Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- The meaning of God and the freedom of religion
- Red faces over ‘1314’ mistake
- The Story Behind Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming Corruption Scandal
- EC slams NGOs for revealing info on discussions
- Tear gas decision at Bersih called for, says top cop
- Is DAP bowing to Malay interests?
- Zairil is an elected CEC member in DAP: Is this a mishap of miscalculation or calculated ...
- Time to set up a Ministry of Minority Affairs
- LTAT: No army funds used in Boustead deal
- Bar to look into Tan Sri lawyer’s possible misconduct
- Why can’t Rosli have his say in court?
- Anwar fails to strike out charges against him in Bersih 3.0 case
- Robert Phang files RM100mil defamation suit against ex IGP Musa Hassan
- DAP admits counting error left Zairil out of CEC
- Surendran – a man whose facts do not figure
- SNAP’s sec-gen quits over ‘BN leanings’
- The other Allah debate
- ‘Toothbrush maker financing Puspahanas’
- Disillusioned activist Sindu quits STAR
| The meaning of God and the freedom of religion Posted: 04 Jan 2013 11:37 AM PST
If a faith can be destroyed, it must be a faith in lies. A faith that is really a faith in truth is never afraid of being destroyed; it cannot because truth cannot be destroyed. Only lies are afraid of being broken, only lies need protection. Truth in itself is self-evident. So if you have some faith which is just a lie, it makes you secure. freedom The meaning of God and the existence of God are issues of great importance in relation to the freedom of religion. For this simply discussion, it might be better to come to some understanding as to what we understand by the term "God" without applying etymology. Generally speaking we have: First meaning, according to Rev. Prof. Frederick Copleston: presume to mean – provisionally at least - a supreme personal being – distinct from the world and creator of the world, such a being actually exists, and that His existence can be proved philosophically. The Christian God is a personal God. This does not mean that God is a human being, but that God has "personality" and the capability of both relationships with other personal beings. In his debate with Father Copleston, Bertrand Russell accepted this definition although his position is that of agnosticism. The keyword is "personal being". Second meaning, according to Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh or Osho: God is not a person, God is the totality of all that is. The whole creative energy of existence is God. God is not the creator; rather, God is the creative force, the very creation itself. For the New Age Movement (NAM), the second meaning of God is more appropriate. New Agers practice a non-judgmental attitude toward error and falsehood. They believe that everyone's path is their own choosing and that it is all from God. So they could never say someone or something was wrong. Nature is indifferent to our values, and can only be understood by ignoring our notions of good and bad. Thus it is appropriate to assume that God is impersonal. The keyword is "creative force". Third meaning, when Prophet Muhammad was asked by his contemporaries about Allah; the answer came directly from Allah Himself in the form of a short chapter of the Qur'an, which reads: "In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate. Say (O Muhammad), He is God, the One God, the Everlasting Refuge, who has not begotten, nor has been begotten, and equal to Him is not anyone". Is Allah personal or impersonal in Islam? Islamic description of Allah is unknowable and above comprehension, only adjectival words are allowed. It is considered blasphemous to "presume" that one can know Allah intimately or claim any sort of close, personal fellowship with him, thus it is safe to assume that Allah is impersonal. The keyword is "unknowable". Four questions are posed based on the principle of four-cornered negation in Indian Philosophy: Is God personal? Is God impersonal? Is God both personal and impersonal? Is God neither personal nor impersonal? Sanjaya (6th. B. C.), the best known sceptic during his time would not only not say a definite "Yes" to any question, but would also not give a definite "No". That is God cannot be directly expressed, but only as the negation of negation. In any religion, God cannot be both personal and impersonal because the former will be first and foremost, in order for God to be impersonal, God must be personal first. This is an a posteriori justification and it is very difficult to imagine God's eternalness if impersonal God came first. For God, the transition from impersonal to personal is meaningless, for example, humans are created from earth, humans are personal being but earth is not. Either personal God or impersonal God had created humans from earth. Humans are not God, but it is meaningful for personified humans to create impersonal objects such as cars, ships, computers etc. Then who created God? We leave this question as it leads to an infinite regression. -9 -8 -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The zero in the arithmetical series of numbers above is an indeterminate quantity and to say minus zero or plus zero makes no difference, but it is still a number. If it is not positive or negative, we cannot say it is both positive and negative because positive and negative are opposite and cannot be attributed to the same number. So if God is neither personal nor impersonal, the metaphysical conception of emptiness or nihilism came into play and thus God does not exist or God could possibly had been invented by humans. The way science inquires and progresses is exactly the way of man's inner search to find the truth and becomes a lab unto himself. The Buddha could not find any God within himself or outside after searching to the very core of his being, thus Buddhists do not believe in God, instead they talk about Nirvana. Buddha's religion is based in an inner benediction, in an inner blessing – it has nothing to do with fear, especially of God. Buddha says that it is not because of fear that should you be moral, but because of understanding. The coming of a super mind, a perfect being or messiah who will lead us into a long awaited era of universal peace, love and joy is being anticipated by all religion - the Hindu Avatar, the Al Mahdi of the Muslims, the Jewish Messiah, the Buddhist Maitreya, or the second coming of Christ. Are they all point to the same being that is soon to come or are they different? So which God, revelation or teaching is true, real or right? The most contentious issue is the formation of theocratic state which put the question of whether God is personal, impersonal or not existing untenable. With the formation and implementation of theocratic state by force, some adherents might reject religious pluralism which claims that all religions are equally true and equally good. They also accept that only their religion possesses the perfect and complete revelation. This is the recipe for invitation to war when each side claimed to have the mandate from God and why freedom of religion is so important as Bertrand Russell asserts: "When two men of science disagree, they do not invoke the secular arm; they wait for further evidence to decide the issue, because, as men of science, they know that neither is infallible. But when two theologians differ, since there is no criteria to which either can appeal, there is nothing for it but mutual hatred and an open or covert appeal to force." Many unaltered verses in the Qu'ran did mention about fighting the infidels. The Qur'an certainly proclaims that when the time is appropriate, Muslims must use force or perhaps other subtle ways to convert the unbelievers to Islam and to punish or kill anyone who leaves Islam. According to the principle of abrogation, "Let there be no compulsion in religion" is being abrogated by the later texts "Verses of the sword" to compel conversion of the infidel by armed violence which historically Islam's preferred method. At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity and Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. In the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks, Saudi religious and political leaders, in the process of extending their condolences to President Bush, also extended an invitation to him to convert to Islam. Realistical, authentical or ethical questions aside, the above paragraph is only comprehensible if God is personal, God's command is His personal command and not His will, intention or desire. Humans must believe that they are able to fly before working on building an aeroplane. A human who only will could never take to the sky or change the world. The emphasis is on why we want to believe before doing the correct things. Similarly, only personal God has the prerogative to choose a different mode to reveal the Qu'ran through Jibril as compared to how the Torah is revealed to Moses and the Bible by Jesus. Thus, it is also understandable and sensible when Pope Urban II orders the first Crusade to take back Christian lands from Muslim invaders since he is the representative of personal God on earth. The essence of worship in Islam is the feeling of gratitude towards Allah. The feeling of gratitude is so important that a non-believer is called a kafir or an infidel, which means one who denies the truth and also one who is ungrateful. This essence of worship is comprehensible only if God is personal and knowable as He is able to grant us our wishes, as only personal God can wills before any yields, otherwise it is similar to the worshiping the water, rock or tree believed to contain unknowable divine character of the natural world as practiced in paganism. Let's compare God to gravitational force to distinguish personal and impersonal God. Impersonal God can never grant us our wishes. Take for example, a man who worships gravitational force a million times, he will still die a million times if he jumped a million times from a hundred storey building without a parachute; unless a personal God commanded some angels to save him from crashing. So men do not pray and will not be grateful to all these existing forces but they have to do some study to understand them. These existing forces will not reveal its formula or theories to us by worshiping them but it is for us to use scientific approach and experiments to realize them. But Islamic understanding is more on "textual and orthodox consensus" rather than philosophical construct as we see in the case of the short term success of the Mu'tazilite theology based on reason and rational thought. The adherents of the Mu'tazilite school are best known for their assertion that because of the perfect unity and eternal nature of Allah, the Qu'ran must therefore had been created, as it could not be co-eternal with God. This created two possibilities, on the one hand, distinguishing the Divine attributes (living, powerful, generous, speech) from the Divine essence (God's oneness) with the former subordinate to the latter and on the other end, those who were against the Mu'tazilite insisted that the attributes of God were real beings that eternally subsist in God. Ahmad ibn Hanbal is remembered as the exemplary defender of hadith, opposed the metaphorical interpretation of the Qu'ran and Sunna as they should be accepted as reality without engaging in any hermeneutical extension. Eschatological images (punishment in hell) are not metaphorical but real and anthropomorphic language (God's throne, hands, eyes) is simply to be accepted, "without asking how." In the end the traditional-minded ulama emerged stronger and independent than ever and the Caliph Mutawwakil reversed course and embraced the viewpoint of the more traditional religious scholars. One faith and works problem is as such: Muslims should not but do perform the outward works identified with Islam without the inner conviction of faith, but was it also possible to have faith apart from works? The Mu'tazilites compromised and came close to the eventual "orthodox" solution to the problem of faith and works that arises. Religion that affects people at three intertwined levels – personal, social and political - should be separated because the power of religion based political supremacy and the eventual risk of corruption over people's personal and social life had brought untold suffering throughout the history of mankind. Some religious people are motivated by their political interests first and find a religious rationale to suit the occasion; this is a danger to those who would like to live peacefully in a pluralistic world. Osho, who claims to teach religiousness and agrees that religion and politics should remain separate, has this to say about God, truth and spirituality: The purpose of life is life itself. Life cannot be understood. You can live it – that is the only understanding there. If you understand what life is, you will never ask what God is. When I say this table exist, it is meaningful because the table can go out of existence: we can destroy it. But when I say God exists it is meaningless, because God cannot go out of existence and cannot be destroyed. Existence is meaningful only if nonexistence is possible. If nonexistence is impossible, existence is meaningless. God is beyond both: matter and mind. You cannot know God unless you become God himself. If I say "I can know God without becoming God," you are saying something impossible. Because of this, Christianity and Mohammedanism both think that to say that you can become God is sacrilegious, profane, irreligious; it doesn't show respect. The Mohammedan attitude about it has been so stubborn that it killed Mansur al-Hallaj and other Sufi mystics because they declared that they were God. Unless you enter him, and become one with him, how can you know him? You can just move around and around him. But whatsoever you come to know is just information that is gathered from without, it is not direct knowledge. Reality cannot be known by the outer senses – the outer senses interpret reality as matter. Reality cannot be known through the inner senses – the inner senses interpret reality as mind. Reality can be known only when you have taken a jump into reality itself, without any mediators; when you have lost your mind and when you have lost your meditation also. The authentic religion does not teach you to worship. The authentic religion teaches you to discover your immortality, to discover the god within you. Death is defeated only by those who are ready to die any moment, to accept death without any reluctance. Truth, by its very nature, cannot be organized. To organized truth, or to kill it, mean the same thing. The first thing an organized establishment do is to kill its own esoteric part, because the esoteric group is always a disturbance, a heresy. A true religion will not require faith from you. A true religion will require experience. It will not ask you to drop your doubt, it will help you to sharpen your doubt so that you can inquire to the very end. The true religion will help you find your truth. Mohammed's truth is Mohammed's truth; it cannot be yours just by becoming a Mohammedan. Neither can the pope, the religious leaders convince anybody that for God's sake you have to kill. Strange … because God has created everybody. Whomsoever you are killings you are killing God's creation. If it is true that god created the world, then there should be no war – it is one family, there should be no nations. All wars are irreligious. Many more people have been killed in the name of religion than in any other name. It has nothing to do with religions, just the ego. Whatsoever is yours has to be the best in the world. Whatsoever is others' cannot be the best, cannot be allowed to be the best in the world. There would be no good and no bad because goodness and badness are human distinctions, mental distinctions. If there were no human beings on earth, would there be any flower that was ugly or any flower that was beautiful? There would only be flowers flowering; the distinction would not be there. Existence exists with no beginning and no end, but with many changes. Religions are against sex because that is the only way to make you unhappy, guilty, afraid. Once you are afraid, you can be manipulated. Remember this fundamental rule: make a person afraid if you want to dominate him. First make him afraid. If he is afraid, you can dominate him. If he is not afraid, why and how can you dominate him? There are two things which make people very much afraid – one is death and the other is sex. Faith is blind in a different sense because it has its own way of seeing. It is not seeing through reason, it is seeing through the heart. Truth cannot be uttered, the moment you utter it, it becomes a lie. Truth cannot be said. The moment you say it, it is almost part of a dream now; no longer truth. Religion can be an opium, so can communism – anything that gives hope for the future, in this world or in another world; anything that helps you to sacrifice your present for something that helps to feed your ego. If a faith can be destroyed, it must be a faith in lies. A faith that is really a faith in truth is never afraid of being destroyed; it cannot because truth cannot be destroyed. Only lies are afraid of being broken, only lies need protection. Truth in itself is self-evident. So if you have some faith which is just a lie, it makes you secure. Prayer does the same thing, and priests do the same thing – they make you more adjusted. Meditation is a science. It is not going to help you in adjustment, it is going to help you in transformation. You cannot seek truth. You can find it, but you cannot seek it. The very seeking is the hindrance. All objects are worldly because "seeking" is the world. So you cannot seek anything non-worldly. The moment you seek, it becomes the world. If you seek God, your God is part of the world. You are the truth just here and now, it is not something to be achieved in the future. A child is pure because there is no mind. And the moment knowledge comes, division enters. You begin to divide between what is good and what is bad. You cannot create order on the world. When you try to create order you create disorder. Religion always divide you into two: the evil and the divine. If someone really follows them, he will come to conclude that the moment you destroy the devil, God is destroyed. Whatsoever you know about "God" is through "tolds" - the parents, the society, the culture. It is your conditioning. And now you have got a concept about God and you are trying to understand that word. "God" is not a word. The word God is not God. The word is simply a word, in itself empty and meaningless. If you really want to know what God is, you will have to drop the word and drop the mind and move into no-mind. Love will bring you closer to it than thinking. If you don't believe in any God, you may not be irreligious, because God is not basic to religion. Non ego is basic to religion. And even if you believe in God, with an egoist mind you are irreligious. With a non egoistic mind there is no need to believe in a God. You fall into the divine automatically. Whenever you are silent, the ego is not. Whenever your mind is restless, the ego is there. That's why we cannot love, because with the ego, love is impossible. Love, meditation, God, they all require one thing – the ego must not be there. Jesus is right in saying that God is love, because both phenomena happen only when the ego is not. If you know love, there is no need to know God – you have known him already. As a result of these "powerful" teachings like the one above by Osho, New Age practices have made their way into almost every area of different culture and religion, and leaders of monotheistic religion are very unhappy. They accused the New Age practices as satanic and quoted religious scriptures to justify their position, such as; in the original lie, Satan questions God's word and authority and claims that through the acquisition of secret or gnostic wisdom, man can be enlightened and can be like God. The most important contentious question/issue is whether man has the freedom and right to choose between Gnosticism (teaching that esoteric or divine knowledge could be gained directly by oneself) or Scripturalism (strict compliance to the literal interpretation of the religious books presided by intermediaries). In Sai Baba's example, there were video evidence that he performed magical tricks rather than miracles. Subsequently, his organized exoteric group would prevent people from bringing video camera into the ashram. In this case, the New Agers position would be a non-judgmental and they see the magic tricks as a technique to draw people towards religiousness. They also view that Prophet Muhammad uses the sword as a technique during his time, if he doesn't, he would probably had been killed by the sword of others. But if the freedom to choose and practice any religion is denied, don't be fooled by the notion that the New Agers would sit quietly, I believe they too can be "corrupted" to become merciless and probably become the most brutal and savage killers. Lest I forgot, this freedom includes the liberty to choose to become an atheist. Before it turns endless, I would like to end my "quoted from various sources" article with questions for my readers to ponder and seek answers: Is Satan personal, impersonal, unknowable or better not to know? If God is Almighty, why didn't He destroy all the Satan once and for all? Did Buddhism influence early Christianity as researchers claimed to have found proof of the existence of manuscripts in India and Tibet that support the belief that Christ was in India during this time in his life? Is it true according to Prof. Tariq Ramadan of Oxford University that Islam does not prevent or kill anyone who leaves the Islamic faith however the killings had been confused with political treason? Is Allah the same as the God of the Bible? From a scholarly Christian perspective, see here http://www.studytoanswer.net/myths_ch3.html why Allah is not the same as the God of the Bible. Why Allah is the God who is to be served and in contrast Jesus is the God who came to serve? How to understand the fact that we only have access to the will of Allah and the revelation is not a revelation of Allah, but the revelation of his will? Why Christianity overemphasizing faith/love and forsaking the law and why Islam integrated both law and faith/love? Is it true that the God of the Bible is love, whereas Allah's primary characteristic is power? Could it be possible that Allah's power leads to fatalism rather than obedience from the security for the believer? Why there is a contrasting fact that the God of the Bible wants to be known in the context of His personal predestination while Allah does not want to be known? Why Jesus will descend in a Buddhist fashion, dressed in yellow robes with his head anointed according to the Hadith? Why not in white or black burqa? Is it true according to Ibn Warraq in his book "Why I am not a Muslim" that the Islamic Allah is the end result of theological evolution and concoction from pagan pre-Islamic religious systems in the Middle east? Is it true according to Ibn Warraq again, there were numerous words of foreign origin in the Qu'ran and the Arabs Arabicized them, for example the word "Koran" itself comes from the Syriac, and Prophet Muhammad evidently got it from Christian sources?
|
| Posted: 04 Jan 2013 11:34 AM PST
The biggest irony of course is that this is the party that has been trying to tell the Election Commission how to do its job. The folk in the Election Commission are probably having the last laugh now. Joceline Tan, The Star DAP leaders say it is a computing glitch but some have described the shocking revisions to DAP election results three weeks after the polls as Ubah Rocket Style. AIYOOOOOO! How can?" That was the SMS reaction of one DAP MP after learning of his party's election fiasco. "It's what I would call a perception disaster," the DAP MP said when contacted. The blunder in the party's election result has left DAP leaders red-faced and many of its members angry and astounded. Another DAP figure described it as a "joke". Nothing like this, he said, had ever happened in the party, where the winner was actually the loser and the loser is now the winner. "I believe it was a genuine mistake but I feel sad," he said. On Thursday, the DAP said a "technical glitch" had caused errors in the result of the party election which took place on Dec 15. The mistake apparently occurred during a cut-and-paste job after the results were tabulated. The party's election returning officer Pooi Weng Keong said that grassroots worker Vincent Wu, who had won the sixth spot in the 20-member central executive committee (CEC) did not actually win. Instead, the party's new Malay star Zairil Khir Johari had managed to squeeze into the 20th spot and was the winner. Wu had only received 669 votes and not 1,202 as previously reported. As such, he had dropped to No. 26 in the new results. Zairil who was reported to have received 305 votes earlier actually got 803 votes under the new results. The Cantonese-speaking members in the party are calling the event "1314" because the mistake was announced in the year 2013, in the first month and on the fourth day. In Cantonese, "1314" means "one survives, another dies". Some party members are upset that the party has taken three weeks to correct the situation. In the meantime, they said Umno had a field day bashing the party for not electing a Malay into the CEC because of the mistake. Pooi detected the mistake a day after the election and immediately notified secretary-general Lim Guan Eng. It was then decided that its latest recruit Ong Kian Ming lead an internal audit. Sources said the whole thing was kept under wraps because the party was unsure how to handle it. When the outcome of the audit was presented to the CEC, a discussion was held on the impact of going public with it. One view was that the results had been announced, there was no challenge to it and they should let sleeping dogs lie. But the CEC decided that they had to come clean and own up to the mistake because something so sensational was bound to leak. One party leader then insisted on a gag order on who could speak on the issue but was over-ruled. However, party leaders have been unwilling to speak on the record about this because it is simply too embarrassing. No matter how they talk around it, the fact remains that it was a big-time bungle in prime-time politics. As one party official admitted: "Our party members will accept what happened but people outside must think we are stupid. "If we can't even manage a simple election, how can we convince them that we can run the country?" Read more at: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/1/5/nation/12536201&sec=nation
|
| The Story Behind Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming Corruption Scandal Posted: 04 Jan 2013 11:30 AM PST
Actually what Kit Siang said is true where no matter how corrupted is DAP leaders proven to be the public will just shut their eyes on them. Shen Yee Aun After Mac 2008 , Pakatan Rakyat had successfully captured the state of Perak where DAP won 18 seats , PKR 7 and PAS 6 . At first they get a shock where they never expected that a Tsunami politics will happen and because of this they never really plan the allocation of position before they capture Perak. So the question of who is the Menteri Besar of Perak was never a question in Pakatan Rakyat before the General Election. Only after they won they are in deep dilemma where DAP itself won the seat more than both PAS and PKR added up and yet since they do not have any Malay candidate therefore it is unlikely to have a non – Malay Menteri Besar from DAP. Then , DAP Quickly call for a Central Executive Committee, at its emergency meeting in Penang on Sunday, 9th March 2008 and in their meeting their finalize that the Menteri Besar should either be DAP Ngeh Koo Ham or Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi from PKR. On the 10th of Mac , PAS top leadership secretly send their people to meet up with both Nga Kor Ming and Ngeh Koo Ham to lobby for a PAS State Assemblyman to be the Menteri Besar. PAS knew the weakness of PKR in Pakatan Rakyat where they are the weakest political party in PR in terms of grassroots and even the quality of their candidate. They saw a light to politically bring up their man in the state of Perak to further expand their Islamic agenda. PAS is a very sincere political party that hardly look for money benefit and willing to sacrifice money for their religious cause. PAS top strategist advice the negotiator to use money as a trade for a Menteri Besar position with the powerful lions in Perak ( Nga Kor Ming and Ngeh Koo Ham ). Since the only resources PAS is having after Mac 2008 is only Kelantan dan Kedah but it very hard to close a deal from the Kedah Menteri Besar Azizan. So , PAS top leaders secretly seek Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Aziz to award a back door close deal logging investment worth RM 30 million to both Ngeh and Nga to lobby for a PAS State Assemblyman to be the Menteri Besar. PAS spiritual agree where according to him he is willing to do anything as long as it for an Islamic cause. So both Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming secretly close the deal with PAS representative without the consent from both top DAP and PKR leadership. They plot a way for Nizar to be the Menteri Besar of Perak to by pass PKR Malay State Assemblyman that won 1 seat extra more than PAS. Later on , Kit Siang call DAP to boycott the Nizar ( PAS ) as the Menteri Besar of Perak in his press conference and also in his blog writings
Both Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming silently stay away from this battle and let Kit Siang fought against Nizar. Earlier , nobody in DAP or PKR ever know that there is already a secret deal between Ngeh and Nga with PAS leaders. They just silently plot a way for it to happen and since they are more powerful than Lim Kit Siang in Perak therefore they do have their ways to make it happen. On 17 Mac , Nizar from PAS successfully became the Menteri Besar of Perak with the help from Ngeh and Nga from DAP. After that , both Ngeh and Nga continue to expand their power and political base in DAP . They knew the facts that Lim Kit Siang is already too old to be in DAP for a long time and the arrogant Lim Guan Eng will need to step down as the Secretary General of DAP after his 3rd term. They are young and time is with them. They became so powerful that Kulasegaran a previous Vice Chairman and National Leader in DAP even loses his power in Perak. Lim Kit Siang is not happy with the latest development and strength of both the nepotism Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming. It will be a threat to the Lim Dynasty influence and power in DAP. Therefore , he hand over Nga Kor Ming wife tailoring contract to UMNO to play it. Another corruption of DAP leaders in Perak. It is a sign of pre emptive strike and a sign of warning from Lim Kit Siang to both Ngeh and Nga to slow down in whatever they are doing in DAP to expand their power. When that happens DAP DC call up Nga Kor Ming for investigation. According to DAP internal sources , the DC will let Nga Kor Ming off if he start to behave and stop expanding his political strength. Being a smart politician Nga Kor Ming just agree with it and that is why DAP DC conclude to let him off. But then the young Nga Kor Ming is a very combative politician. He will never surrender to sure threat. That is why he took even more step further to cut off Lim Kit Siang right hand man in Perak ( Kulasegaran ) right after this incident to send back another message to Lim Kit Siang that he is the real warlord in Perak. A revenge strike happen when Nga Kor Ming uses his influence in DAP to dig out list of DAP Selangor corruption that is related to Lim Kit Siang camp ( Teresa Kok , Teo Nie Ching , Ronnie Liu , Lim Lip Eng ). He secretly leak out this news to MCA top leadership to play up the issue and the battle will be seem from MCA side but politically it is impossible for MCA to know if all this sources , details and news is not from DAP internally. Read more at: http://1sya.com/?p=4287
|
| EC slams NGOs for revealing info on discussions Posted: 04 Jan 2013 11:28 AM PST
(The Star) - The Election Commission (EC) has blasted certain non-governmental organisations (NGOs) for providing a political party with information on their discussions. Its deputy chairman Datuk Wan Ahmad Wan Omar described this as unethical and a clear breach of the confidentality that both the EC and the NGOs, which would be monitoring the general election, had agreed on. "We have met three times and the representatives agreed with the stipulated conditions. If they did not agree with the conditions, why not raise the matter during the meetings? "Why must they go behind us and run to a political party to voice their dissatisfaction?" he told The Star yesterday. Informing a political party on issues raised during these meetings, said Wan Ahmad, showed that the NGOs were not impartial – a vital "must have" criterion if they wanted to be objective in monitoring the elections. "The NGOs can be perceived as a political informer. This is clearly a breach of confidentiality that each of the NGOs involved is aware of. The EC had impressed on them many times that the discussions were confidential. "They are being unethical. We also want to find out who among them is the one with a 'big mouth'," said an upset Wan Ahmad. The EC, he clarified, had identified 16 NGOs to be given observer status during the elections but they were yet to be accredited. "The plan was for the commission to have a ceremony to hand over the accreditations and allow the NGOs to tell the press their work plan," he said. PKR secretary-general Datuk Saifuddin Nasution Ismail had earlier been quoted in an online portal as saying that the EC's conditions for bodies monitoring the elections did not reflect transparency and fairness as they included barring observers from the counting of ballots. Dismissing this claim, Wan Ahmad insisted that observers would be allowed in the counting area but that their number would have to be capped due to space constraints. He added that this was in line with international standard operating procedure. "Ballot counting is an important election process. How can we not allow them to observe this? But we cannot allow too many of them because of space. "Agents of candidates will also be present to closely monitor this," said Wan Ahmad. "I do not know whether the NGOs involved do not understand us or that the political party has twisted the issue." |
| Tear gas decision at Bersih called for, says top cop Posted: 04 Jan 2013 11:27 AM PST
(The Star) - City police chief DCP Datuk Mohmad Salleh said the decision to release tear gas during the Bersih rally last year was the right course of action but admitted his officers could have exercised more care. "Although I did not give the instructions to fire tear gas on the day, I stand by the decision. It was the right thing to do, given that the situation was turning ugly. "However, looking at the injuries some participants allegedly sustained from the canisters, I think the officers could have been more careful when firing," he said yesterday during Suhakam's inquiry into the Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28. Mohmad was the last of 49 witnesses who testified in front of the panel comprising Suhakam vice-chairman Datuk Dr Khaw Lake Tee and commissioner Detta Samen. He also explained that while he was in charge, he had been based at the operations centre in the KL police contingent headquarters. "My team monitored the situation via real-time video feed, and had kept in touch with officers on the ground through walkie-talkies. "I did not interfere with the instructions they were receiving until the commotion, after which I issued an order via walkie-talkie to all officers to retreat immediately," he said. Mohmad added that most of the instructions on the day had come from then Dang Wangi OCPD Asst Comm Zulkarnain Abdul Rahman, including the order to fire the tear gas. On a related matter, Mohmad told the panel that some changes had been made in police training after Bersih. "In accordance with the spirit of the Peaceful Assembly Act, we are training police officers to understand the difference between a riot and an assembly and how to act based on the situation." The panel will hear submissions from the inquiry's observers on Jan 10, before listing its recommendations.
|
| Is DAP bowing to Malay interests? Posted: 03 Jan 2013 07:14 PM PST The DAP has rectified its party election results and a Malay candidate has been elected to the powerful central executive committee. Leven Woon, FMT The DAP has rectified its party election results of Dec 15 and suspicion is rife that the party is pandering to Malay interests. In the election, not one of the eight Malay candidates were voted into the central executive committee (CEC). But last night the party announced it rectified the results and Zairil Khir Johari, a protégé of secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, secured the number 20 spot. This puts Zairil in the powerful 20-seat CEC and being the sole Malay candidate who was elected to the top post. In the recount, Zairil secured a place in CEC by garnering 803 votes. On the other hand, DAP grassroots member Vincent Wu, who initially shared the fifth spot with Anthony Loke at 1,202 votes, actually garnered 669 votes and is in 26th position. Deputy president Tan Kok Wai secured the sixth spot following the changes. Several quarters are asking why the delay in the recount as the party had known the error a day after the party polls on Dec 15. The party election returning officer, Pooi Weng Keong, said the error was caused by technical glitches when transferring the tabulated results using Microsoft Excels. He said he had reported the mistake to DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng a day after the party polls, but the latter instructed that the correct results be made public after an internal audit and verified by external auditors. However, former Selangor DAP leader Tan Tuan Tat believed that the timing of such an announcement might be the party's ploy to divert public attention from an alleged land scandal involving Perak DAP leader Ngeh Koo Ham. The allegations first surfaced during Perak State Legislative Assembly sitting on Dec 21 in which Ngeh was accused of receiving more than 4,000 acres of a land from PAS-led Kelantan government as an inducement to appoint PAS assemblyman Nizar Jamaluddin as menteri besar after the 2008 general election. "Don't forget after the central executive committee election, only the issue of Ngeh Koo Ham cropped up. "The issue has been punishing, so I wouldn't be surprised if this was done to divert attention," he said. He also said the party should have conducted fresh elections in the wake of such major error. "It's definitely a big no-no for them to make such a mistake for a major event like party elections. It proves that their management skill is not up to par yet," he said. The party's poll results was criticised by various quarters as its members failed to elect any of the eight Malay candidates to the CEC, despite the party's claims that it is a multiracial party. Meanwhile, Klang DAP secretary Lee Fu Haw asked why the party did not immediately inform about the error to the delegates who were still at the party convention. "You could have announced it first and gone for the auditing later. The delay is puzzling to many of us ," he said. He, however, said he didn't think the rectifications were cooked up.
|
| Zairil is an elected CEC member in DAP: Is this a mishap of miscalculation or calculated ... Posted: 03 Jan 2013 05:26 PM PST K. Fernandez It has now been confirmed that 30-year old Zairil Khir Johari's numbering was switched with Vincent Wu Him Ven. This draws further flak and speculation to two burdening questions whether the elections in DAP totality is fraudulent and if Zairil's new 'election results' is a political manoeuvre. Both seem relevant because Zairil came under fire because of his age and dual appointment as political secretary to Lim Guan Eng and the high paying Penang Economy Institute job that the latter holds. Lim Guan Eng came to his rescue by saying that Zairil Khir Johari has a Masters and that his father was the first Minister of Education in Malaysia. Doubts about his paternal linkages have already come under speculation and his tertiary achievements do not justify Lim Guan Eng's claims. 'I sincerely apologise to all the DAP members and congress delegates for the mistakes made in the tabulation process' said officer for the election Pooi Weng Keong. Zairil Khir Johari recently demanded that the election commission resign because of vote buying, and many are waiting for his statement on DAP's vote counting stint. Rest assured Datuk Ambiga will not seek a Bersih in DAP though the party does not practice clean and fair elections. |
| Time to set up a Ministry of Minority Affairs Posted: 03 Jan 2013 04:51 PM PST Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, CPI As we begin a new year, a rash of old issues and challenges confront the country. Chief amongst them are racial and religious tensions and a rising sense of marginalization and alienation among our minority communities while at the same time the majority community feels threatened and insecure. Many of these problems are deeply entrenched. Their effects are no longer confined to a small part of our body politic or emerge as isolated and unconnected events. They have infiltrated into all sectors of society and cast a shadow in the life of every Malaysian – in our everyday thought processes, in our consciousness and in our actions. The problems that are associated with the ethnic and religious divide between Malays and non-Malays and between Muslims and non-Muslims will not be resolved quickly. There is no magical remedy. Many of these problems stem from our seriously weakened social cohesion and the growing disunity that our nation has experienced during the past four decades. The intangible but potent glue of harmony, sense of community and commitment to realizing the common good that binds countries and their people together has long broken down in Malaysia. The start of a new year is a good time to spend pondering on how to recover this spirit of lost social cohesion and to focus on what can be done to rebuild it. Addressing the plight of small minorities The sense of alienation and marginalization is most palpable among Indian, Orang Asli and other small minority communities. Although some members of these groups can make their way up the socio-economic ladder with their own resources, nonetheless many of the rest are wallowing in poverty and deprivation. They will require a special helping hand if they are able to ever escape from the straitjacket of impoverishment and stagnation. As the race-oriented New Economic Policy is jettisoned in place of a new national policy paradigm based on need and not race, how do we ensure that these groups –which have badly lagged behind other communities in every single important indicator of development and wellbeing – do not lose out again in the implementation of the New Economic Model during the next decade? How do we guarantee that poor and needy members of small minority communities will be scrupulously and fairly targeted for assistance and do not disappear or are lost sight of in our national agenda of development that will be inevitably dominated by the concerns of the dominant Malay, and to some extent, the Chinese community? To undo the negative impact of decades of government neglect and discrimination against the smaller minority communities as well as to steer a new path for social cohesion and social justice that will embrace all Malaysians, it may be necessary to establish a new Ministry that can mobilize and lead future efforts in the public sector aimed at improving the life prospects of downtrodden minority Malaysians. Hindraf's blueprint Two months ago, to mark the fifth anniversary of the movement's rally in KLCC on Nov 25, 2007 – the event which precipitated a new dawn of political consciousness in Malaysia – Hindraf unveiled a blueprint proposing solutions to overcome the plight of ethnic Indian community, especially the 800,000 displaced estate workers and 350,000 stateless Indians. Towards the end of the blueprint document is a proposal to establish a Ministry of Minority Affairs that would plan and execute development efforts to address the educational, housing, resettlement and employment needs of marginalized Indians. This proposal to set up an entirely new Ministry may seem like an inappropriate one, coming at a time when the efficiency and efficacy of a bloated civil service has come under severe public scrutiny and censure. However, it is in my view worthy of serious consideration by the Barisan and Pakatan parties, whichever coalition comes to power in the coming elections. Justification for the new Ministry The justification for establishing an entirely new Ministry devoted to the smaller minorities is compelling. Numerous studies have established that relations between and within communities suffer when people lack work and endure hardship, debt, low esteem, poor skills and bad living conditions. These basic necessities of life are the foundations of a strong social fabric but are lacking for many in the smaller minority communities. Also, unlike the Malay and Chinese communities that dominate our public and private sectors, Malaysia's small minority communities lack the resources and clout to compete for the opportunities ostensibly available to all stakeholders in our economy and society. Already marginalized, when left to fend for themselves in the future, they are likely to fall further behind as the competition for scarce resources becomes more intense. How much will it cost? During the past ten Malaysia Development Plans, a total sum of over one trillion ringgit was spent. Little of this development expenditure was committed towards or trickled down to the smaller minorities (see table).
|
| LTAT: No army funds used in Boustead deal Posted: 03 Jan 2013 04:37 PM PST
Chua Sue-Ann, fz.com Army savings fund Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera (LTAT) has defended the recent acquisitions by its subsidiary Boustead Holdings Bhd as a commercially sound decision that does not utilise any army funds. In a statement today, Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera (LTAT) chairman Admiral (Retired) Tan Sri Mohd Anwar Mohd Nor maintained that Boustead's corporate exercise was based on commercial reasons and not other considerations. LTAT's statement was issued to assuage public criticism over moves by Boustead's wholly-owned subsidiary Bakti Wira Development Sdn Bhd to buy an 80% stake in Astacanggih Sdn Bhd for RM30 million. After the share purchase, Bakti Wira and Astacanggih will then purchase 200 acres of land in Bukit Raja, Klang for RM130 million from Awan Megah (M) Sdn Bhd, a company owned by Selangor Wanita Umno chief Raja Datuk Ropiaah Raja Abdullah. Mohd Anwar also stressed that LTAT was not involved in the purchase of the 80% stake in Astacanggih, a company controlled by controversial businessman Deepak Jaikishan, even though LTAT holds a 60.7% stake in Boustead. Mohd Anwar also sought to clarify that LTAT's funds were not used in these two contentious transactions, as alleged by the opposition and some veteran servicemen. According to Mohd Anwar, Boustead would fund its share purchase of Astacanggih by using profits generated from previous property development projects. Astacanggih meanwhile will take on borrowings to fund the acquisition and development of the Bukit Raja land since Astacanggih currently has no borrowings, Mohd Anwar said. Retired Royal Malaysian Air Force general Datuk Abdul Hadi Abdul Khatab had earlier called on the army generals sitting on LTAT's board to speak out against the contentious deals. Abdul Hadi, who heads PKR's security committee, had also alleged that the RM160 million deal was merely for "private gain" and does not benefit current and former servicemen contributing to the fund. Mohd Anwar said that LTAT will closely monitor all its investments, including its stake in Boustead, to ensure that it brings the best returns for LTAT's contributors who are members of the Malaysian armed forces. "LTAT has full faith that the land development project by Boustead will be as successful as Boustead's other projects while being able to provide affordable housing for servicemen," Mohd Anwar said. Mohd Anwar also said the transactions will help expand Boustead's landbank and bring profits for Boustead in the long term. Boustead has pointed out that the deal will enable it to expand its existing landbank in Klang since Awan Megah's 200-acre parcel was adjacent to Boustead and LTAT's 700 acres in that area.
|
| Bar to look into Tan Sri lawyer’s possible misconduct Posted: 03 Jan 2013 04:28 PM PST We will act regardless of the personalities involved, says its president Lim Chee Wee. Lisa J. Ariffin, FMT The Bar Council today assured that it would make all necessary enquiries to ascertain the identity of the lawyers involved in the drafting of private investigator P Balasubramaniam's second statutory declaration (SD). Its chairman, Lim Chee Wee, today said that the Malaysian Bar will act in accordance with due process regardless of the personalities or circumstances. He said this in a statement in light of recent allegations by carpet trader Deepak Jaikishan that a 'Tan Sri' lawyer and his son had been involved in the preparation of the second SD. The second SD has since reversed an earlier one Balasubramaniam had signed, which implicated Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak in the 2006 murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu. "If there is cogent evidence to suggest professional misconduct, we will not hesitate to lodge a complaint with the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board [ASDB] and prosecute the complaint," Lim said. He said it will then be the responsibility of the ASDB to adjudicate the matter and to mete out appropriate disciplinary punishment. He urged anyone with compelling evidence of professional misconduct in this matter to submit a complaint with the ASDB. "We are prepared to render assistance to any would-be complainant, in having his or her complaint properly directed to the ASDB," Lim said. "We urge those who have knowledge in this matter to be less hesitant, and more forthright," he added. He stressed the seriousness of the matter, saying it could not "be resolved on an indulgence of surmise, conjecture or deductions [simple or otherwise)". "To do so would be to sacrifice due process [including natural justice] at the altar of expediency or convenience," he said. "This would ultimately compromise the proper determination of the matter." In a previous report, the Tan Sri lawyer was revealed to be Cecil Abraham, who sits on the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) panel. In exposing the lawyer's identity, former member of MACC advisory panel, Robert Phang, urged Abraham to come forward and verify the claims. However, Balasubramaniam's lawyer, Americk Singh Sidhu, stressed that Abraham was a "barrister of the highest integrity" and maintained that it was "unthinkable" for Abraham to have been involved in the preparation of the second SD. He also claimed that Balasubramaniam was forced to sign the second SD because of threats to the safety of his wife and children.
|
| Why can’t Rosli have his say in court? Posted: 03 Jan 2013 04:22 PM PST
Din Merican Please see the news report below from The New Straits Times on the Court allowing the Attorney-General's Chambers ('A-GC') to expunge several questions in Lawyer Rosli Dahlan's witness statements. The mainstream media is so quick to report whenever the A-GC scores a point against him. But they will black out any news of his success and victories against the A-GC or the government. My readers will remember that in 2007 just one day before Hari Raya AidilFitri, Lawyer Rosli was brutalised by the MACC before being dragged into court on a trumped up charge by the MACC under instructions of A-G Gani Patail. Even then, Lawyer Rosli had informed Judge SM Komathy that this was a conspiracy to smear his name and humiliate him (see the NST report of that time) and swore that he would fight the charge to show his innocence. He then launched this RM50 million law suit for criminal conspiracy, wrongful arrest, assault and defamation against the most powerful UMNO-owned newspaper, Utusan Malaysia, the MACC, the Government and various MACC officers whom he called the 'rogues in government". That is the case that is coming to trial only now, after considerable lapse of time. Why? Because the A-G and the MACC want to punish him. In retaliation, the MACC dragged the criminal case against Lawyer Rosli for over 5 years. Over that period, Dato Ramli Yusuff was acquitted by the various courts. Despite that, the MACC pursued the case against Laywer Rosli. When he was acquitted, A-G Gani Patail directed that an appeal should be made. Then on August 2, 2012, Lawyer Rosli filed an explosive affidavit disclosing how the MACC Director of Prosecution, Dato Razak Musa tried to coax himi to drop his RM50 million lawsuit. Lawyer Rosli's affidavit also exhibited a Statutory Declaration by Tan Sri Robert Phang who exposed that the MACC Chief Commissioner, Dato Seri Abu Kassim, had admitted that there was no case against Rosli but A-G Gani Patail would not allow the case to be dropped. So, just when his RM50 million trial is about to start, the A-GC commences filing all kinds of applications to block a fair trial. Gani Patail wants the trial to be conducted the way he wants it, and not the way it should be. They want to dictate how Lawyer Rosli can present his evidence. They want the trial to be on their turf and according to their rules. Basically, they want it all their way no matter what. And as you know, that means it would not be a level playing field. It is like a boxing match where one boxer is asked to wear a heavily padded gloves with mouthpiece or face protector but the other boxer is allowed to put on a knuckle duster and wears a full padded suit like an American football player. Is that a fair fight? Of course not! Thus, the NST report below came as no surprise to me when technicalities, by calling Lawyer Rosli's witness testimonies as "hearsay and irrelevant evidence", are being used to prevent his side of the story from being told in open court. Some of my legal eagle friends are perplexed that the Judge could rule that the Rosli's evidence in his witness statement was not pleaded in his statement of claim. They tell me that the court document called a "pleading" which is a Statement of Claim is supposed to just state the brief facts of the claim and not the evidence or the law. The evidence will be presented when the witness like Rosli comes to court and tells his story by way of witness testimony. And yet, Rosli is prevented from doing this. What is wrong, Judge? Preventing Rosli from telling his story by ruling that it is irrelevant even before he has the chance of saying it reminds me of the late Judge Augustine Paul who kept ruling "Irrelevant" against Counsel Christopher Fernando during Anwar Ibrahim's trial. In the end, the Good Lord rendered Augustine Paul irrelevant by burying him six feet underground. If I didn't know Lawyer Rosli better, I would have told him not to be wasting his time fighting for lost causes. He is better off joining the ranks of the UMNO cronies. He can then sit comfortably and reap the fruits of being an UMNOputra lawyer. Even the non-Malay Tan Sri lawyer who prepared the false PI Bala's second SD knows how to play ball. But not this resolute Lawyer Rosli. Many think that either he is too idealistic or he is just a plain fool by hoping to vindicate his name through the courts. Many have said that after Lawyer Rosli was acquitted in 2011 and the A-G made a last minute withdrawal of the criminal appeal against him, Lawyer Rosli should have just walked away quietly and continue with his life peacefully. But he persisted. So the predictable thing would happen now. They will tire Lawyer Rosli down, make him incur astronomical legal costs, drag the case, make technical objections to delay the case as they are doing now, and after all that, they will still not allow Lawyer Rosli to take the witness stand and tell his side of the story. And Malaysians will never know what Lawyer Rosli is going to say in court. That is pretty obvious to us. I tried to call Rosli after reading the NST news, but he did not answer. I called him again countless times even as I am writing this piece, but my calls kept going to his voice mail. I can understand that Lawyer Rosli may be feeling very down. He must be tired by the hurdles and obstacles that are placed before him to frustrate his attempt to vindicate himself and seek accountability from those who have wronged him. I feel sorry for him. But I know Rosli well enough to know that when he wakes up tomorrow, he will say Lawan Tetap Lawan!
|
| Anwar fails to strike out charges against him in Bersih 3.0 case Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:56 PM PST
(The Star) - Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Friday failed in his bid to strike out charges against him for allegedly violating a court order by taking part in the Bersih 3.0 rally. Sessions Court judge Mahmud Abdullah allowed a preliminary objection by the prosecution against the striking out application by Anwar. In his ruling Friday, he held that the Sessions Court had no jurisdiction to revise or review or make any declaration that the prohibitory order issued by Magistrate Zaki Ashraf Zubir prohibiting any assembly at Dataran Merdeka was invalid. "The Subordinate Courts Act does not give revisionary and declaratory jurisdiction to the Sessions Court. The Sessions Court is bound by the Act," he said. Anwar's lawyer Ramkarpal Singh said that he would appeal against the court ruling and file his notice of appeal at the High Court by Monday. Ramkarpal said that Anwar's application challenging the constitutionality of the charge under Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 was set to continue to be heard at the High Court on Jan 11. The court then set Feb 28 for mention.
|
| Robert Phang files RM100mil defamation suit against ex IGP Musa Hassan Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:52 PM PST
(The Star) - Tan Sri Robert Phang has filed a RM100mil-defamation suit against former IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan. The suit was filed at the Shah Alam High Court registry on Friday through the firm Messrs S.N. Nair & Partners. Phang claimed Musa uttered defamatory words at a press conference held by MyWatch which implied he was a dishonest, untrustworthy, unethical and a corrupt person. He claimed Musa's words were pre-meditated to tarnish his image. Phang is claiming compensatory and aggravated, exemplary damages, and other costs and relief deemed fit by the court.
|
| DAP admits counting error left Zairil out of CEC Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:43 PM PST
Syed Jaymal Zahiid, The Malaysian Insider The DAP was forced to admit last night it botched up the vote count at its polls last month that saw Zairil Khir Johari shut out of the opposition party's highest leadership council despite a push to appear more racially-inclusive. Newcomer Zairil — one of the handful of Malay representatives out of a total 68 candidates vying for 20 seats in the DAP's central executive committee (CEC) — made the cut as an elected member after an audit of the December 15 polls showed it had wrongly chalked up the tabulation process. "The error was discovered after the congress and I then notified the DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng. "Lim immediately instructed that the correct results must be made public subject to an internal audit," Pooi Weng Keong, the returning officer for the 16th DAP National Congress, told a news conference last night after its CEC meeting. The party also conducted audits of the recount, carried out within the DAP by its election strategist Ong Kian Ming and externally by TCMK Associated Chartered Accountants. National publicity chief Tony Pua told reporters the party immediately held a recount, which showed Zairil had won enough votes to be elected to the CEC. He maintained the second tallying process made a slight difference to the overall outcome of the elections. The Chinese-dominated DAP had been attacked by former vice-chairman Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim who alleged that Malays had no place in the party. Zairil, the son of former education minister, the late Tan Sri Khir Johari, won the last seat in the CEC contest with 803 votes. The 28-year-old was appointed to the CEC, as assistant national publicity secretary, after failing to be elected the first time around — a move described by the party's critics and political foes as a damage-control exercise. The political secretary to Lim, who is also Penang chief minister, said last night the recount validated his belief in the DAP as a party that stood for transparency and trust in the younger generation. He added that only political foes had looked at the party's polls from a racial perspective. "It was made a big deal by others," Zairil said last night. The CEC now has two Malay representatives, the other being Senator Dr Ariffin SM Omar who was appointed as party vice chairman.
|
| Surendran – a man whose facts do not figure Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:38 PM PST
FMT LETTER: From PM Sivalingam, via e-mail PKR Vice-President N Surendran is probably well-versed with the law but is woefully ignorant when it comes to mathematics. His numbers simply do not add up and his facts do not figure. For instance, he has repeatedly claimed that there are 300,000 stateless Indians in the country. He arrived at that figure not by the use of any credible study but by mere unsupported guesswork. When he organised a rally at Putrajaya recently ostensibly to champion the cause of stateless Indians, only a mere 300 showed up, that too with a lot of Indian national who are workers in Malaysia hoping to get Malaysian citizenship. Whatever happened to the remaining 299,700? He clearly failed for good in his attempt to demonise the government when his rally turned out a mega flop, what more when his political mentor and bosses from Pakatan Rakyat, including Anwar Ibrahim, failed to rally behind him. Incidentally, we may not have forgotten that Hindraf's deposed leader P Uthayakumar had once claimed that there were 450,000 stateless Indians. Between Uthayakumar and Surendran, the figure dropped by 150,000. Were they phantom numbers to shore up dwindling numbers of their political supporters? On the other hand, the government under Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak went on record to quash Surendran's claims by producing actual results. They have worked hard done to search for Indians with documentation problems and bring them forward to register and successfully granted citizenship and other documentations to more than 6,500 Indians. The remaining cases received through their MyDaftar campaign are still being processed, and the numbers is a far, far cry from 300,000. Now, having failed to steal the spotlight over the so-called 300,000 stateless Indians, Surendran claims that 49,000 children of stateless persons cannot attend school because they do not have birth certificates. He claims these figures were culled from census data and population statistics. Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin was reported to have said that children without valid personal identification papers could still have access to education as long as they fulfilled the Education Ministry's circular dated March 11, 2009. It states a child without personal documents can register at a government school or a government-aided school if one of his or her parents is a Malaysian citizen. This is in line with Malaysia's compliance with the Convention on the Rights of Children, which states that stateless children have a right to basic education. There is no reason therefore for any child born in Malaysia to be denied education. Will Surendran show the proof that there are 49,000 children who are unable to attend school? Can he bring at least 10% of them to the JPN or to the Ministry of Education and assist them to attend school? In all likelihood, Surendran, being Anwar's parachuted 'Indian' leader in PKR, will sneakily evade this challenge by coming out with lame and pathetic excuses. "I will only show the proof to the Prime Minister", "Whether there are 49,000 stateless children or not, the number is not important, be serious to solve the issue", "Umno and BN must stop its racist policy by denying citizenship to immigrant races" bla bla bla… These are some whining dialogues of Surendran that we are sick and tired of hearing. In effect, today, the issue of lack of documentation among Indians and other races in Malaysia doesn't seem to be a serious issue given that the government is already attending to it more seriously to ensure deserving individuals gets their rightful citizenship. It only seems like people like Surendran are the problem, problem because he has no other issues to fight on, to capitalise on and to fool the people. It is time for Surendran to stop, yes, I repeat, to stop politicising issues on citizenship for his selfish political ambition. Wise people will judge you not based on how frequently you shout about this matter, but how many people you have actually helped solve their woes. So Surendran, stop making use of people for your advantage and get your facts and figures right before you decide on another circus of yours!
|
| SNAP’s sec-gen quits over ‘BN leanings’ Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:33 PM PST The latest resignation could trigger a major exodus from Sarawak National Party, pushing the party further into political doldrums. Joseph Tawie, FMT KUCHING: Speculations that Sarawak Nasional Party (SNAP) will return to Barisan Nasional were confirmed with the resignation of its secretary-general Frankie Nyumboi. Nyumboi cited "major differences" with SNAP president Stanley Jugol as the reason for his resignation adding that he did not want to be with a party that 'betrayed' its members. In a text message to FMT, Nyumboi said: "I have relinquished my post as secretary-general and have informed the president on Nov 30, 2012 via SMS at about 5.00 pm. "I do not agree with his direction to rejoin BN and the manner he had made the decision does not take into account the feelings and desire of members at large. "I do not want to be a party to a decision which betrays the general members' aspirations," he said, who is also the party's elected vice-president. Nyumboi, who was appointed in January last year as secretary-general, said SNAP was putting itself in a very insignificant position by adopting to be BN-friendly or 'leaning towards' BN. "Grassroots members have lost their trust and hope in the party and lately its image diminished significantly with its loud silence on political issues and the goings-on in the political scene. Perhaps this is just to appease (BN masters)," he said. With regard to his intention to contest the Mas Gading seat, Nyumboi said that it is still on unless the party refuses to endorse him. Under such circumstance, he foresees a "new scenario" emerging. He however declined to explain what the "new scenario" would be. The SNAP national council is scheduled to meet on Jan 16 to decide Nyumboi's resignation among others but the later knows his appointment as secretary-general will not be renewed. SNAP in BN? Nyumboi's resignation is expected to trigger mass resignations by those who disagree with the top leadership's decision to return to the BN fold and their resignations may send SNAP further into the abyss of political doldrums. SNAP was deregistered in November 2002 after an unresolved party leadership crisis which also resulted in the formation of Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP). Even though the party's deregistration was reversed by the Court of Appeal in June 2010, SNAP's membership in BN remains a mystery. It had never been sacked from BN nor quit the BN. READ MORE HERE: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2013/01/04/snaps-sec-gen-quits-over-bn-leanings/
|
| Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:20 PM PST
Mariam Mokhtar with Hannah Yeoh in London The word Allah has been used for hundreds of years in the Golden Chersonese or the Malay Peninsula without any problems. Mariam Mokhtar, FMT If politicians form the group of people whom we despise most, then the sanctimonious hypocrites have to come a close second. The holier-than-thou types make the lives of many people a misery. They judge others by a strict set of rules, to which many of them fail to adhere. The current Allah debate, sparked off by Penang's Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, is our latest political football. The government has to pretend it is the defender of Malay rights and so the Allah debate will never reach a satisfactory conclusion before GE-13. Umno Muslims must have a low opinion of their fellow Muslims if they think that the use of the word Allah by non-Muslims would lead to "confusion". If Muslims can be confused by their non-Muslim friends using the word "Allah" then perhaps, we should blame the Education Minister Muhyiddin Yassin, for an education system which churns out idiots. There is no confusion. The word Allah has been used for hundreds of years in the Golden Chersonese or the Malay Peninsula without any problems. The word Allah, from the Aramaic language, has been used in the middle-east, by both Muslims and Christians for thousands of years. Around 2009, a senior Umno politician decided to gain brownie points and spook the Muslim masses, by claiming that only Umno can protect the Malays, their faith, their rulers and their way of life, the word Allah was banned from use by non-Muslims. The rest as they say, is history. The "Allah" debate is nothing compared with the misuse of the words, "Insha Allah", a tag which many Muslims adjoin to the end of their statements. The misuse of "Insha Allah", is more insidious, affects both Muslims and non-Muslims, in and out of Malaysia, and is a bane in our lives. Some Muslims liberally lace their speech with "Insha Allah". How many times have some Muslims told us that they would do something, and then end their statements with "Insha Allah"? How often has that commitment failed to be fulfilled? The following are some of the ways many Muslims have abused the words "Insha Allah": "I will check out the contract requirements by the end of the week, Insha Allah." "When I finish shopping, I will meet you at the library, Insha Allah". "Don't worry, I will drive mother to her friend's house, Insha Allah." "The cheque will be posted before the end of the month, Insha Allah." "Leave it to me. I will make sure she gets to her class on time, Insha Allah." "Trust me, I will sign the documents before the deadline, Insha Allah." Breaking promises In my experience, the people in the above examples used the words "Insha Allah" as an excuse to break their promise. They may have had no intention of keeping their promise, or they may have been too lazy to keep to their end of the deal, or found something more exciting to do instead. So they say that what happened was God's will. Perhaps, others have had different experiences or been more "lucky" with people who say "Insha Allah". For those who are not aware, the words "Insha Allah" means "If Allah wills it" or simply "God willing". To those of us who have been let down many times, "Insha Allah" might as well mean "maybe" or "If I can be bothered" or "I might do it, if I have nothing better to do". Whenever someone uses the words "Insha Allah", I know that person has no intention of carrying out his promise. Muslims who do not understand what the words truly mean, tend to use these words flippantly. Although some of the Muslims who use these words are sincere, the majority are not. First, they say "Insha Allah" because they realise that few people will question the power of God. Second, this cop-out clause is a useful excuse to explain why they failed to live up to their promise, because they will say, "God willed it". It would be nice if people were more open and admit that they could not fulfil the promise, rather than tell lies and invoke the name of God. Ultimately, it is not the faith in God that is tested, rather our trust and relationship in our friend, colleague or relative that is damaged. People who have worked in the middle-east will be only too familiar with the phrase, "Inkin bukra, Insha Allah" which means "Maybe tomorrow, God willing." This makes the word mañana sound like a call for immediate action. Returning to the Allah debate, Lim's Christmas message of 2012 failed to elicit the spirit of Christian cheer and goodwill from some Malaysians. The joyful tidings he was trying to raise, has started a raging debate, all because he urged Putrajaya to allow Christians to use the word "Allah" in the Malay version of the bible. So, instead of people lighting the Christmas pudding, Malaysia's latest defenders of Islam, a group of 100 members of the Pertubuhan Penyatuan Pembelaan Melayu Malaysia (PPPMM) staged a protest and burned portraits of Lim. READ MORE HERE: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/01/04/the-other-allah-debate/
|
| ‘Toothbrush maker financing Puspahanas’ Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:16 PM PST Awan Megah, the company owned by Wanita Umno Selangor chief has not spent a single sen on the 2005 project and instead gained millions, said PKR. Anisah Shukry, FMT The multi-million defence project awarded to Awan Megah Sdn Bhd is fully financed by a company specialising in the manufacturing of toothbrushes, said PKR leader Rafizi Ramli today. He said this meant that Raja Ropiaah, who owns Awan Megah, had not spent a single sen on the National Defence Education Centre (Puspahanas) project, despite having been given RM130 million and 223.33 acres of prime land in return for developing the centre. Instead, he said, the Selangor Umno Wanita chief received multiple commissions for the project from three different companies – Deepak Jaikishan's Astacanggih Sdn Bhd, Boustead Holdings Bhd (BHB) and toothbrush manufacturer GuppyUnip Sdn Bhd. "It is clear that Awan Megah is just an 'Ali Baba' company – it has no activities, no capital and just works as a middleman to gain commission, much like the Perimekar company involved in the Scorpene scandal," Rafizi told reporters at a press conference here. As proof, the PKR director of strategy provided reporters with the latest summary of Awan Megah's financial information from the Companies Comission Malaysia (CCM). The documents revealed that Awan Megah had not conducted any financial activity since 1993, and was considered a dormant company. This was despite the fact that the then defence minister Najib Tun Razak had awarded the Puspahanas project to Raja Ropiaah in 2005. Instead, copies of a private and confidental letter from the United Overseas Bank (UOB) to GuppyUnip showed it had approved a loan of RM79,250,000 for GuppyUnip in 2010. The copy, which Rafizi distributed to reporters, said the purpose of the loans was for "issuance of financial guarantee favouring Awan Megah (M) Sdn Bhd", "to pay Awan Megah Sdn Bhd" as well as to partly finance the "cost of earthwork and infrastructure costs on the subject property", among others.
"Worse still, the 223 acres of land is supposed to be for Awan Megah but the letter from UOB shows that GuppyUnip is covering the costs of the premium payment to the Selangor state government," he added. He said the bank document also revealed why the Puspahanas project was delayed for so long – it took five years for Awan Megah to find a partner which could provide it with the financial backing it needed. Meanwhile, even the unfinished Puspahanas' location remained a mystery to the public and Rafizi said he would attempt to visit the presumed construction site over the weekend. "I heard that in the past five years, they have not managed to go beyond breaking the ground," he said. 'She won't be able to escape' "Last Wednesday, I made a statement for Raja Ropiaah to come forward. What would be done with the millions, since it won't be used to fund Puspahanas? "To enrich her family? To enrich Wanita Umno? The culture of taking the rakyat's money for their own personal use is prevalent in Wanita Umno," she said. Zuraida said that should Raja Ropiaah choose to keep quiet over the missing funds, it would be to the latter's detriment as PKR Wanita would go all out to expose the scandals she was hiding. "We expect her to keep quiet, the way [Wanita Umno chief] Shahrizat Abdul Jalil did [over the National Feedlot Scandal]. But she won't be able to escape," she stressed. Rafizi also explained that the reason Awan Megah needed to pull in partners such as carpet dealer Deepak and GuppyUnip to finance the project was because it was a "shell company." "Awan Megah is only a shell company, it has no expertise in construction. In fact, it has not run any activity at all, as you can see in the CCM documents. "That is why when it was awarded Puspahanas, it had to rope in another company as a partner to actually manage the construction. And this is how Deepak came in," he explained.
|
| Disillusioned activist Sindu quits STAR Posted: 03 Jan 2013 03:09 PM PST Exodus from STAR is expected with the exit of long-time Sabah human rights and consumer activist. Luke Rintod, FMT PAPAR: A well-known human rights and consumer activist, Patrick Sindu, has dropped a bombshell on surging State Reform Party (STAR). He is resigning from STAR to join another opposition party, PKR. Sindu, who was STAR chief for Papar, said he had lost confidence in the party led by maverick Sabah opposition leader, Jeffrey Kitingan. Sindu claimed there will be a mass resignation from STAR following his exit. In a text message to his friends today, the former long-standing president of the now defunct Consumer Association of Sabah (Cash) said he will be joining PKR tomorrow. "I am joining PKR at 2pm tomorrow at a PKR function at Kampung Sungkadon, Papar, to be witnessed by PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail," he said. When FMT called, Sindu said details of his reasons for leaving STAR would be disclosed in his exit speech at the Papar function. "Please come tomorrow, you will hear it [the reason] in my speech…" he added. It is rumoured that Sindu has been unhappy with the way STAR has treated him. He has been particularly annoyed that Jeffrey had excluded him from the party's long list of leaders to sign a transparency pledge with Transparency International (TI) in Kota Kinabalu a few months ago. Jeffrey had apparently chosen mostly "green horns".
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan