Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Posted: 11 May 2013 12:23 AM PDT

Trickery is used to unseat an elected government by foul means

New Straits Times

LEADERSHIP by example has no place in PKR. If it did then Malaysia would be in deep trouble for, in the actions of its de facto head, are manifest everything that parents would have taught their children not to do. Foremost would be the unending refrain in every home for every member of the household not to break the law. Yet, here is a man professing to be a leader, encouraging anyone who will listen to defy the authorities and rule of law. Of course, there are parties trained in law happily charging the police's interpretation of the Peaceful Assembly Act to be wrong and that there is nothing illegal about the protest rally held recently by both PKR and DAP at the Kelana Jaya Stadium. It is important here to note that Pas has already accepted the outcome of the recent general election.

Malaysians, who trooped in the tens of thousands to listen to the diatribes of sore losers, will rue the day when this country would have lost the progress made economically, socially and politically. This last is obvious from the way PKR and DAP are attempting to commandeer a mature democracy by deception. Accusing the Election Commission (EC) of all manner of electoral irregularities and the police force for facilitating them, PKR, however, does not appear anxious to take its accusations to the courts of law. Instead, the country is witnessing a situation where one of its own key officials is forming the party's own tribunal and calling upon the public to come forward with evidence of electoral fraud. Strange that the accusers are only just looking for evidence.

Something is surely amiss when allegations are made prior to the gathering of evidence. What is undeniable is that they are baseless in the first place. That it all began from well before the general election is further proof of PKR's intention to draw a veil of trickery, abusing social media towards accomplishing these ends. There, credulous parties are picking these fabrications up and spreading the purported video evidence of vote buying, phantom voters being bussed in and reports of blackouts at counting stations. If all these were unimpeachable proof why are they not being carted in as complaints to the EC? Instead, they are allowed to go viral on Facebook. Now why is that? Obviously, the aim is to trap the unthinking into the web of lies orchestrated by PKR's de facto head and his stooges. Is this not dishonesty belying a tyranny waiting to surface and, maybe, even worse?

Riding waves on the M’sian tsunami

Posted: 10 May 2013 12:51 PM PDT

BN and Pakatan need to go back to the drawing board, reassess their positions on important issues, and envisage new ways to improve their platforms.

Nile Bowie, FMT

The mood was jubilant at the Kelana Jaya mass rally held on the evening of May 8, as some 50,000 to 70,000 participants filled the stadium and crowded the highway. The national anthem was sung, slogans were changed, flags were waved, and people dispersed peacefully.

I cannot recall witnessing any police presence at the event or along the highway. Participants honked horns and carried around placards that read "Save Malaysia", "1Bangla", and my personal favorite, "Bangla Nasional (BN)".

For one thing, the multi-ethnic crowd was a testament to Najib's misstep with the "Chinese Tsunami" statement.

The thrust of his statement isn't incorrect; Chinese voters by and large abandoned BN and voted for the opposition.

Really, the outpouring of support for Pakatan reflects an "Urban & New-Media User Tsunami," which doesn't exactly role off the tongue, so better or for worse, let's call it a "Malaysian Tsunami".

The swathes of discontent (predominately) young and middle-aged participants at the rally are indicative of the massive trust deficit the BN is faced with.

While it's evident that many have lost faith in the government and the electoral authorities, the vast majority of opposition supporters are hostile to legitimate criticism of the Pakatan coalition and unwilling to scrupulously scrutinize hearsay and social-media rumours.

As questionable pictures float around social-media purporting to show "foreigners" standing in line to vote as definitive proof of BN being engaged in fraud, the DAP has condemned social network users for spreading rumours and allegations that a massive blackout took place in Bentong during the tallying of votes, at which time EC officials brought in "dubious ballot boxes" that favoured BN.

The opposition leader's claims of 40,000 foreign nationals being flown into Malaysia to vote for BN remain unsubstantiated.

Partially free and not fair

The thrust of the report issued by the IDEAS Institute detailing their assessments of the election results is more-or-less objective and balanced; it presents the legitimate grievances of the rally-goers and lays out the challenges facing the EC and BN.

Firstly, many voters are under the impression that the EC is a creation of the BN; the report corrects those assumptions.

The membership of the EC are appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (Federal Head of State) after consultation with the Conference of Malay Rulers, not the Prime Minister (Head of the Government).

The report noted how the EC made a "bold and laudable" move to accredit 17 organisations as domestic election observers; five in Peninsula Malaysia, nine in Sarawak, and three in Sabah, noting that "the EC did not interfere with the recruitment process of observers, and the organisations were given full autonomy to recruit, train and deploy their volunteers within the terms and conditions of their appointment."

The report highlights how the EC continues to face criticism from many quarters as a result of the widespread perception that the EC is not politically independent.

The authors of the report attribute this to the EC's failure to affectively appease public concerns (compounded by hundreds of cases of indelible ink washing off), as well as all EC officials being former civil servants.

The authors state "the EC is open to new ideas, but their weakness is that they can only work cordially with organisations that employ a non-confrontational approach."

The report confirms what is an obvious truth, that the Malaysian mainstream-media environment is heavily dominated by BN-friendly coverage. The report notes how the BN government offered Pakatan a 10-minute, pre-recorded slot on RTM to air their manifesto. Pakatan rejected this offer on the basis that 10 minutes was insufﬁcient compared to the coverage enjoyed by BN.

More troublingly, the report notes the repeated usage of government facilities, especially government schools, for BN campaigns, along with cases of political speeches being delivered in army camps.

It is fair to say that these instances created an uneven ﬁeld as it allowed BN to campaign using government facilities paid for by taxpayers. The report cites concerns that the electoral roll contained multiple cases of voters sharing the same name and address, voters sharing the same IC number, mismatch between gender indicated by IC and data on EC database, voters with incomplete house addresses.

The authors stated their belief that popular suspicions would have not arisen if the integrity of the electoral roll were guaranteed, though it does not link these alleged discrepancies to any abuses that would have allowed BN to unfairly win the election.

Perhaps the most compelling discrepancy was that constituency electorate sizes were not delineated proportionately. The EC, not the government, is empowered to delineate constituencies every 10 years, and the last delineation exercise was done in 2003.

The report notes how the difference in constituency electorate sizes was limited to a margin of 15% above or below the average constituency electorate at the time of independence. This rule was relaxed in the 1960s and was completely removed in 1973, allowing a political party to win the majority of seats through winning smaller constituencies, but without receiving the majority of popular votes, which is what happened in GE13.

This is by far the most glaring case of an institutional-slant in favour of BN.

The report states, "While the overall election process proceeded with no major incidences, we observed verbal and physical confrontations against several individuals who resembled foreigners. Despite the various technical issues, we found that the overall election process proceeded smoothly and the vast majority of the glitches were not major. Many of these issues were rectiﬁed by the EC ofﬁcers on duty immediately. We also found most nomination and polling centres to be well organised. We also found the effectiveness of the indelible ink to be questionable, and the allegations of phantom voters to be plentiful. However, we were not able to verify if the alleged foreigners were indeed foreigners, or they were actually Malaysians who looked like foreigners."

It should be noted that the Merdeka Centre, called "the country's most respected polling organisation" by many international media outlets, criticised the IDEAS Institute report, saying it rejected some of the reports "accusations" because it believed they had gone beyond their scope of work.

The Merdeka Centre also accused the opposition of making a "host of unsubstantiated allegations about the elections". Though the IDEAS report lays heavy focus on the BN's control of mainstream media, it omits how Pakatan dominates social media and is able to reach millions through new-media applications, which would be entirely necessary to explain in such an assessment; it fails to do so.

It is also worth noting that Pakatan is not denied space on mainstream-media, it chose to refuse it because it was unhappy with the time allotments. Pakatan is also not prevented from using digital media and having print newspapers, not prevented from campaigning, and granted freedom of movement.

What is curious, is that the IDEAS Institute report hesitated to classify Pakatan's claims as "unsubstantiated allegations", even when it admitted it could not confirm their statements.

READ MORE HERE

Ku Li as PM?

Posted: 10 May 2013 12:13 PM PDT

Kuo Yong Kooi

Eighty-four percent turnout to vote in GE13 is as good as it gets. The way Umno created the delineation, it probably needs a 100 percent turnout of voters for the opposition to get a good shot at Putrajaya.

Someone had suggested a government of national unity. This could be a baby step to heal the current rift, or else we might be stuck for another decade in this current predicament. The worst possible scenario is that we might implode and send us back to 1969. These are possibly the remaining scenarios for us now, assuming PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim fails to pull a 'Sept 16' rabbit out of the hat. Malaysia is now split into two political loyalty camps.

Most of the time, politics in the Parliament is just a numbers crunching game. Can someone in the Parliament do some number crunching and ask all the newly-elected parliamentarians who would they prefer to be prime minister? Muhyiddin Yassin or Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Ku Li)?

Is there anyone on the Umno/BN side with any conscience at all? If there are enough numbers on the Umno/BN side waking up to this new post-GE13 reality, then right-wing conservative Umno leaders like Muhyiddin cannot possible take the helm.

The results of GE13 have clearly send a message to the Umno rank and file that the rakyat wanted something to change here. The political careers of Perkasa's Ibrahim Ali and Zulkifli Noordin have just been buried. Leaders like Muhyiddin, who firmly stated that "I am a Malay first and Malaysian second", will only divide us and push us closer to a nightmare scenario.

There are decent Umno leaders like Tengku Razaleigh who are acceptable to Pakatan Rakyat. Why not take this option? If there are enough numbers on the Umno/BN side who think this is the only way to salvage Umno/BN from oblivion, then when Parliament convenes, make a motion of no confidence on the current Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Give the newly-elected Parliamentarians a chance to vote according to their conscience on who they have confidence on to become prime minister.

I believe Ku Li can heal the rift and this is a crucial baby step to end the current stalemate. It departs from the tradition that Umno president is automatically the PM, instead the representatives of the people voted in a new prime minister through a conscience vote. I think the rakyat will be happy with just that slight tectonic shift at the moment.

Most of us will have some faith that Ku Li will make real efforts to do some serious work in reforming the electoral system, judiciary and other government departments. Najib is history, he was given four years to perform and we've got nothing in return except lip service on transformation and 1Malaysia.

If this is not done as soon as possible, Mahathir Mohamad and his cohorts will have the last laugh.

This is a Democracy, You Understand?

Posted: 10 May 2013 11:49 AM PDT

Voting against BN is not voting against the Government. It is voting against the party that was in government up till the point Parliament was dissolved to allow for new elections.

What is so wrong with voting for the Opposition? Why is an Opposition set up in the first place? Isn't it to provide competition to the ruling party? So if people are more persuaded by the case made by the Opposition, why shouldn't they vote for it?

Kee Thuan Chye

Prime Minister Najib Razak blamed the Chinese for not voting for his Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition at the 13th general election on May 5 and ex-prime minister Mahathir Mohamad slammed the Chinese and the Malays who voted for Pakatan Rakyat.

Others from BN and its main component party, Umno, jumped on the bandwagon and said the same thing, accusing the Chinese of being ungrateful.

They all made it sound as if it was a great sin to vote for the Opposition.

Mahathir and the rest of them surely can't be ignorant of what a democracy is. For their enlightenment, let me point out that in a democracy, any number of parties can take part in a contest to decide which one should become the government. And the people who choose through voting are free to vote for any party.

So, since that is the case, it is neither a crime nor a moral wrong to vote for the Opposition. And that is why in a democracy, the ruling party can be voted out if more people feel it doesn't deserve to be the government any more.

This, in fact, was what happened at GE13. The popular vote for Pakatan was higher than that for BN. But since our electoral system is based on the first-past-the-post one, and due to gerrymandering the Opposition needs to win more votes to win seats, BN came out the undeserving winner.

Ali Rustam, the former chief minister of Melaka, who lost in the polling and thereafter appeared a sore loser, echoed his master, Najib, and blamed the Chinese too. "The results have shown that the Chinese do not appreciate the Government, they just want to change without considering the consequences and what we have done for them all this while."

Well, what is there to appreciate of a government that is corrupt and continually plays the race card? Even during the GE13 campaign period, its leaders, especially Mahathir, were saying things to demonise the DAP in order to frighten the Malays and persuade them against supporting the party and its Pakatan partners, PKR and PAS.

Furthermore, contrary to what Ali Rustam says, the Chinese did consider the consequences. They knew why they voted for the Opposition. They wanted Pakatan to form the next government so that a new Malaysia might emerge, purged of the malpractices of BN and its rotten system and culture.

And what is there to be grateful to the Government for? If it provides the things needed for society to thrive in, that is its job. That is what it was elected to do. So no Chinese, Malay, Indian, Kadazan, Iban needs to be grateful to the Government.

One more lesson for the BN leaders who are ignorant of what a democracy is – the Government is not the same thing as the party in government. They are two separate things, and therefore voting against BN is not voting against the Government. It is voting against the party that was in government up till the point Parliament was dissolved to allow for new elections. This is an important point that everyone – not only these ignorant leaders – should appreciate.

And even more important is this – BN is not the country. Anyone voting against BN is therefore not being disloyal to the country.

Anyway, Ali Rustam should learn from his BN colleague, former deputy minister Saifuddin Abdullah, who also lost in the elections.

Saifuddin said he did not blame anyone for his defeat. As for the Chinese vote, he said "it was not against the Malays and certainly not about being ungrateful". He added: "It was more like they wanted to teach the MCA a lesson. Some of (the voters) told me frankly – we like you, but we want to teach the MCA a lesson."

The Chinese wanted to teach the Chinese party a lesson – that summed it up correctly. They voted for the DAP, but they also voted for Malay candidates from PKR and PAS. Some Malays also voted for the DAP; otherwise, it wouldn't have won so many seats in Johor, Selangor, Penang, etc. Which debunks the spin that Najib concocted when he said BN's poorer performance this time was due to a "Chinese tsunami". Fortunately, he has since been pointed out to be grossly wrong by many people, including BN politicians, who say instead that it was a "Malaysian tsunami".

Ali Rustam is quoted in Utusan Malaysia, the Umno-owned newspaper that published the offensive article 'Apa Lagi Cina Mahu?' (What Else do the Chinese Want?), as saying the Chinese are racist. He might do better to reserve that tag for Mahathir.

Before polling day, Mahathir irresponsibly said that if the DAP's Lim Kit Siang were to win the Gelang Patah seat, there would be racial conflict. And after the results came out, he blamed the Chinese and said the Malays who voted for the Opposition were greedy.

Why greedy? Because, he said, they were willing to sell their own race.

Is politics about race? In multi-racial Malaysia, should it be about race? Isn't it perpetuating racial conflict to drum it into people they should vote for the ruling party because of their race? Why are leaders who should know better telling people to vote according to their race?

Why are leaders like Mahathir taking this racist approach?

Mahathir keeps rubbing it in that Malays who voted for the Opposition should not have done so. He seems to imply that they couldn't think for themselves. He and his ilk must think that such Malays are stupid. But he's very wrong. They are among the most intelligent people in Malaysia.

And the more he rubs it in, the more he will distance them from him – and his party.

Malaysians who voted for the Opposition, regardless of race, did so following their conscience. They should not be shaken by bullying talk, even if it comes from a prime minister and a former one. They ought to know what such politicians are capable of saying.

Najib now says he wants to be "a prime minister for all Malaysians" and yet he defended what Utusan Malaysia wrote in that offensive article, obviously aimed at causing racial tension. He talks of national reconciliation and yet he doesn't walk the talk. As I have written before, in my book No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians, Najib speaks with a forked tongue. I am repeating it here.

If he wants national reconciliation, he should clean up the system, dismantle Mahathirism, end cronyism, free the media, make the EC and Petronas answerable to Parliament, redelineate the electoral constituencies to ensure a fair fight for all parties in GE14 … and do many more things right.

Otherwise, what he says is nothing but bullshit.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians, and the latest volume, Ask for No Bullshit, Get Some More!

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Sabtu, 11 Mei 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan