifuddin is of a very small minority in Umno. In fact he stands alone, and is not popular in the party that feels its dominance is an entitlement, a birthright.

And the names he mentioned in his talk in Melbourne — Khairy Jamaluddin and Gan Ping Siew — are not in his class when speaking about change, be it in Putrajaya or within their parties.

The question is this: who has more sway in Putrajaya: Saifuddin or the likes of Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz or Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein or even Datuk Ahmad Maslan?

And who prevails in Umno? At this point in time, it sure doesn't look like its Saifuddin or those like him.

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

That was The Malaysian Insider Editorial today, and a very valid observation and pertinent questions, may I add. Nevertheless, we all know the answer to those questions. Saifuddin Abdullah speaks for the minority, not the majority. And the majority definitely holds the opposite view to Saifuddin's. Should Saifuddin, therefore, even bother to speak up since his is the minority view and his minority view is not going to change anything?

But then is this not always the case? The minority would normally never dare speak up. Take Saifuddin's case as an example. Those in Umno brand him as a Trojan horse. They call him a mole. They allege that he is a Pakatan Rakyat supporter who is trying to sabotage Umno from the inside. They consider him a traitor who is waiting to leave Umno to join the opposition. And because of that he would most likely not be chosen to contest the next election.

The opposition would also whack him. They will say he is not sincere. If he is sincere why is he still in Umno? He should leave Umno now and join the opposition.

Then, when he does leave Umno to join the opposition, he would still get whacked.

Umno will say he is a frustrated person (gulungan keciwa) who left Umno to join the opposition because he is not going to be chosen to contest the next election. The opposition supporters will say the same thing and will speculate that he is an Umno mole who will probably jump back to Umno in the event of a hung Parliament.

The bottom line is, whatever you say and do can never be right. They will still have something to say about you. And being in the minority means you will get whacked by both sides. It is better you remain in the majority, either pro-government or pro-opposition.

If you are in the opposition and you criticise the opposition you will get whacked. If you are in the government and you criticise the government you will get whacked. Hence you either take the side of the government or you take the side of the opposition and then suck up to one side or the other. Then you become a hero.

That, I suppose, is the Malaysian way. That is the Malaysian mindset. You follow the herd. Either you are a cow or you are a goat. And you just moo or bleat when others do, in sync and in tempo with the others. You do not meow in a group that moos or bleats. They will whack you to kingdom come.

And that proves Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's theory that most people, Malaysians included, are like herd. They buy and sell property and shares like herd as well. When people buy they buy. When people sell they sell. Fundamentals play no part in your investment and divestment decisions. You just follow what others do.

And hence would Malaysian politics be any different? If you think that Barisan Nasional is going to win you will vote Barisan Nasional. If you think that Pakatan Rakyat is going to win you will vote Pakatan Rakyat.

This happened in 1999. It happened in 2004. And it happened again in 2008.

Most people would like to believe that Pakatan Rakyat performed the way it did in 2008 because the people already had enough of Barisan Nasional and just wanted a change after half a century of the same government. I hope you do not believe this because if you do then you are going to be in for a rude shock.

No, that was not the reason why 2008 turned out the way it did. People already felt the way they did in 2008 since way back in 1998, ten years before that. The only thing is that most people did not dare act on what they felt because they thought they were in the minority. And people do not like being in the minority. They want to be in the majority.

In 1998, it was mainly the Malays who swung. And they swung because they felt that the Malays who were going to swing were in the majority. And that proved true the following year in the 1999 general election.

The non-Malays I spoke to back in 1998-1999 also felt the same way as the Malays felt. But they were not confident that the swing was large enough. They were worried that the swing would be too small and hence if they joined those who vote against the government they might be in the minority. And the non-Malays told me that it is very dangerous to be in the minority. It is safer to be in the majority. Hence even if they hate Barisan Nasional they would still vote for Barisan Nasional just to be safe.

In 2004, it appeared like the hate factor had disappeared. The people were not really anti-Barisan Nasional as much as they were anti-Dr Mahathir. And the issue against Dr Mahathir was what he did to Anwar Ibrahim. Hence 1999 was a reflection of the Dr Mahathir hate factor.

But Dr Mahathir had already resigned and there was talk that Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi would release Anwar soon after the 11th General Election of March 2004. Hence the Malays are no longer angry with Umno.

Against that backdrop, most likely the Malays would swing back to Umno. So, if the non-Malays voted opposition while the Malays voted Barisan Nasional, the non-Malays will be in the minority. So, again, it would be safer to vote Barisan Nasional, just in case.

And that was exactly what happened in 2004. The Malays swung back to Umno and PAS lost Terengganu and held on to Kelantan with a one-seat majority in the State Assembly.

Phew, lucky the non-Malays did not vote opposition. So they were right for not voting opposition after all. If they did they would be in deep shit. But they still hated Umno and Barisan Nasional though. It is just they did not vote opposition for safety reasons.

Then, in 2007, against the backdrop of the Bersih and Hindaf rallies in November that same year, it appeared like those opposed to the government were in the majority, or at least a large minority. And it appeared like those opposed to the government were not confined to just one race but cut across the board to include all the races. Even Tun Dr Mahathir was opposed to the government. He resigned from Umno and campaigned all over Malaysia to tell the Umno members to not vote for Umno.

It looked like this time it was for real. Many Umno people even supported and joined the Bersih march in November 2007. DAP and PAS members and some leaders also met up with Umno people who supported the move that Umno must be taught a lesson in the general election. There were just so many anti-Umno Umno members and leaders.

This anti-Umno movement was no longer just an opposition thing. Umno people and leaders were against Umno as well. Tun Dr Mahathir himself was against Umno. Umno is finished. It is time everyone voted Pakatan Rakyat. We are now in the majority.

Then we went round the country to speak at ceramahs and announced that Barisan Nasional was going to lose between 80-100 Parliament seats. They were also going to lose five states and probably rule in two states with a simple majority. Barisan Nasional is finished. Even Umno people and its leaders support the opposition. We told the tens of thousands in the audience this will definitely happen. We even named the states that were going to fall to the opposition.

It is just like the stock market or property market. If enough people believe that in January next year the market is going to collapse it will collapse. And it will collapse because people will panic and will sell. So it is the panicking and selling that actually triggers the collapse. That is how self-fulfilling prophecies work.

The people from Sabah and Sarawak were quite sore with us from West Malaysia. We should have gone to East Malaysia and also tell the voters there that Barisan Nasional was going to get whacked, they lamented. The East Malaysian voters did not think it would happen. So they voted Barisan Nasional because they thought the swing is not going to be large enough. If they had known that the swing was actually bigger than they thought then they too would have voted opposition.

Hence the people from East Malaysia would have also followed the herd if they had known. The only thing is they did not know that there was a herd. And that was why they stuck with Barisan Nasional.

The question now is: do the people believe that the swing is still there? Do they believe that the swing is even larger now than in 2008? If they believe that the swing is larger it is going to get larger. But if they believe that the swing has gone back to Barisan Nasional then it will swing back to Barisan Nasional. People have herd mentality and they will follow the herd. They do not want to be in the minority

I will stop here for now and maybe continue later with part 2 of 'Like a trapped animal' and relate what is going to make the people, in particular the Malays, vote Umno.

How the knife cuts both ways

Posted: 19 Sep 2012 05:40 PM PDT

Ngeh's statement was also about taking to the streets being a waste of time. What Ngeh said was basically almost the same as what Tunku Aziz said. But Tunku Aziz was demonised while Ngeh was not. In fact, the reverse happened. PAS supports Ngeh's right to air this personal view, a right not allowed Tunku Aziz.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Perak DAP Chief Ngeh Koo Ham – you are a complete disgrace

(The Kuala Lumpur Post) - Ngeh Koo Ham – you are a complete disgrace. You are just like the other arrogant DAP leaders who do not use their head when they tweet.

How does one describe the DAP leader Manoharan who posted a tweet to run down our badminton hero Lee Chong Wei.

The Perak DAP chief, we are sure, is the kind who would run down Malaysia when he is overseas. We bet our last ringgit he does that.

He is the kind of chauvinist leader who appeals to the many whining Malaysians – who lives in a affluent neighbourhood, has a maid, has three cars or more, travels overseas and enjoys the best of Malaysian life!

One can speculate what are Ngeh's private views regarding the controversial anti-Islam Innocence of Muslims video clip.

He has a sick mind because only a racist mind would post a tweet that read: "Khairy wants Muslim protest against Sam Bacile. For Islam or his political gains? Are Muslims wasting too much time and energy on this."

He has tried to wriggle out of this provocative tweet by claiming he was merely posing a question. Come on, Ngeh, you must think we are as stupid as your DAP groupies and zombies.

You should stop lying and come out with an apology instead. You are clearly insensitive but worse, you have offended the majority of Muslims in Malaysia.

A mistake is one thing but to put that offensive question is another thing. You can only say you are a bloody disgrace.

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

Ngeh Koo Ham keluarkan pandangan peribadi, kata Hatta Ramli

(The Malaysian Insider) - Bendahari PAS Pusat Dr Hatta Mohd Ramli berkata, pengerusi DAP Perak, Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham hanya mengeluarkan pandangan peribadi mengenai demonstrasi menentang klip video nabi yang akan dilangsungkan esok di hadapan Kedutaan Amerika Syarikat (AS) dan tidak mewakili pandangan keseluruhan ahli Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

Menurut beliau, di dalam sebuah negara demokratik, setiap orang berhak untuk mengeluarkan pandangan sendiri asalkan ia tidak melampaui batas.

Pada 16 September lalu, Ngeh telah menulis dalam laman sosial Twitter yang bertulis, "Khairy mahu umat Islam berdemo menentang (klip video) Sam Bacile, untuk Islam atau kepentingan politik? Kenapa umat Islam membuang masa dan tenaga untuk semua ini."

Berikutan dengan kenyataan itu, ia menimbulkan perasaan kurang senang di kalangan beberapa pihak yang mengatakan Ngeh tidak sensitif dengan isu yang berkait dengan agama Islam.

Menurut Dr Hatta lagi, hubungan DAP dan PAS akan terus kekal rapat dalam kerjasama PR biarpun terdapat perbezaan dalam beberapa isu.

(READ MORE HERE)

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

The above was what an Umno Blog wrote, and republished by a few news portals and websites. Ngeh has since apologised for that faux pas here: I retract and apologise to any Muslim who is offended by my tweet.

According to Dr Hatta Mohd Ramli of PAS, Ngeh's 'outburst' was his personal view. Dr Hatta also said, "…di dalam sebuah negara demokratik, setiap orang berhak untuk mengeluarkan pandangan sendiri asalkan ia tidak melampaui batas." (In a democratic country, everyone has a right to air his/her personal view as long as it does not exceed the boundary).

It is apparent that Umno is going to town on this faux pas and this is going to hurt DAP quite badly. And I really don't blame Umno. If I were in Umno's Black Ops or Psychological Warfare team I would do the same. This is certainly not an opportunity to be missed.

But that is not the issue I want to talk about. After all, race, religion and personal attacks are the stuff that Malaysian politics is made of. Basically, it is primary school-level politics. And when words fail, they will resort to violence.

So far, over the last year or so, we have seen the fringes of this violence. Rest assured more and harder stuff is coming and those who talk the most will probably hide within the safety of their homes while those innocent of any involvement will have to suffer the consequences and retaliation. This is the sad reality of violence.

Dr Hatta's conclusion is that everyone has a right to his/her personal view. And Ngeh's statement was just that, his personal view. Hence PAS will not lose any sleep over what Ngeh said.

It is very comforting and reassuring to hear Dr Hatta say that. But then Dr Hatta is a liberal Muslim and the product of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK). Hence he has been moulded into tolerating dissenting views and criticism -- although he may be a leader of an Islamic party and the dissenting view is regarding Islam.

So, not all the more than one billion Muslims are bloodthirsty, medieval-minded, intolerant people. There are many amongst that more than one billion who are open-minded and tolerant of criticism. It is only that they can't be bothered to argue with the close-minded Muslims. Most of us have learned years ago that it is a waste of time trying to debate with religious bigots, never mind from which religion they may come from -- they are all the same.

Hence that is the bottom line -- just ignore the religious bigots. When you ignore them they eventually just shut up and go home. It is when you layan (engage) them that they get all excited. They want an audience and when you give them an audience they will put on an even greater 'show'.

A crucial part of Dr Hatta's statement is that as long as it does not exceed the boundary (asalkan ia tidak melampaui batas) it is okay to express your personal view.

And herein lies the problem.

Where is this boundary and at what point would one be perceived as 'exceeding the boundary'? Is calling Anwar Ibrahim BABI (Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim), as what the Umno Blogs do, be melampaui batas? What about calling Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad Mahatahi? Is this within the boundary (tidak melampaui batas)?

The boundary is invisible and very subjective. I would consider BABI and Mahatahi as definitely melampaui batas. The Umno and Pakatan supporters, however, do not think so. They think this is very kosher. In that case would calling Prophet Muhammad a paedophile be considered kosher or melampaui batas?

I suppose the yardstick would be: do unto others as you would others do unto you. Some Umno Bloggers call my mother a prostitute. I hate that. Hence I would not call any other person's mother a prostitute since I do not like my mother being called that.

The more crucial issue in this whole Ngeh episode is that Dr Hatta regards what Ngeh said as his personal view and that under a democracy Ngeh has a right to his personal views.

Okay, that is well and fine -- what Ngeh said is his personal view and under a democracy Ngeh has a right to his personal views. But do the DAP people also practice what Dr Hatta's preaches? I remember when Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim expressed his personal view and he was whacked kau-kau for that. Does not Tunku Aziz also have a right to his personal view just like Ngeh?

What Tunku Aziz said was regarding demonstrations. He did not think Malaysians should take to the streets, as this is a violation of Malaysian laws. (Whether we agree or not with that law would be another matter but it would still be breaking the law).

The opposition has to decide whether freedom of speech is allowed or not. No need to ask Umno or Barisan Nasional this question. Umno and Barisan Nasional do not allow freedom of speech. It is the opposition that is fighting for freedom of speech. So we need to ask the opposition this question, not ask Umno or Barisan Nasional.

It appears like the opposition is not consistent with its stand regarding freedom of speech. When we say something they don't like they whack us. They call us all sorts of foul names. They call us a traitor and turncoat. They call us a Trojan horse. But when they commit a faux pas they scream freedom of speech to squirm out of their mistake.

And please stop this "if you criticise the opposition that means you support Barisan Nasional" nonsense. That is so, so childish. Some of us might do just that, support Barisan Nasional, just to teach you phoneys and fakes a lesson. Barisan Nasional may be bad but at least they do not pretend to be angels. They are bad and proud of it. You opposition people pretend to be angels but behind that mask you are no different from Barisan Nasional.

Just practice what you preach. Walk the talk. Then you will get our support. Until then, shape up or ship out. Your choice!

The Kuching Declaration: all dressed up and nowhere to go

Posted: 17 Sep 2012 06:29 PM PDT

Take one point as an example. To become a great nation we need an efficient and professional civil service, judiciary, police force, etc. And for that to happen we need good people in government. And to see good people in government we need to abolish our discriminatory policies and implement meritocracy. And that would mean certain 'sacrifices' would be needed.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

LEST WE FORGET, AND LEST ALL THE PEOPLES OF OUR GREAT NATION OF MALAYSIA FORGET, WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, DO ONCE AGAIN FIRMLY, RESOLUTELY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY PLEDGE AND PROMISE BEFORE THE WHOLE NATION OF MALAYSIA AS OUR WITNESSES, ON THIS HISTORIC DAY THE 16TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2012, IN THE CITY OF KUCHING, AND ON BEHALF OF OUR RESPECTIVE PARTIES AND PAKATAN RAKYAT AS A WHOLE, THAT WHEN WE FORM THE NEXT GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA, PAKATAN RAKYAT WILL HONOUR ALL ITS PLEDGES AND PROMISES TO THE PEOPLES OF MALAYSIA.

WE WILL HONOURABLY EXECUTE ALL THE POLICIES SET FORTH IN THE BUKU JINGGA SO THAT MALAYSIA WILL ONCE AGAIN BE A GREAT NATION, HER PEOPLES PROSPEROUS, HER FUTURE SECURE AND PEACEFUL, AND HER NAME CELEBRATED BY ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD.

WE WILL HONOUR THE SPIRIT OF THE MALAYSIA AGREEMENT OF 1963 WHICH OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THEIR HANDS TO, AND AS A SIGN OF OUR DEEP COMMITMENT TO THE PEOPLES OF SARAWAK AND SABAH, CONSISTENT WITH DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES AND JUSTICE FOR ALL MALAYSIANS, IN PARTICULAR:

ARTICLE ONE: EQUAL PARTNERS

We will restore the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement and the position of Sarawak and Sabah as equal partners within Malaysia by restoring autonomy to Sarawak and Sabah within the framework of the Federal Constitution.

ARTICLE TWO: FAIR REPRESENTATION

We will increase national integration between Sarawak, Sabah and Peninsular Malaysia through a fair power-sharing arrangement that fully upholds the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement.

ARTICLE THREE: CITIZENSHIP

We will set up a Royal Commission to solve the perennial national problem of illegal immigration and citizenship, particularly in Sarawak and Sabah.

ARTICLE FOUR: RESTORATION OF NATIVE CUSTOMARY RIGHTS OVER LAND

We will endorse the authority already vested in the State Laws of Sarawak and Sabah to set up Land Commissions to investigate, resolve disputes, redress, survey and restore Native Customary Rights over Native Customary Lands.

ARTICLE FIVE: COMPETENT SARAWAK AND SABAH

We will endorse the appointment of Sarawak and Sabah citizens to head Government Departments in their own respective States and by the powers vested in the State Secretaries of both States as well as give first priority to the appointment of Sarawak and Sabah citizens at Federal Government level functioning within Sarawak and Sabah.

ARTICLE SIX: OIL JUSTICE

We will raise the royalties paid on petroleum and hydrocarbon resources to Sarawak and Sabah to 20% from the present 5%.

ARTICLE SEVEN: EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT

We will bring the level of infrastructure development in Sarawak and Sabah up to par with Peninsular Malaysia.

We, the undersigned, make this declaration as an incontrovertible contract between the Pakatan Rakyat and the peoples of Malaysia, this historic day of 16th September, 2012 on Malaysia Day, so that it may ring out resoundingly from Malaysia's high forest hills down to the open sea; so that freedom may ever reign; and our peoples live in unity!

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

I sat and mulled over The Kuching Declaration over the last two days trying to decipher what we can expect to see once Pakatan Rakyat takes over the Federal Government. I then went through The People's Declaration of February 2008 that Pakatan Rakyat signed in an official ceremony in the run up to the 12th General Election. My purpose was to see where the two Declarations agree and where they disagree.

Actually there is no contradiction between the two -- only that the sentence structure is different -- plus, while The People's Declaration goes into details (some complain that there are too much details), The Kuching Declaration merely states an aspiration minus any details.

Clearly The Kuching Declaration is a political statement that does not include a working plan. Hence there should be a more detailed Addendum or Lampiran as to how each Article of the Declaration is going to be implemented.

Let's take one example: SO THAT MALAYSIA WILL ONCE AGAIN BE A GREAT NATION, HER PEOPLES PROSPEROUS, HER FUTURE SECURE AND PEACEFUL, AND HER NAME CELEBRATED BY ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD.

That was what The Kuching Declaration said.

'So that Malaysia will once again be a great nation'. We need to be specific as to what period of time Malaysia was supposed to be this great nation that we are talking about and in what way it was great. And how do we measure greatness?

We must remember that greatness is subjective. For example, some people may measure Malaysia's greatness as being during the time of P. Ramli and Saloma when there was no racial discord and Malay girls/women wore sleeveless/short dresses/skirts and Malay men could openly go to cabarets and drink beer. The 'old-timers' would say: those were the good old days -- when Rose Chan performed in BB Park and Chinese or Indian boys could date Malay girls. Malaysia was a great place to live. The Malaysia of today is not that great any more, they would lament.

Others would say that the great days of Malaysia was when Chinese and Indians could rise to become the heads of government departments or head the police force and military services. Today, they lament, you need to be a Malay-Muslim to become the head. The fact that this has resulted in a serious decline in standards and morals proves that an all-Malay administration is not good for the country, they argue.

Hence, to bring Malaysia back to its days of greatness would involve doing away with the New Economic Policy and racial discrimination/quotas in favour of meritocracy that is colour blind. Is Pakatan Rakyat prepared to announce that as its masterplan on how Malaysia will be brought back to greatness?

The devil, as they say, is in the details. Hence we need the details of the real meaning of greatness and how this greatness can be restored to what it used to be.

The rest of the statement (HER PEOPLES PROSPEROUS, HER FUTURE SECURE AND PEACEFUL, AND HER NAME CELEBRATED BY ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD) is also mere rhetoric. The world is getting poorer because nations are printing 'paper' 24-7 without any real wealth or gold backing. The world is also becoming a more dangerous place to live with wars and killings being a daily occurrence. And how do you expect Malaysia to be 'CELEBRATED BY ALL THE NATIONS OF THE WORLD' when we come out with guidelines on how to detect schoolchildren who might one day grow up to become gay or obedient wives' clubs formed to teach wives how to become whores?

We need to first stop being the joker of the world before we can expect to be celebrated by all the nations of the world. Hence for this statement to become part of The Kuching Declaration is itself a joke. The Malaysian mindset is so warped that it is impossible for Malaysia to be celebrated by all the nations of the world. We are actually the laughing stock of the world.

So, if Pakatan Rakyat wants us to take The Kuching Declaration seriously, it has to stop joking, unless that part of the statement was meant as tongue-in-cheek or sarcasm.

If all Pakatan Rakyat wants is a 'feel good' statement then The Kuching Declaration would have achieved that purpose. But if what they intended was to lay out the blueprint as to what we can expect under a Pakatan Rakyat federal government then The Kuching Declaration failed miserably because it does not tell us how all that is going to happen.

Let me put it another way. Sex is in the mind. If your mind is not into sex then you can't even get an erection. So you need to first be in the right frame of mind. Reforming the country, as what The Kuching Declaration is really all about, is also in the mind. So, if we are not in the right frame of mind here, we will also not see anything happen.

Hence, are we prepared to first get into the right frame of mind to ensure that what Pakatan Rakyat is promising us will become a reality?

We can kick out Barisan Nasional. We can vote Pakatan Rakyat in to office. That is no big deal. That can happen if we want it to happen. But can Pakatan Rakyat deliver on its promises if we vote them in to office?

Pakatan Rakyat can never deliver its election promises unless we allow them to do so. Just like Pakatan Rakyat can never take over Putrajaya unless we allow them to, in that same spirit, Pakatan Rakyat cannot deliver its promises unless we allow them to do so.

So I don't really care what Pakatan Rakyat is promising us. After all, they made many promises in the past and not always did they deliver what they promised. What I want to know is what are we going to allow Pakatan Rakyat to do?

At the end of the day it is about us and not about Pakatan Rakyat. And, this, we fail to see. We are the cause of the problems but we conveniently blame the government for what we are doing or not doing.

The question would be: are WE, Malaysians, the voters, prepared to sacrifice? This is not up to Pakatan Rakyat. All they can do is make promises. But whether they can do anything about these promises all depend on us.

Hence, as I said, are we prepared to first get into the right frame of mind to ensure that what Pakatan Rakyat is promising us will become a reality? If we are not, then Pakatan Rakyat is going to fail. There is nothing Pakatan Rakyat can do if we do not allow them to do it. And, currently, Malaysians merely scream about reforms but are not prepared to really reform.

Reforms is not merely about shouting and screaming, which is what we are doing all the time. Reforms is about biting the bullet and daring to change. And that would mean a paradigm shift. But do you even know what the term 'paradigm shift' means?

All I can say is be careful with what you wish for. If you are not ready then don't wish for it. And if you are not ready then Pakatan Rakyat's Kuching Declaration is going to end up just like The People's Declaration, all hot air and habuk in the end.

I suppose that brings to mind the old saying: don't ask what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. And that would also include: don't ask how Pakatan Rakyat is going to reform the country but how far you are prepared to 'tolerate' reforms. And note I used 'tolerate' because Malaysians would not even tolerate Bibles in Bahasa Malaysia or gay entertainers singing in the country, so I just don't see how we can talk about reforms.

That, basically, will determine whether The Kuching Declaration is going to be a load of bullshit in the end. We, not Pakatan Rakyat, will determine that.

How to die by the sword

Posted: 15 Sep 2012 07:43 PM PDT

In fact, to be honest, I am actually quite delighted. I am enjoying seeing these people suffer what I have suffered. Okay, maybe it is not fair of me to think like this. But who cares about being fair? I mean, when someone does something to you, you consider it poetic justice when the same thing is done to him or her. Hence I don't really care whether what is being done to them is fair or not. I am just so happy that they are now being subjected to what they subjected me to.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Suaram trio told to explain foreign funding

Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) is calling on PKR leader Tian Chua and Suara Rakyat Malaysia director Kua Kia Soong and co-founder R. Sivarasa to explain to Malaysians why Suaram is allegedly funded by foreign parties.

JMM president Azwanddin Hamzah yesterday urged the trio to hold a press conference to inform the rakyat why foreign influence had been used to interfere in the country's political agenda.

"We also want to know if Tian Chua, Sivarasa and Kua have paid taxes to the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) from the funds received from currency speculator George Soros.

"It's very clear that Soros was the mastermind behind the plans of bringing down the country's economy," he said yesterday in a statement.

Azwanddin urged IRB chief executive officer Tan Sri Mohd Shukor Mahfar to investigate and ensure that the key Suaram figures were paying corporate income tax.

Suaram has been plagued with controversy with reports that it was not a non-governmental organisation but an entity registered as a company called Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd and the revelation of "highly suspicious" fund transactions between Suaram and Suara Inisiatif.

The Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism Ministry has been investigating whether an American non-governmental organisation that is allegedly funding Suaram is linked to Soros.

Emails have been reportedly found linking the money to Soros.

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

Perkasa: Suaram funders also behind LGBT programmes

Malay rights group Perkasa information chief Ruslan Kasim has claimed that the funders of Suaram were also responsible for supporting programmes for the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transexual (LGBT) community.

This, he said in an Mingguan Malaysia report today, was on top of funding Suaram with the purpose of smearing Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak in the Scorpene controversy and the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu.

"They also fund programmes for apostasy, free sex like LGBT. These are all against Islam," he was quoted as saying.

Ruslan was referring to Suaram's overseas funding which the government has claimed that among others, came from organisations linked to currency speculator George Soros.

Ruslan also questioned whether Suaram had paid private investigator P Balasubramaniam to make a statutory declaration to smear the premier's name.

"We want to know who funded Suaram to pay the private investigator to make the statutory declaration," he was quoted as saying.

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

10 sebab Anwar tidak layak jadi PM

1. Sokong Israel

2. Bantuan asing (kini terbukti SUARAM)

3. Anwar pluralisme Islam

4. Buku Jingga manifesto akan rosakkan ekonomi negara

5. Tiada kabinet bayangan. Siapa Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan?

6. Sokong LGBT yang hukum haram

7. Pembohongan 916 satu politik yang amat besar

8. Mahu jatuhkan kerajaan guna demonstrasi jalanan ... Tahrir Square

9. Video China doll tulin dan Anwar tak jelaskan

10. Kes liwat tak selesai dan Mahkamah Tinggi lepaskan atas teknikal

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

It looks like the 'Gang Suaram' is under serious attack. Tian Chua, R. Sivarasa, Dr. Kua Kia Soong, Dr. Yeoh Seng Guan, Elizabeth Wong, Cynthia Gabriel, Latheefa Koya, Yap Swee Seng, Premesh Chandran, Edmund Bon, S. Arutchelvam, and a couple of others, all have bullets with their names on them.

They are alleged to have received illegal funding from overseas sources. They are alleged to have received financial support from George Soros. They are alleged to be tools of the Americans. They are alleged to be supporters of Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transexuals (LGBTs). They are alleged to be behind the move to get Muslims to leave Islam. They are alleged to be Communists. They are alleged to have bribed private investigator P. Balasubramanian into signing a false statutory declaration to defame and slander Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. There are questions as to whether these 'Gang Suaram' people may also be involved with the same people who are behind the recent ant-Islam movie. In fact, if the sun starts rising from the west instead of the east, these people would probably be blamed for that as well.

Are these allegations fair? Are these allegations founded? Is there any truth in these allegations?

I suppose that is not important. What is important would be: can these people prove their innocence? If these allegations were not true then they would have to offer evidence to prove that they are not true.

Maybe two years ago I would not be talking like this. Two years ago, I will have said that the accuser needs to prove the allegation. The accused needs not prove anything. Those who make the allegation need to prove it.

That would have been two years ago.

Since then, however, the rules have changed. The new rule is: once an allegation has been made against you then you need to prove that the allegation is not true. Until you can prove it is not true then we must consider it as true. You are guilty until you can prove your innocence.

I did not realise until about two years ago in 2010 that this is the new rule of the game. And I was subjected to this new rule. As much as I tried to protest and profess my innocence, whatever I said was not accepted. I am guilty until I could prove I am innocent.

I have actually got quite used to it by now. I suppose after two years you can sort of get used to anything. Hence I find it extremely difficult to sympathise with all these people.

The important thing, though, is not whether you or I care about what is being done to them or whether it is fair or not. I think most people who read Malaysia Today have already more or less made up their minds as to which party they are going to vote for. It is the fence sitters that matter more.

For example, most non-Malay voters in Selangor already know whether they are going to vote for Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat. A large majority has already made up their mind. Hence the Chinese, Indians and 'lain-lain' do not really matter.

The future of Selangor will depend on the Malay voters. Hence Umno and Barisan Nasional need to convince the Malay voters that all these allegations against the 'Gang Suaram' are true. And if the Malays are convinced then Pakatan Rakyat is going to lose a lot of Malay votes. And that would mean Barisan Nasional would be able to take back Selangor, the jewel in the crown.

To me this goes beyond Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat. It is about seeing those people who unfairly accuse me of something I did not do now suffer the same fate.

Is Pakatan Rakyat going to get hurt by this? Who the hell cares! All I care about is that the gang that went out of their way to whack me is now getting whacked and that they might lose Selangor because of it.

I suppose, as they say, revenge is best served cold. Hmm…I am enjoying this so much I'm at the point of getting an orgasm.

It’s in the soul

Posted: 13 Sep 2012 07:10 PM PDT

Now, while all this was going on, while I was scrambling to raise the money to save my house, P.I. Bala and the Pakatan Rakyat people go and make nasty statements about deals I am doing with Umno. Then I discover that P.I. Bala is in secret negotiations with Hamzah Zainuddin, one of the chaps who is the cause of my financial problems.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

So you think you have soul, do you? Well, how do you know? Are you really sure you have soul? You probably think that soul is that thing that leaves your body and goes to heaven or hell when you die. That is not soul, at least not the type of soul that I mean.

People who have soul listen to Santana, Led Zeppelin, Uriah Heep, Jethro Tull, Grand Funk, Jimi Hendix, The Rolling Stones, and bands of their ilk. The list just goes on and you can throw in The Kinks, Manfred Mann, Creedence Clearwater Revival, and whatnot if you want to -- still good to listen to after all these years, 50 years to be exact.

Anyway, depending on what I wish to write for the day, I will switch on my iTunes and search through my library of albums and play the songs that will put me in the mood that I want to be in. And today, as I write this, I am playing Santana's 'Guitar Heaven'. And the volume of my Bose speakers will blow your mind, let me assure you.

So, with Santana's 'Guitar Heaven' blaring away in the background, guess what mood I am currently in. Yes, I am in that type of the mood -- the mood that wants to break heads and smash faces. And the head I want to break and the face I want to smash is that of private investigator Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal, a.k.a P.I. Bala.

Is that unfair of me? Well, I hold dear the old belief that if you 'share salt' at the same table with someone, then you do not betray that person. In fact, that is the sure way of knowing that you are not going to be betrayed. You share salt at the same table with your host/guest and that is the guarantee you will get to walk away from that table in one piece. No host/guest will assassinate you when you share salt at his table.

But that is an old English belief and P.I. Bala is not English. Hence he does not understand what I would regard as noble and honourable values. Hence, after he shared salt at my table, he turned around and betrayed me. Even assassins do not do this. But P.I Bala did this. And because of that it is warranted that I put a price on his head. So now he can't go back to Malaysia like he hoped he could. A person with a price on his head is worth more dead than alive.

To understand what I am driving at, I will have to rewind 15 years or so. And the personalities involved are Datuk Hamzah Zainuddin, the Deputy Minister for Plantation Industries and Commodities; Nik Anuar Nik Salleh, the business partner of Datuk Kamaruddin Jaafar, the PAS Member of the Parliament for Tumpat; James Au, the one-time General Manager of Rhone Poulenc; and Abdul Rahman Adnan, a lawyer and one of Anwar Ibrahim's speech writers in Institut Kajian Dasar or IKD. Incidentally, Nik Anuar's wife, Zaidah Omar Baki, is the best friend of Anwar Ibrahim's sister, Farizon.

And the story goes as follows.

Hamzah Zainuddin and Nik Anuar were doing business with Rhone Poulenc through their company called Medik & Kimia 2000 Sdn Bhd. Rhone Poulenc was importing unapproved vaccines for poultry and pigs so they were not able to market them since they were not approved by the government. Hence Medik & Kimia 2000 Sdn Bhd was used as the front company to do all the distribution. In the event that the authorities found out, Rhone Poulenc would not face prosecution.

Of course, not long after that, Malaysia faced a huge problem and many diseased pigs had to be culled at a great loss to the pig farmers. Many pig farmers also died. Hence it made sense to shield Rhone Poulenc from something like this by using a front company such as Medik & Kimia 2000 Sdn Bhd.

Anyway, James Au, Hamzah Zainuddin and Nik Anuar later came out with a plan to fleece Rhone Poulenc of a couple of million Ringgit. They siphoned out more than RM1 million but they had to make it appear like James Au attempted to recover the money or else he might be implicated in the scam.

However, instead of suing the company, Hamzah Zainuddin or Nik Anuar, they sued me. And the suit was for RM1.3 million. And in that statement of claim they alleged that I had guaranteed that amount.

I went to see Abdul Rahman Adnan, my classmate in school and one of Anwar Ibrahim's 'key men', and requested him to act for me, which he agreed. On the day of the hearing, Rahman went to court but the judge would not listen to our arguments. Rhone Poulenc's lawyer insisted that I had guaranteed that debt and the judge would not listen to Rahman's argument that I never guaranteed that debt and that the document is a fake.

That same day, Rahman asked me to go to his office and he related what had happened in court. Rahman explained that the judge told them she was late for a lunch appointment so she was in a hurry to make her decision and did not have time to listen to long drawn-out arguments. Hence we lost the case -- because the judge was pressed for time and was late for her lunch appointment.

I asked Rahman what I should do and he suggested that I should transfer or sell any property that I might own before they get me declared a bankrupt. I was flabbergasted. Was this the best advice Rahman could offer me?

I then went to Sri Ram and Co. to seek the advise of the late Manjit Singh Gurcharan Singh. Manjit looked at my case and said that the case is so simple he cannot understand why Rahman Adnan could not win it for me. I told Manjit about the judge being late for lunch and all that and Manjit replied that this normally happens -- younger lawyers get intimidated by senior judges so the judges would bully them.

Manjit agreed to help me and winked that his boss, Sri Ram, was the President of the Appeal Court. I suppose that meant Sri Ram would not brush off our case with the excuse that he was late for lunch.

However, Manjit found he could not take this matter further because somehow the entire file had disappeared. Manjit told me that this is also quite normal. It costs a very little to bribe an office boy to make files disappear. Many lawyers do this, Manjit explained.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, Manjit died and I was detained under ISA. On the third day of my detention, they sent a letter to my house giving me 14 days to contest the bankruptcy application against me. I was, of course, detained for almost 60 days so they made me a bankrupt by default. By the time I was released it was already water under the bridge and I did not have the money to engage a lawyer to take this case to court.

To add insult to injury -- or rather more injury to injury -- they quietly deleted my name on the land title of my house without informing me. I did not know until later when I tried to sell my house that I no longer owned that house.

The lawyer told me that they can't do this and he suggested that I take this case to court and challenge it. The lawyer was confident I could win because the transfer was done illegally. But it would probably take many years and tens of thousands in legal fees.

I felt it would be a waste of time and money. I could not afford ten years and the RM50,000 or RM100,000 in legal fees. Instead, I asked my daughter to go meet the authorities and try to negotiate a settlement. They agreed that this matter can be settled for a payment of RM215,000. We tried to appeal this figure but it was rejected. The figure stays at RM215,000.

My daughter then went to the bank to secure a loan for an amount of RM215,000 to pay off the authorities. A few months ago we paid the authorities the RM215,000 to 'buy back' my house.

Fucking hell! I was made a bankrupt because a judge was late for lunch. I was sued for RM1.3 million on the false allegation that I had guaranteed a debt by an Umno Deputy Minister -- while he was not sued whereas he is a multi-millionaire who had paid his wife RM10 million in a divorce settlement. Then they illegally transferred my house and forced me to pay RM215,000 to 'buy back' the house. And P.I. Bala and these Pakatan Rakyat people have the gall to say I have made a deal.

Man, if that is what they do to me when I 'make a deal', imagine what they would do to me if there were no deal. Yes, that is the type of mood I am in today. I am in a fucking mood. And blame it all on Santana.

To call or not to call, that is the question

Posted: 11 Sep 2012 05:31 PM PDT

Ambiga also dismissed claims that Najib was concerned that if the polls were held before the term expired in April 2013, Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states would not dissolve their respective assemblies. "I don't buy that excuse. He [Najib] kept the nation on election mode. Even the recent Merdeka celebration was an election campaign," she said.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Delay polls and risk punishment

The Bersih leader takes the prime minister to task for delaying the general election with no good reason, describing this as disconcerting and irresponsible.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Describing this as both "disconcerting and irresponsible", Bersih co-chairperson S Ambiga warned Najib that the continued delay could prove to be perilous for him and BN.

She said that it would not come as a surprise if the voters, including the fence-sitters, punished him for this feet-dragging in the next polls.

"I understand it is the Westminster system and it is the prerogative of the prime minister. But a good government should be prepared to take on the election and not be afraid to set a date," she told FMT.

"We have been in election mode since he [Najib] took over and everyone has been pumped up. He drops hints [about the polls] and that is irresponsible. You don't toy with people's feelings.

"People are fed up! They can't plan things like going on holidays and so forth. Furthermore, it affects investor confidence.

"That's why I say it is irresponsible. If this is how a government is going to play with the election date, then it would be best to have a fixed date for polling," she added.

Ambiga said as political leaders in other parts of the world discussed the economic crisis and recession, their Malaysian counterparts were still engrossed in politicking.

"So who is running the country? This is unacceptable," she stressed.

(READ MORE HERE)

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

Step out of Dr M's shadow, call for GE

DAP national chairman says Najib must earn the right to be prime minister. He also wants the PM to bestow bumiputera status for all Malaysians born on and after August, 1957.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak must quash the perception that Dr Mahathir Mohamad is still running the nation.

To do this, DAP Karpal Singh said Najib must call for a general election and earn his right to be the prime minister.

Pointing to the ever growing public excitement and demand for the general election, he said it was time for Najib to come out of Mahathir's shadow.

"The perception is that Mahathir is the de facto prime minister," he told reporters here.

Mahathir, who stepped down in 2003 after 22 years at the helm, continues to be an influential leader in both Barisan Nasional and Umno.

The 84-year-old statesman also played an instrumental role in removing former premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, to pave the way for Najib's rise to the post.

(READ MORE HERE)

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

Selangor will skip early polls, says Pakatan

(The Malaysian Insider) - Selangor will not hold state polls concurrently with an early 13th general election, federal opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) said today, citing complaints about the electoral rolls in the state.

PR now governs the states of Selangor, Kedah, Kelantan and Pulau Pinang.

"I agree with Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim that Selangor will not have state elections if there's snap polls because SPR (the Election Commission) has not yet cleaned the names (in the electoral roll)," said Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at a press conference today.

According to Anwar, Selangor had offered funds to help the Election Commission (EC) in cleaning the electoral roll.

Anwar said Kelantan has decided to have state polls together with the general election, while Penang was still mulling over the option.

PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali, who was also present at the press conference, said that the Kedah government has also not decided on when it will hold state polls.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Selasa, 25 September 2012

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Pengikut

Trafik

Live Traffic

Mesyuarat Tingkap

Archive