Ahad, 24 Mac 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


If it has failed, just discard it?

Posted: 23 Mar 2013 07:41 PM PDT

So don't try to tell me about what's wrong with the NEP. I told the government that same thing back in 1985 and I suffered because of that. I paid a heavy price by getting blacklisted for pointing out the flaws in the implementation of the NEP. I became Umno's number one enemy for coining the word Umnoputera and declaring these people a traitor to the Malay race who should be lined up and shot.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

One very crucial point that was raised by those who had participated in the New Economic Policy (NEP) debate (or rather quarrel) over the last one week is that the NEP has failed, it has been abused by those in power to enrich themselves, it is a racist and discriminatory policy, and hence it should be discarded because it does not work and it does not achieve the objective as was originally intended.

This is certainly one view and a view that must not be rejected because all views are valid and should be respected in a civil society like Malaysia. The argument of whether it is a right view or a wrong view does not come into play because right and wrong depend on your belief system. For example, the implementation of the Islamic Sharia law would be right to fundamentalist or orthodox Muslims and wrong to liberal Muslims or non-Muslims.

From 1974 to 1994, I lived in Terengganu and was active in the Kuala Terengganu Rotary Club. I was, in fact, its Secretary for about seven years. Note that the majority of our members were non-Malays because some Malays seem to have this impression that the Rotary Club is a secret Zionist organisation and another form of Freemasonry. Hence the Malay membership was rather low although the population of Terengganu is about 97% Malay.

As part of my Rotary work, our committee used to visit the rural schools in remote places such as Wakaf Tapai and Kuala Berang, which are predominantly agricultural areas where piped water and electricity are considered luxuries. (That was why I did good business selling petrol/diesel engine-driven water pumps, generators, kerosene lamps, and so on).

It is therefore no coincidence that cholera is an almost on-going problem (and amongst the highest in West Malaysia) and infant/childbirth deaths are considered biasa (normal). It is also the reason why people there (meaning Malays) do not practice family planning (even when the government distributes tens of millions of condoms free of charge). They need more children because these children die so often.

My personal project (which I paid for from my own pocket) was to distribute free Bata school shoes to the school children in those places (I have written about this before). This is because these children were so poor they walked around barefooted.

A few months later, I again visited these schools and discovered that these school children still walked to school barefooted. They would hang their shoes around their neck and put them on only when they entered the school compound. The reason for this, according to the headmaster I spoke to, was so that they did not wear out their very precious Bata shoes.

I then told the Bata retailer to give them two pairs of shoes each and inform them that we will replace them as soon as they wear out -- so no need to hang these shoes around their neck and walk barefooted any more. (I don't know whether it is because I am getting old and sentimental that I write this with tears dripping down my cheeks).

If you were to look at the Malays living in Taman Tun Dr Ismail, Bangsar, Damansara, Subang Jaya, Shah Alam, and so on, then definitely the Malays do not need the NEP any longer. I have bumped into many Malaysian Malays shopping in Bicester Village (where even I cannot afford to shop but only go there to 'look see') and for sure they do not need the NEP (even the Chinese kalah in shopping).

If you want to see whether the NEP is no longer needed then don't just look at the Malays in the big towns and cities. Go to the rural areas in the East Coast and East Malaysia and see how the Malays (and natives) there live. They certainly still need help.

Now, that does not mean the Chinese and Indians are all super-rich and that only the Malays or natives of East Malaysia are poor and destitute. There are many Chinese and Indians who are poor as well. Hence the NEP should cover these poor Chinese and Indians as well. That was what it was supposed to be but that is not what is happening.

That is my first bone of contention.

I agree with the argument that the NEP has been exploited and abused to make some people very rich. In fact, I was the one who raised this point almost 30 years ago back in 1985 and which resulted in me being blacklisted by the government because of that allegation.

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah can confirm this because I made this allegation during a seminar in his Ministry, which he personally chaired. When I made that allegation there was a stunned silence in the hall until Ku Li clapped and then all the other participants in the seminar joined him to clap as well. Nevertheless, the government still blacklisted me and for many years thereafter I could not get any government contracts.

So don't try to tell me about what's wrong with the NEP. I told the government that same thing back in 1985 and I suffered because of that. I paid a heavy price by getting blacklisted for pointing out the flaws in the implementation of the NEP. I became Umno's number one enemy for coining the word Umnoputera and declaring these people a traitor to the Malay race who should be lined up and shot.

But should the 95% needy be made to pay for the transgressions of the 5% corrupt? Is it fair to punish all Malays for the misdeeds of a handful of Malays?

That is my second bone of contention.

Many things do not work well in Malaysia, the NEP being one of them. It looks like our defence policy is also a failure judging by what happened in Lahat Datu recently. Do we then disband the army?

There are many complaints about the police force as well. Do we abolish the police force and allow everyone to carry guns and look after their own safety like in the Old Wild West or like in some parts of the Middle East today?

The election system is also flawed. Hitler managed to rule with only 30% of the votes and then took the world through a bloody war that saw the sacrifice of tens of millions of lives. Barisan Nasional will be able to form the next government even if it garners only 45% of the votes in the coming general election. Should we then abolish general elections?

We need to be more mature and realistic in evaluating things. We cannot always look at the small picture while ignoring the big picture. Some things work. Many things do not work.

Gambling is bad. Families break up because of gambling. But gambling is not banned or abolished. In fact, Singapore is exploiting gambling as a source of revenue. And Singapore is supposed to be one of the more sensible countries, even more sensible than Malaysia.

It is easy for those with money in their pockets to demand that the NEP be abolished. But when you walk to school barefooted, the NEP is the only thing you have to guarantee your future.

What we need is a better NEP, not the end of the NEP. And while Barisan Nasional has failed to offer us that better NEP, I do not see any alternative better NEP from Pakatan Rakyat either.

And that is my third bone of contention.

 

It’s about social justice

Posted: 22 Mar 2013 07:07 PM PDT

Somehow, along the way, the NEP was interpreted as being a Malay-only policy. No, it is not and was never intended to be so. Although it was meant to address the problems faced by the Malays, this does not mean it does not also cover those who are not Malays who equally need assistance.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Did you read the comments by mainly the Chinese readers in my last three articles of this week?

1. The Chinese and Indians screwed up

2. Conjecture, imagination and suspicion

3. Talking to a ten-year old

I admit that I was being naughty and that I wanted to provoke the non-Malays to see what they would say. And the non-Malays reacted exactly how I expected them to. Hence it is not really that difficult to understand the very narrow and very predictable mind of these non-Malays. Hence, also, it is so easy to manipulate the non-Malays.

Those who have been following what I have been writing over the last 20 years or so since the 1990s when the Internet first appeared in Malaysia can probably remember that in those days I used the analogy of domesticated cats versus wild cats (kucing hutan). And having owned more than 40 cats in my lifetime -- and at the height of it 17 cats at one time -- I know what I am talking about (I actually read a book on cat psychology).

Anyway, the analogy I used was as follows.

A wild cat is a survivor. It hunts for its food and knows how to stay alive (surprisingly, it can even leap into the air and capture a bird in flight because I have seen it happen). However, when you domesticate a cat and feed it regularly twice or three times a day (with snacks in between), the cat loses the ability to survive. It depends on you to feed it and to keep it alive. It also becomes very susceptible to diseases, which wild cats are pretty immune from.

If you abandon a domesticated cat it hardly knows how to survive any more and most likely will die out there in the wilds. It gets attacked by other animals, gets run over by cars, becomes thin and weak, and will very soon become riddled with various diseases.

And this is what the New Economic Policy (NEP) has done to the Malays, I argued, back in the 1990s. It has domesticated the Malays and the Malays who 400 or 500 years ago were feared seafaring people (a.k.a pirates at the time when piracy was a noble and honourable professional, as it was in Europe as well) have now become a tame and docile race.

No doubt Malays have this uncanny ability to lose their tame and docile streak and mengamuk ('run amok', as the English would say, because there is no such word in the English language since mengamuk is unique to the Malay race) if their maruah (dignity) is challenged. Then, suddenly, the Malays change from a domesticated cat to a kucing hutan -- not unlike Bruce Lee in 'The First of Fury' (and the whole reason why I took up Taekwondo and Karate).

Even in the days when I was active in the Malay Chamber of Commerce I was opposed to certain aspects of the NEP (and this brought me into conflict with the Umno chaps in the Chamber who thought I was a traitor to the Malay race). I was not opposed to the concept of the NEP. I thought the concept was rather good and the intentions pretty noble. I was opposed to the abuse of the NEP, which I said had been hijacked by the Umnoputeras.

Yes, I was the one who invented the term 'Umnoputera' 30 years ago back in the 1980s, much to the chagrin of an Umno Member of Parliament from Terengganu who stood up to whack me for that comment.

Anyway, that word 'Umnoputera' has survived until today and I can proudly claim to be the inventor of that word (my Uncle, Raja Datuk Arshad bin Raja Sir Tun Uda, Anwar Ibrahim's classmate in MCKK, can confirm this because he was also a participant in that Congress and was sitting beside me when I stood up to utter that comment).

I felt that as far as opening up college and tertiary education to the Malays, the NEP has seen some success although I still criticise the quality of that education. It is no point aiming for quantity if we lack quality. And I have always been a critic of the quality of that education until today.

Nevertheless, the NEP has been able to take the Malay out of the kampung (village). However, as I have said many times before, the NEP has not succeeded in taking the kampung out of the Malay. And that is my beef with the NEP.

No, I am not trying to insult the Malays or run down those Malays who still live in the kampung. In fact, the Malays from the kampung are very decent people, more decent than many Malays who live in the towns and cities. I am merely lamenting about the fate of 'my people' -- and showing concern for the Malays does not make me a racist or else Mandela and Gandhi would be racists as well.

The NEP is a good policy. It is supposed to be about reducing the gap between the haves and the haves-not and reducing the disparity between the different races. This would mean that the NEP is not just for the Malays. It is also for the Chinese, Indians, and natives of East Malaysia plus the Orang Asal who require help.

Somehow, along the way, the NEP was interpreted as being a Malay-only policy. No, it is not and was never intended to be so. Although it was meant to address the problems faced by the Malays, this does not mean it does not also cover those who are not Malays who equally need assistance.

Tun Razak Hussein, Malaysia's Second Prime Minister, was the architect of the NEP. He was also the architect of the most successful land settlement in the world, FELDA. The United Nations FAO actually sent teams to Malaysia to study the success of the FELDA scheme to see how the same can be implemented in Africa and Latin America. That is how highly regarded FELDA is.

But why did MCA and MIC not propose that certain FELDA schemes also be set up for the poor Chinese and Indians? Is it that the Chinese and Indians did not want to become land settlers? Is it that FELDA refused to allow the Chinese and Indians to participate in these land schemes? Or it is that MCA and MIC did not bother to pursue this matter with FELDA or the government?

I do not know the answer to those questions so maybe those from MCA and MIC can enlighten us.

If 30 or 40 years ago the poor Chinese and Indians had become FELDA settlers, today, many of them would be millionaires and P. Waytha Moorthy would not need to go on his hunger strike (READ MORE HERE).

Okay, Moorthy is now about to complete the second week of his hunger strike. Many Chinese and some Indians have posted comments in my three articles regarding the NEP mentioned above. From your comments you give the impression that you are opposed to the NEP. You say that the NEP is unfair, racist and discriminatory.

Why are you so angry with the NEP? Do you think that the NEP is unfair? Do you think that the NEP only helps the Malays and not the poor Indians and Chinese as well?

Okay, let us say for arguments sake I agree with you. There are many poor Chinese and even more poor Indians as well. But the NEP does not help these people. You want a fairer NEP where all races that deserve help receive help.

Are you sincere about this? Or are you just looking for an excuse to oppose the NEP so that the Malays remain backward?

Moorthy of Hindraf is fighting for the lot of the Indians. And he is doing this by going on a hunger strike. How many of you support him and agree with his hunger strike? I have read many nasty comments over the last two weeks disparaging and vilifying Moorthy. You are mocking him. You do not support him.

Why do you not support him since you are supposedly fighting for social justice and you oppose the NEP because you feel it is an unjust policy? I do not see too many Indians and even lesser Chinese rallying to Moorthy's side. Instead, you make fun of him.

The Indians, Chinese -- and maybe the Malays as well -- should support Moorthy. You should join him in his hunger strike. If you can't stand not eating then you should show solidarity by launching civil disobedience. There are many ways you can do this. Boycott crony businesses. Go to the doctor and complain about a stomach ailment or migraine and get two days off from work. Switch off your lights for one hour every night. Stay home so that you do not need to drive and therefore do not need to buy any petrol for your car. Stop buying newspapers. Stop watching the news on TV. Stay away from shopping complexes and shopping malls. Don't eat fish, meat and chicken for a whole week.

There are so many things you can do as a sign of solidarity to protest the plight of the Indians in Malaysia. Instead, you make fun of them and mock them. You are not concerned about what happens to the Indians. You also oppose the NEP on the excuse that you seek social justice and fairness for all races. But you do not translate this rhetoric into action when it comes to the Indians.

 

With your head buried in the sand

Posted: 14 Mar 2013 08:30 AM PDT

I speak to Malays here in the UK -- professionals who work in the UK, say for the last 10 or 20 years, and whose children were born and now school in the UK -- and they still ask me whether what I am propagating is wise. Do you think we really should end the New Economic Policy (NEP) in favour of meritocracy? What will happen to the Malays if we do that? Won't we 'lose' the country to the Chinese?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Yesterday's article, Malaysia at the crossroads, is a most interesting experiment in comprehension. There were more than 100 comments and none answered the point of that whole article: which is, how is the opposition going to woo the Malay voters? That is what the whole article was about and which no one addressed.

I understand, and at times even appreciate, that readers are taking the opportunity to post comments merely to lepas geram (let off steam). They are not really interested in debating or to enter into any discourse. They just want to vent their anger and frustration.

It is like going to the gym to punch the punching ball because you are sexually frustrated and/or your job is a dead-end job with no real future. So you need to hit out at something. Some kick the cat, some punch a ball, and many of you post nasty comments in Malaysia Today.

The 2008 General Election is said to be a landmark for Malaysia's opposition. We would like to believe that a new political culture has emerged. Some say that, finally, the racial divide has been bridged and today people think as Malaysians and no longer as Malays, Chinese and Indians, or as one of the natives of East Malaysia.

Is this true? Many of you who post comments in Malaysia Today appear to think so. But what is the average age of those who post comments in Malaysia Today? 30? 35? 40? How many of you who post comments in Malaysia Today are 65 or 70? How many of you who post comments in Malaysia Today were born before the Second World War, or before Merdeka, or before 1970?

Okay, let us just look at Malaysians who live, work and/or study, say, in the UK. We have Malaysians here in the UK from all the races. UK is an advanced society. Racism is a crime in the UK and you can get sent to jail even for the mildest of racial slurs. If that same law was applied in Malaysia and was strictly enforced, probably 80% of Malaysians would end up in jail.

There are Malaysians who have lived in the UK for 20 years or more. Some were married in the UK and some even born in the UK. Hence these Malaysians in the UK should not have been exposed to Malaysian-style racism and should by now be insulated from racism.

But this is not so. Chinese mix with Chinese. Malays mix with Malays. In fact, most Malays in the UK only want to live in certain residential areas that are monopolised by their 'own kind' -- fellow Malays and in the absence of fellow Malays at least in areas which are predominantly Muslim. And don't tell me that the Chinese are not like that because if this were true then there would not be so many Chinatowns all over the world, the UK included.

I speak to Malays here in the UK -- professionals who work in the UK, say for the last 10 or 20 years, and whose children were born and now school in the UK -- and they still ask me whether what I am propagating is wise. Do you think we really should end the New Economic Policy (NEP) in favour of meritocracy? What will happen to the Malays if we do that? Won't we 'lose' the country to the Chinese?

Now, these are Malay professionals who are doing well in the UK not because of the NEP but because of merits. They got their positions not because of the colour of their skin but because they are qualified. Their children are in a local Mat Salleh school and are top of the class or at least in the top ten or top five.

You are doing well, I tell them. Are you doing well because the UK has an NEP and you got your job because you are Malay or because you are good at your job and/or qualified for the job? Your children are doing very well in school and can compete with the 'whites'. Is this because of the NEP or because they have brains?

They agree that the NEP has nothing to do with it. Maybe in the beginning it was because of the NEP -- and because of the NEP they managed to receive a good education. But from thereon it had nothing to do with the NEP. They compete on a level playing field and they excelled, as did their children in school, entirely on their own merits and with no handicap or advantages.

Okay, I tell them, in short, you are who you are has nothing to do with the NEP and the only benefit that you can see from the NEP is that you received an education. However, judging by how well your children are doing in school, even without the NEP you would still have made it in life just as long as you were allowed the opportunity of a good education.

In short, I ask them, if Malaysia did not have any NEP but had enough schools, colleges, universities, teachers, lecturers, etc., you would have still made it even without any quota system and the only reason you need a quota system is because of a shortage of educational facilities?

They agreed that that is correct.

So we do not need the NEP, right? We need more institutions of learning so that the quota system can end.

When I summed it up that way they hesitated. As logical as this argument may sound, they were not too sure. They still felt that removing or abolishing the NEP would not be good for the Malays.

My wife, Marina, would listen to this exchange and later, when we are alone, she would express her awe at the mind of these Malays. They live and work in the UK. They and their children are doing well. And they are doing well not because of the NEP. So they do not need the NEP. And yet they are not prepared to let go of the NEP in spite of the fact they do not need it.

That is how the mind of the Malay works. And these are Malays in the UK. What about Malays in Malaysia? Would they not also be thinking like this, or worse?

Earlier this year I gave a talk in Cambridge called For God, King and Racism (lifted from the saying 'For God, King and Country'). It was a one and half hour talk about the history of racism in Malaysia, mainly the 'three Rs' that I had written about before more than once -- race, religion, royalty.

As I had explained before, these are the concerns of the Malays -- even Malays who have lived/worked 20 years in the UK and who should, therefore, not be concerned about such matters. And Umno is aware of these concerns. And Umno knows how to play on these concerns to garner Malay support.

The non-Malays in the opposition, however -- many of you who post comments in Malaysia Today -- are not sensitive to these concerns. Instead you do the opposite. Rather than address these concerns you engage in Malay-, Islam-, and/or Royalty-bashing.

Do you really think this will ensure that the opposition is going to get Malay support?

Look at the results of the 2008 General Election. Look at where the seats that DAP won are. Look at where the seats that PAS won are. Look at where the seats that PKR won.

Is it merely a coincidence that the seats that DAP won were mostly in areas where the Chinese voters were more than 50% or the Malay voters were less 40%? Of course, there were some seats that DAP won where the Malay voters were higher than the Chinese voters, mainly in the cities or main towns, which were 'delivered' by PAS.

PAS won seats where the Malay voters were predominantly Malay while PKR did well in areas where it was about 50:50 Malay:non-Malay.

In short, the voting pattern was along racial lines. Race still very much determines how people vote. As much as we would like to believe that the 2008 General Election was a landmark election where Malaysians no longer voted along racial lines, this is not true.

Many of you who comment in Malaysia Today make the Malays saki hati (hurt the feelings of the Malays). Hell, even I saki hati with the DAP Chinese supporters and can no longer tahan the arrogance in your comments (in case you are too stupid to realise that). No, Umno did not win us over, as many of you allege. Instead, your foul mouths have sent us away. And this is the feeling of many Malays who voted Pakatan Rakyat in the last general election.

In 2008, many people screamed ABU (asal bukan Umno or anything but Umno). Today, these same people are screaming ABC (asal bukan Cina). Is this how you want to face the coming general election?

As I said earlier, many of you are in your 20s, 30s or 40s. Some of us who were born before the Second World War, before Merdeka, or before 1970 have seen what it was like in the old days. And what is frightening is that we seem to be seeing a repeat of that era. And yet even more frightening is that many of you just do not see this. And when we point this out and try to caution you that the situation is not at all healthy, you respond with allegations that we are serving Umno's agenda and are trying to play up the fear factor.

That is what is called denial syndrome.

 

The one-track mind

Posted: 12 Mar 2013 01:44 PM PDT

And that is the most important criteria to get Malaysian citizenship. And that is why many foreigners have been given Malaysian citizenship. So I don't know why many of you grumble and complain about the 'Projek IC' in Sabah. Maybe one million people have been given ICs. But then these people are exactly like you -- ignorant people who have no ability to think beyond the one-track. So why should they not be given Malaysian citizenship when they possess the brain of a Malaysian?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

After living in the East Coast of West Malaysia for 20 years from 1974-1994, and after interacting with the local 'natives' of Terengganu and Kelantan, you tend to develop a pretty good idea as to how their mind works.

Terengganu and Kelantan is predominantly Malay-Muslim with some areas comprising of 70%-90% farmers and fishermen. The people there are actually very nice and friendly although many of them harbour the wrong impression of the non-Malays/non-Muslims, mainly due to ignorance.

For example, they ('they' not necessarily meaning everyone but some: the degree or percentage not known, though, since I have not conducted any poll) think that the Chinese can live as husband and wife, although they may not be legally married, mainly because Chinese do not have any religion and hence, according to Chinese 'norms', this is not an immoral thing.

My wife, Marina, was shocked when one day a kampong woman told her this. Marina had to tell her that the Chinese, just like the Malays, do have a concept of morality and most of what is considered immoral for Malays is also immoral for Chinese. And this kampong woman was actually quite surprised that the Chinese, too, have moral values.

They also think that the Chinese businessmen and shopkeepers cheat due to the same reason -- meaning that the Chinese do not have any religion and hence they do not have any concept of heaven and hell where you later pay for the bad things that you do (or get rewarded for the good things that you do). This means it is in the Chinese character to be dishonest since they are not accountable for their actions in the Afterlife.

I suppose the manner in how you treat people from another community depends on how you perceive them and what you think of them. Hence if you think that the Chinese are 'immoral' and 'dishonest' only because they do not have any religion to guide them regarding right and wrong, then you accept the fact that you cannot expect the Chinese to be 'good' people but then you should not blame them also since they do not have the advantage of a religion to help guide them.

And this is the problem with how these people think. They think that morality and honesty are not part of the Chinese character not because the Chinese are bad people but because, to the Chinese, these concepts do not exist due to the absence of religion.

Can you see what ignorance can do to you? Part of the blame must certainly go to that person who is ignorant because it is your duty to get educated. However, the Chinese too need to also make themselves understood. And that is why I always write articles about the Malays and Islam. I feel many non-Malays/non-Muslims have misconceptions about the Malays and Islam mainly because they don't bother to find out (just like the Malays do not bother to find out about the non-Malays/non-Muslims).

One more thing about the Malays is that they believe very strongly in bomoh (witch doctors), black magic, good genies (jin), bad genies, evil spirits, tangkal (lucky charms), etc. Tangkal are supposed to make you invincible and bullets, knives, etc., would not be able to penetrate your body.

Maznah Ismail a.k.a. Mona Fendi (picture above) was supposed to be a specialist in tangkal that gives you invincibility. Unfortunately for her client, though, Pahang State Assemblyman Datuk Mazlan Idris, it did not work and when they conducted the test, the parang (machete) went deep into his skull and killed him (it was supposed to have bounced off his skull without leaving a scratch).

It seems some of those Filipino Muslim soldiers who infiltrated Sabah recently and who were shot dead had tangkal on their bodies as well -- although they did not quite work (since they were shot dead). Not quite an endorsement for those bomoh who manufactured those tangkal for the Filipino Muslim army. On some of those dead soldiers the tangkal was found between their legs. Maybe this was to make sure that they don't get their balls shot off.

Actually, Chinese, Indians and 'others' also believe in bomoh, tangkal, jin, black magic, and so on. When P.I. Balasubramanian suffered his heart attack a few days ago, they said that 'First Lady' Rosmah Mansor had used black magic on him. Hence he was supposed to be suffering from an attack of black magic. I am not sure whether they thought so before they discovered what was really wrong with him or whether they meant that the heart attack was due to black magic.

But don't laugh. As funny as it may sound, many people of all races do believe in such things. In fact, when Malays from Terengganu and Kelantan get sick the first thing that comes to mind is that someone must have employed a bomoh to put a spell on you. And they will go to their own bomoh for treatment.

I have known of cases where someone had aches and pains and went to a bomoh for treatment -- who confirmed the aches and pains was because some bad bomoh had put a spell on you. After many months or even years of treatment, the aches and pains would still not go away (and after paying the bomoh a tidy sum of money over all that time).

One day you can't bear the pain any longer and you go to a 'proper' doctor. The doctor then tells you that you are suffering from cancer. However, you should have done something about it earlier. Now it is too late and because of that you will be dead within six months, most likely over the next two months or so.

The bottom line is, if you had gone to the doctor instead of a bomoh you might have been saved. Now, because you wasted your time with the bomoh, it is too late and because of that you are going to die.

Sounds stupid does it not? But this is the way they think. They have a one-track mind. And this is because they are quite ignorant so they are incapable of thinking outside this one-track. Hence if anything goes wrong it can only be because of one thing -- black magic and the work of an evil bomoh.

Many if not most Malaysians have this same mentality. They too are ignorant and have a one-track mind. When something happens they can only think of one reason for this. They are incapable of imagining any other reason other than just this one reason.

For example, if someone disagrees with you or has a different opinion from you then this can only be due to one reason -- and that one reason is that that person has been bought. Your brain is not capable of imagining that there could actually be another reason for this. This is the same mindset as those who think that if your body has aches and pains then it must be because a bomoh has put a spell on you.

I suppose we can't expect everyone to have analytical skills and to have the ability to think beyond the one-track. If you are sick then it can only because of a bomoh using black magic. If someone disagrees with you then it can only be because he/she has been bought.

And that is the most important criteria to get Malaysian citizenship. And that is why many foreigners have been given Malaysian citizenship. So I don't know why many of you grumble and complain about the 'Projek IC' in Sabah. Maybe one million people have been given ICs. But then these people are exactly like you -- ignorant people who have no ability to think beyond the one-track. So why should they not be given Malaysian citizenship when they possess the brain of a Malaysian?

 

Heckling, mocking and debating

Posted: 10 Mar 2013 04:10 PM PDT

I detest hecklers. And that is what a few readers who comment in Malaysia Today are, hecklers. But they imagine themselves as philosophers who are making wise comments that are going to help change entire humankind for the better. And that is why of late I have been putting down these hecklers with my own responses to their silly heckling comments.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There are people who do not understand the difference between heckling, mocking and debating. I suppose these are the types of people who also do not understand the difference between making love, screwing and raping. To these people, brutally grabbing a female and ravaging her against her will comes under the category of 'making love'.

Absolutely no class! Manners of country bumpkins!

But then I suppose we can't blame them. These people did not receive an education at good schools like the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK) or the Victoria Institution (VI) -- both schools that I went to. Many of them were schooled in obscure small towns that still had bucket latrines up to the 1960s or 1970s, or in kampong schools or vernacular/mother-tongue hole-in-the-wall schools.

You can take the village idiot out of the village but you can't take the village mentality out of the village idiot, as the saying goes. Hence you can send them to school but that does not necessarily mean they will receive an education. Education is not just about going to school. After all even monkeys can be taught tricks and then sent into space after being taught these tricks. Hence you may have gone to school but whether you are still a monkey is yet to be seen.

I detest hecklers. And that is what a few readers who comment in Malaysia Today are, hecklers. But they imagine themselves as philosophers who are making wise comments that are going to help change entire humankind for the better. And that is why of late I have been putting down these hecklers with my own responses to their silly heckling comments.

I remember an incident that happened about 30 years ago back in the early 1980s. Tan Sri Tan Kay Hock, the Chairman of Johan Holdings Berhad and George Kent (M) Bhd, took me (and our wives) for dinner at The Paddock in the (old) Kuala Lumpur Hilton. There was a comedian on stage and he was pretty good.

But we could not hear what the comedian was saying because there were two Malay chaps pissed-drunk at the table behind us who were heckling him. I noticed the manager, escorted by a security guard, going up to them to request them to tone down a bit because everyone was staring at them and were clearly quite upset with the disturbance. But these two pissed-drunk Malay chaps continued heckling the comedian until it came to a stage that he became quite flustered and did not know how to continue with his routine.

That was when I stood up and walked over to the table of these two very drunk hecklers and told them to shut the fuck up. The manager and security guard knew that the whole thing was about to turn ugly but before they could separate us one of the Malay chaps stood up and made a move towards me.

In that type of situation there is more room for talk. I punched the chap and he fell back into his chair quite stunned. For the rest of the night he remained very quiet and just 'enjoyed' the show. I think he must have been 'boiling' because after a while he came over to my table and demanded to know why I had punched him. The manager quickly grabbed him and pulled him back to his table before I could rearrange his face.

Well, okay, that was 30 years ago and I was still in my early 30s and hence quite darah panas (hot headed). Nevertheless, although I am not so fist-of-fury any longer, as I used to be, I still have zero tolerance for hecklers.

A few years ago (before the 2008 GE) I attended a debate between Umno Youth and PKR Youth at the PWTC. The Umno Youth and Puteri Umno members in the audience were very well behaved. The PKR Youth members, however, were heckling the Umno Youth debaters every time they stood up to debate.

The Umno Youth and Puteri Umno members did not do the same to the PKR Youth debaters when they stood up to debate. They Umno boys and girls behaved well and they allowed the PKR Youth debaters to say their piece without any interruptions. And even as the PKR Youth members heckled the Umno Youth debaters the Umno Youth debaters still smiled and continued in a civil manner without showing any signs of irritation.

The PKR Youth hecklers were sitting in the row right behind me (I was sitting next to Cikgu Bad so he can confirm this incident) so I could not hear the debate due to all the commotion. I turned to the PKR Youth chaps and told them to shut up and show some respect to the debaters. They kept quiet for a while and then continued heckling. I got so fed up I walked out of the hall although I wished I could just punch these hecklers in their faces.

Looking back now, I should have punched them in their faces because these people have now all joined Umno and are amongst the greatest critics of Pakatan Rakyat. And if I had known they would one day leave the opposition to join Umno I might have whacked them in the face to shut them up.

Anyway, as I said, Malaysia Today, too, has its share of hecklers who do not address, rebut or reply to the points in the article or report. They totally ignore the issues and instead just heckle. And these are the people I respond to with my sarcastic comments. It is not so much bringing myself down to their level but more to give them a taste of their own medicine. After all, I too can be nasty and post racist comments as well as they can.

But the most important thing, though, is that I put my name to my comments while they heckle under false identities without revealing who they are. And this is because they have not been properly educated and brought up like I have. I mean, they may have gone to school but they still demonstrate the mentality of their forefathers from the new villages, fishing villages, padi-fields, rubber estates, tin mines, and so on.

You can bring the descendants of people from the new villages, fishing villages, padi-fields, rubber estates and tin mines out of the new villages, fishing villages, padi-fields, rubber estates and tin mines, but you can never remove the new village, fishing village, padi-field, rubber estate and tin mine mentality from their brain.

Do I sound pompous? I hope so because I intended it to be so.

 

Why must I like Anwar?

Posted: 09 Mar 2013 04:02 PM PST

I know some of you like or maybe even love Anwar. I have no problems with that. But just because you like or love Anwar that does not mean I too must do so. And just because I do not like or love the same people that you do this does give you the right to vilify, disparage, mock and curse me.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There are people who are of the opinion that if I am a reformist, if I am loyal to the cause, if I really wish to see change, then I should love Anwar Ibrahim and sing his praises. If I do not love Anwar, then I am not a reformist, I am not loyal to the cause, and I do not wish to see change.

Well, you have probably figured this out by now (and if you haven't then you are dumber than I thought) but I do not love Anwar Ibrahim. But that does not mean I hate him either. Not loving does not necessarily translate to hate. For example, I do not love Britney Spears's music. But that does not mean I hate her music either.

In fact, I rather like her slower numbers such as 'I'm Not A Girl, Not Yet A Woman', 'Born To Make You Happy', 'Don't Let Me Be The Last To Know', 'From The Bottom Of My Broken Heart', and so on. However, I would not regard her music as 'to die for', unlike Emile Sandé's song 'Clown', which I play every day, a few times a day. Now that is a song 'to die for' that gives me goose pimples (in fact, I'm listening to that song even as we speak).

My 'displeasure' with Anwar, if I may be permitted to call it that, started around August 2004. I was then the Director of the Free Anwar Campaign, which I headed for roughly five years of the six years that Anwar was in jail. And I funded it from my own pocket except for the RM1,000 that Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail gave me in 2000 and the RM2,000 that Anwar's brother, Rosli, gave me in 2002. That was all: RM3,000 in total from Anwar's family.

But that was not an issue. I was not doing all this for money anyway. Then, in August 2004, one of Anwar's lawyers, Pawanchik Merican, spoke to me to ask me how much I was receiving every month to run the Free Anwar Campaign. I replied that other than the RM3,000 I had received thus far, I was not receiving any money and that the cost to run the Free Anwar Campaign came from my own pocket.

Pawanchik was very upset when I told him this. He knew I was travelling all over the country campaigning not only for Anwar but also against the Internal Security Act. And he also knew that Anwar's people had raised a few million Ringgit in the name of the Free Anwar campaign. Hence he thought that the money actually went into financing the Free Anwar Campaign.

Pawanchik then informed me that he had visited Anwar in the Sungai Buloh Prison and had told Anwar about this but Anwar did not respond. He just kept quiet. Pawanchik then advised me to close down the Free Anwar Campaign to stop Anwar's people from using it to raise money.

I told Pawanchik I would only close down the Free Anwar Campaign once Anwar is free from prison and not a day earlier. Pawanchik replied that Anwar is going to remain in prison for at least another six years. So am I prepared to keep running the Free Anwar Campaign for another six years?

I told Pawanchik that Anwar was going to be released in another few weeks, after which I will then close down the Free Anwar Campaign. Pawanchik laughed and said that none of Anwar's many lawyers believed that he would be free in another few weeks. They were very confident that Anwar would spend no less than ten years in jail in total, maybe even 12 years.

I then wrote an article that Anwar would see freedom on 2nd September 2004 and one of Anwar's lawyers came to see me at my home in Sungai Buloh to scold me. And this lawyer told me that he is scolding me on Anwar's behalf because my article that Anwar would be freed on 2nd September 2004 is a lie and not true at all.

Anyway, I was right and Anwar and his lawyers were wrong. Anwar was freed on 2nd September 2004 as I had written. On that same day I put the Free Anwar Campaign to sleep and began to focus on Malaysia Today fulltime, which I had launched two weeks earlier on Friday, 13th August 2004.

On that day, 2nd September 2004, Anwar's lawyer (the one who had come to my house to scold me) phoned me and said that Anwar wanted to see me. I told him to go to hell. The next day, 3rd September 2004, Anwar's brother, Rosli (the chap who had given me RM2,000) phoned me and, again, told me that Anwar wanted to see me. And, again, I told him to go to hell.

On the third day, 4th September 2004, Dato' Kamarul Bahrin Abbas (the current MP for Teluk Kemang) phoned me and pleaded with me to come and see Anwar. Dato' told me that Anwar was leaving for Germany that same night and he wanted to see me before he leaves. I told Dato' that Anwar can leave for Germany and maybe I will see him when he returns. Dato' said Anwar wanted to see me before he leaves.

I felt bad because I have great respect for Dato' Kamarul, who was my boss in the party newspaper, Berita Keadilan, later changed to Seruan Keadilan. I asked my wife, Marina, what I should do and she replied that if I wanted to go and see Anwar then I will have walk there because she was not going to drive me. Finally Marina agreed to drive me as long as she can wait outside the house and not have to go into the house to also see Anwar.

I went to see Anwar that 4th September 2004 not because he wanted to see me but because I segan with Dato' Kamarul. Dato' Kamarul, in fact, was waiting outside the house when we arrived and he escorted me into Anwar's bedroom.

Anwar's first words to me were, "Allah, anak Raja ni, susah sungguh nak panggil datang jumpa."

I replied, "Why do you want to see me? After all you are not happy with me."

So you see, as early as back in August 2004 when I launched Malaysia Today and Anwar was spending his last fortnight in prison I had already 'washed my hands' of him. And I made that very clear by refusing to go and see him even when his lawyer and brother phoned me. I relented on the third day only because I wanted to 'give face' to Dato' Kamarul because I segan with him, my boss in the party newspaper. When I segan with someone I will give him/her face even if I am not happy doing what they request from me.

Hence I 'stayed' with Anwar not because I love Anwar but for the sake of Dato' Kamarul who I have great respect for.

In the 2008 general election, I campaigned for DAP, but not for Pakatan Rakyat. I declined all the invitations to speak at the PAS and PKR rallies/ceramah. I told them I would only speak at the DAP rallies. And I did, all the way to Penang.

Then they approached me and asked me to speak at Nurul Izzah's ceramah. At first I said 'no'. No PKR ceramahs. Then a friend pleaded with me to help Nurul. Because of this friend who I also segan, an Indian chap, I relented and said that only at Nurul's ceramah, but not at the other PKR ceramah -- exclusive for Nurul Izzah only. And until today I still support Nurul and even helped raise money for her (which I did last year).

I know some of you like or maybe even love Anwar. I have no problems with that. But just because you like or love Anwar that does not mean I too must do so. And just because I do not like or love the same people that you do this does give you the right to vilify, disparage, mock and curse me.

I love Tok Guru Abdul Hadi Awang and Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat. When I meet them I kiss their hands to demonstrate my love for them. Many of you, however, do not like these two PAS leaders. Some of you, in fact, hate them. But I do not vilify, disparage, mock and curse you because you do no like them or you hate them.

I like Karpal Singh. In fact, I have great respect for Karpal and his sons, Gobind in particular. Many of you do not like Karpal. Some of you even hate him and feel he should just retire and keep his mouth shut. But I do not vilify, disparage, mock and curse you because you do no like Karpal or you hate him.

I know some of you do not like Dato' Kamarul, the only person in Malaysia who can get me to go and see Anwar. But I do not vilify, disparage, mock and curse you because you do not like Dato' Kamarul or you hate him. In fact, I even know that some of you are going to sabotage Dato' Kamarul in the coming general election to make sure he loses his seat. But I still do not vilify, disparage, mock and curse you.

So, no, I have not 'turned' of late, as some of you allege. I already 'turned' -- if you wish to use that word -- back in August 2004 when I first launched Malaysia Today. Nothing has changed. In spite of that I still went to Penang to campaign and ceramah for Anwar during the 2008 Permatang Pauh by-election (and he did not even thank me for that). And when Anwar went to London a few times I travelled down to London to meet him at my own expense.

And let me share a secret with you. The more you vilify, disparage, mock and curse me because I do not love Anwar the more I am going to write articles and exposés uncomplimentary to Anwar just to teach you a lesson.

Nobody tells me whom I can and cannot love or like. And I will keep whacking until you get this through your thick head. And if you do not like that, tough, that is your problem, not mine.

 

I speak for God, konon

Posted: 08 Mar 2013 08:22 PM PST

"The Shi'ite influence from Iran exists here and there are attempts to spread it among the community. This represents a major problem not only to the education system but also the Muslim community, so I want immediate action to be taken to prevent the spread of such teachings," said Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Thorough study to identify, curb Shi'ite teachings: DPM

(Bernama) - The government will carry out a thorough study to identify Islamic religious teachers involved in the Shi'ite teachings to curb such activities so that Muslims in the country are not misled by such teachings.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said such a study needed to be carried out at several levels instead of just making presumptions.

"This includes studying the character of the teachers (involved in Shi'ite teachings), their methods of teaching, social activities and their involvement in such teachings. If they are really involved, they would be advised," he said.

He said this at the Northern Zone Conference of Islamic Religious Teachers, Ministry of Education at Universiti Sains Malaysia, here today which was attended by about 2,300 religious teachers.

Muhyiddin, who is also the Education Minister, said this when responding to a question from a religious teacher from Kedah who wanted the government to take action on the growing incidence of religious teachers involved in Shi'ite teachings.

He said immediate action must also be taken as the Shi'ite teachings were contradictory to Islamic teachings in this country and could not be accepted particularly as they involved religious teachers.

He expressed concern if the Shi'ite teachings spread to students through lessons in school and the community because religious teachers had great influence in the society.

"The Shi'ite influence from Iran exists here and there are attempts to spread it among the community. This represents a major problem not only to the education system but also the Muslim community, so I want immediate action to be taken to prevent the spread of such teachings," he said.

Meanwhile in his speech, Muhyiddin said the Barisan Nasional (BN) government implemented numerous measures in empowering Islam including in the Islamic religious education system in schools, the creation of an international Islamic university and the implementation of Islamic banking and finance which had been recognised as the best in the world.

"All forms of progress and development implemented by the BN government are in line with the requirements of Islam as had been stated, 'Balanced Life in the Present World and Hereafter'," he said.

He said that it would not be able to implement policies pertaining to Islam if Malaysia did not have a government or administration that was committed to empowering and preserving the sanctity of the Islamic religion.

"Islamic education as the federal religion does not necessarily guarantee the implementation of Islamic policies if there is no commitment or determination on the part of the government that does not see the need for the sanctity of the Islamic religion to be preserved and the growth of Islam."

Muhyiddin said the federal government had given emphasis on raising the quality of Islamic teaching as it was important for the Muslims in Malaysia.

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

I shudder when Malays foam at the mouth and scream about Al Qur'an, Al Hadith, Al Sunnah and Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah (Sunni, for short). Then they will say that a good Sunni will follow the teachings of Imam Ghazali and Imam Shafiee. Then they will conclude by saying that the Shi'ite are not true Muslims, they are deviant Muslims -- in fact, you should not even consider them Muslims at all -- and Malaysians who follow the teachings Shi'ite must be arrested and sent for religious rehabilitation.

And, in the past, many followers of Shi'ite teachings -- some of them lecturers and professors of various Malaysian universities -- have been arrested for this 'crime'. So, today, those Malays who follow Shi'ite teachings do so secretly to avoid arrest. They go 'underground' and become 'closet' followers of Shi'ism.

This is just like England of the 1500s when Catholics would also go underground and practice Catholicism secretly. If not they would be arrested, their property confiscated, and they would be tortured and then when they are half-dead would be burned alive at the stake like witches and warlocks.

100 years later, England went through a Civil War and one of the various reasons being that Charles I was suspected of being a Catholic sympathiser. The Puritans led by Oliver Cromwell wanted to eradicate the anti-Christ and heretic Catholics from English soil. They even banned Christmas and removed statues and crucifixes from churches, symbols of popish believes and papist religious deviation.

Today, Malaysia is going through what England went through 400-500 years ago. And Catholicism is replaced with Shi'ism. But in Malaysia they only arrest you and send you for religious rehabilitation. They do not burn you alive at the stake -- after being tortured an inch from death -- like they used to do in England four-five centuries ago.

I wonder why.

Do you know that the two famous imams of Sunni Islam -- Imam Ghazali and Imam Shafiee -- were students of Shi'ite scholars? And do you also know that the Hadith -- that the Sunnis say are compulsory to follow -- was written by Persians and not by scholars from Mekah and/or Medina. In fact, during the time of the four Caliphs of Medina, they banned Hadith. Omar was so outraged by false Hadith that he would flog anyone who wrote these Hadith.

Strange or not? We reject the Persian version of Islam but we follow the Hadith and Imams of Persia.

I wonder whether the Deputy Prime Minister is aware of this. Does he know that the so-called ulama' (religious scholars) have been hiding this fact from us. And because 99% of Malays are ignorant of Islam, they do not know this.

It is like the Protestants or Anglicans rejecting popish teachings and then they go and celebrate pagan Christmas every 25th December. Strange or not?

It looks like both Christians and Muslims are equally weird. Then they say that the Christians and Muslims follow the Abrahamic faith. But Abraham is the father of Judaism. Should not Christians and Muslims then be Jews?

Strange! Very strange indeed! They say this is called blind faith. I think it is more like blind rather than faith. And these people think they are all going to heaven and the rest of us are going to hell.

Strange! Very strange indeed! And do you know that Hudud is Jewish law. And the Christians allege that Jesus abrogated the Jewish law of Hudud while the Muslims claim it is Islamic law.

Strange! Very strange indeed!

 

The value of a Muslim oath

Posted: 07 Mar 2013 03:56 PM PST

The Malays/Muslims have just reduced the value of a Muslim oath to zero value. Can we any longer trust Malays/Muslims when they swear an oath in the name of Allah while holding a Qur'an? No wonder Malays/Muslims swear an oath of office and as soon as they are in office they resort to corruption and abuse of power and violate the trust the people have put in them.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

This is the photograph that Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail showed during the press conference that she held regarding Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's sodomy allegation against Anwar Ibrahim. When the press asked Wan Azizah where she got the photograph from, she pointed to me standing at the back of the hall and told the reports to ask Raja Petra.

The reporters then rushed up to me to ask me my comments and I just smiled and responded with a 'no comment'. I just love keeping some things a mystery – such as from where I got that photograph.

At first Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's office denied the photograph and also denied that Saiful had ever been to meet the Prime Minister. Later, when I said that I have evidence that Saiful did visit Najib's office, they did a U-turn and admitted that he did go to Najibs office after all but merely to discuss a scholarship.

Hence allow me to gloat by saying that Malaysia Today broke the story first and even revealed the photograph.

But that is not the point of my article today. What I really want to talk about is that Malays (meaning Muslims as well) pride themselves on the sanctity of the Qur'an and the value of an oath of a Muslim.

In fact, in Surah An Nur (chapter 24) of the Qur'an, it stresses that in any allegation involving sexual misconduct (where the sentence is stoning to death just like the old Jewish laws) your oath can determine whether a person is put to death or is spared death.

In other words, another person's oath can result in you being put to death (by many people throwing stones at you) and/or your oath can spare you the terrible fate of being put to death (by many people throwing stones at you). So an oath is not a light thing. It is the difference between life and death.

And this is what Saiful had done -- he had taken an oath -- and also what Najib had done regarding his alleged involvement with Altantuya Shaariibuu -- he had also taken an oath that he had never met her or even knows her.

Today, Malaysians have learned that an oath of a Muslim has no value after all. An oath of a Muslim -- even when taken with a Qur'an over his/her head -- is as valuable as Japanese 'banana money'.

After this can we ever accept the oath of a Malay/Muslim? It appears like the oath of a Muslim, the most sacred word that a Muslim can ever give, is not worth the paper it is written on (pun intended).

The Malays/Muslims need to ponder on this. If from now on the non-Muslims mock a Muslim who swears in the name of Allah regarding this, that or the other, the Malays/Muslims should not feel offended and start making police reports that so-and-so has insulted Islam and threaten bloodshed and all that bullshit.

The Malays/Muslims have just reduced the value of a Muslim oath to zero value. Can we any longer trust Malays/Muslims when they swear an oath in the name of Allah while holding a Qur'an? No wonder Malays/Muslims swear an oath of office and as soon as they are in office they resort to corruption and abuse of power and violate the trust the people have put in them.

In short, Malays/Muslims cannot be trusted because the sacred oath of a Malay/Muslim is totally worthless. And a human whose sacred oath is worthless is lower than an animal. Are Muslims lower than animals then?

Yes, and trust me, after writing this article I have just closed the door to ever returning to Malaysia never mind whether Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional wins the coming general election.

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

P.S.: By the way, I am inviting volunteers from both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat to become sub-editors of Malaysia Today -- at least for now until the coming general election. Your job will be to update/publish news items or articles every day, say about half a dozen or so a day per person.

The reason I am inviting volunteers from both sides of the political divide is so that we can get balanced reporting and views. Definitely the pro-Barisan people will publish pro-government items while the pro-Pakatan people will publish anti-government items. (You have absolute autonomy and can also write your own articles if you want to).

I will need you to verify your identity and political affiliation, of course, and if you respond fast enough maybe we can arrange a face-to-face meeting some time next week in a secret location in the Malaysian jungle to get the ball rolling. (So be prepared to 'disappear' for a whole day next week).

If you want Malaysia Today to be more balanced then this is your opportunity to do that. I am prepared to turn Malaysia Today into a 'public-owned' Blog and allow you to determine what gets published in Malaysia Today. Then you have no reason to say that Malaysia Today is biased. We want to be as balanced as we can but then you must help make this possible.

Any takers? You can contact me at petra_kamarudin@airpost.net

 

Irritated by beliefs

Posted: 06 Mar 2013 06:58 PM PST

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad once said that Malaysia is not ready to become a full democracy. Malaysia can only be a 'guided' democracy, as what Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore said. This means the people cannot be allowed to think, do and say whatever they like. Malaysians must be guided as to what they can think, do and say.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Some people believe that Muhammad is the final Prophet of God and that the only authentic holy book, the Qur'an, was revealed to Prophet Muhammad (which is the miracle of Prophet Muhammad) through Gabriel and that Muhammad flew up to God's Kingdom to receive the decree that humankind must pray five times a day (and where Muhammad also met Abraham, Moses and Jesus).

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Some people believe that Jesus was of a virgin birth and is the Son of God and that he died for the sins of humankind and came back to life three days later and that if we accept Jesus as the saviour then our soul will be saved.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Some people believe that the Jews are God's chosen people who were led out of slavery by Moses who parted the Red Sea to allow them to escape the Pharaoh and that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments for all humankind to follow plus God gave humankind His laws of Hudud.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Some people believe that you can ignore or mistreat your parents and put them in old folks' homes when they become senile and a burden and then you go to their graves to pray when they die plus you must choose the graveyard properly for good luck and positive fung shui.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Some people believe that you should build statues and place shrines around trees and treat them as Gods and pray to them and that if you are bad you will be reincarnated as a pig or a dog but if you are good you will be reincarnated as a handsome/beautiful Bollywood movie star.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Nevertheless, however silly these beliefs may seem, most people are prepared to live and let live and allow you these beliefs without scolding, cursing, vilifying or disparaging you and will not call you stupid for believing these silly things. They are, after all, your beliefs and you are entitled to those beliefs even though these beliefs may sound insane.

Then, on top of that, there are people who believe that Malaysia is ready for a change of government and that the present government has ruled for too damn long and corruption, abuse of power, racism, an erosion of your fundamental liberties, etc., is so rampant and blatant because of that.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Then, on top of that, there are people who believe that it is futile to change governments because the new government we choose will be just as bad as the old government and that history has proven that countries that changed governments did not see any positive change and it was merely business as usual or old wine in a new bottle.

Many more people, however, think that this is all utter bullshit and probably the imagination of a demented person.

Nevertheless, while you may think that whether you change governments or you retain the present government is a matter of opinion and personal choice, most people will refuse to allow you this freedom of opinion and personal choice and they are not prepared to live and let live and allow you this belief without scolding, cursing, vilifying or disparaging you and call you stupid for believing these silly things.

Isn't it strange? When it comes to religion, most people think you are silly for having these silly beliefs but they will keep silent and allow you to continue being silly. When it comes to politics, however, most people think you are silly for having these silly beliefs but they will not keep silent and allow you to continue being silly.

In fact, religion is more irrational than politics. Nothing in religion can be proven and all religions work on the basis of the supernatural. Politics, however, can at least be argued supported by historical evidence. But while you are allowed your religious beliefs they will not allow you your political beliefs. They will scold, curse, vilify or disparage you if you take an opposite political stand but they do not do the same when you take an opposite religious stand.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad once said that Malaysia is not ready to become a full democracy. Malaysia can only be a 'guided' democracy, as what Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore said. This means the people cannot be allowed to think, do and say whatever they like. Malaysians must be guided as to what they can think, do and say.

When Dr Mahathir first said this I was flabbergasted. I thought that Dr Mahathir had become a raving lunatic and was talking absolute nonsense. What do you mean by 'guided' democracy? Isn't that like being slightly pregnant? Either you are or you are not.

Over time, however, I began to understand the 'logic' in that most illogical statement, in particular over the last five years since 2008. Of late we have been seeing the evil side of Malaysians. And the conduct of Malaysians over these last five years has proven that Malaysians can't be trusted with absolute democracy.

It is like giving a child a box of matches. Mostly likely the whole house will be burned to the ground. The Malays say, macam bagi bunga ke beruk, or, as the English would say: casting pearls before pigs.

"Never give what is holy to dogs or throw your pearls before pigs. Otherwise, they will trample them with their feet and then turn around and attack you." (Matthew 7:6).

 

So what is our foreign policy?

Posted: 05 Mar 2013 04:45 PM PST

Israel did not create itself. Israel was created by the colonial powers that also engineered the destruction of the Ottoman Empire. And the Sykes–Picot Agreement plus the Balfour Declaration were what made Israel possible. And these countries not only created Israel but they propped it up as well and are still doing so. So why are we still friends with them when they are the culprits behind the problem we are facing called Israel?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

'Did PM know US consultants are Israel supporters?'

(Malaysiakini) - Is Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's administration aware that the US consultants it hired to attack political rival Anwar Ibrahim are ardent supporters of the Israeli regime, asks PKR.

PKR communications director Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad said Najib must answer many questions pertaining to the engagement of former United States president George W Bush's speechwriter Joshua Trevino and other American bloggers, through Apco Worldwide and FBC Media, at the expense of taxpayers.

FBC Media and Apco are agencies hired by the Malaysian government to spruce up its image internationally.

"Is the government aware that many of the consultants hired are staunch and avid supporters of Israel, to the detriment of the Palestinians?" were among the questions Nik Nazmi posed in a statement today.

The same right-wing writers hired by the BN-led government, said Nik Nazmi, are also anti-Islam and have been criticising the Muslim Brotherhood and Muslims in the US.

He also wants the PM to explain why and how much more of the rakyat's money has been spent for propaganda, who else have been hired and who did the recruiting and coordination of the campaign, which are mainly slander attacks against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.

He claimed that Trevino was behind the site Malaysiamatters.com, which carried articles aimed at discrediting Anwar to international audiences.

Pakatan had intended to ask the question in Parliament, said the PKR leader, though as it was clear that there will be no Parliament sitting convened, he said the onus is on Najib.

"We hope the PM will answer," said Nik Nazmi during a press conference in Petaling Jaya today.

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

Some background to the Israel issue

On 16th May 1916, Britain and France concluded the Sykes–Picot Agreement, which proposed to divide the Middle East between them into spheres of influence, with "Palestine" as an international enclave.

The Sykes-Picot Agreement did not call for Arab sovereignty, but for the "suzerainty of an Arab chief" and "an international administration, the form of which is to be decided upon after consultation with Russia, and subsequently in consultation with the other allies, and the representatives of the Sherif of Mecca." Under the terms of that agreement, the Zionist Organisation needed to secure an agreement along the lines of the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement with the Sherif of Mecca.

On 2nd November 1917, the Balfour Declaration, a letter from British Foreign Secretary Arthur James Balfour to Lord Rothschild, made public the British support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration led the League of Nations to entrust the United Kingdom with the Palestine Mandate in 1922.

In that letter, Balfour promised British support for the Zionist programme of establishing a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. This pledge of support was made without consulting the indigenous Christian and Muslim inhabitants of Palestine, the Palestinian people. And it was made before British troops had even conquered the land.

Balfour, on behalf of Britain, promised Palestine – over which Britain had no legal right – to a people who did not even live there (of the very small community of Palestinian Jews in Palestine in 1917, very few were Zionists). And he did so with the worst of intentions: to discourage Jewish immigration to Britain. Lord Montagu, the only Jewish member of the Cabinet, opposed the declaration.

And yet, just two years earlier, Britain had committed herself to assisting the Arab nations in achieving their independence from the Ottoman Empire. Arab fighters all over the region, including thousands of Palestinians, fought for their freedom, allowing Britain to establish her mandate in Palestine.

From that moment, Palestine became the victim of colonial conspiracies. The Balfour Declaration helped to encourage Zionist immigration into Palestine and away from America and Western Europe.

Simultaneously, Britain suppressed Palestinian nationalism, which was exemplified by its crushing of the Arab revolt of 1936-1939 and the denial of the right of the Palestinian people to express their will through their own representation. In fact, Britain suppressed Palestinian political representation through a policy of systematic denial of Palestinian political rights.

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

Okay, from the Malaysiakini report above, it appears like Pakatan Rakyat's -- or at least PKR's -- foreign policy is that anyone who is pro-Israel or is opposed to the 'Palestinian cause' must be treated as an enemy of Malaysia. What happens if I were to publicly express an anti-Hamas or a pro-Israel stance? Would that also make me an enemy of the country?

Israel is a 100-year old story. Sabah became part of Malaysia in 1963. So it is a 50-year old story. If the Muslims from the Philippines do not have any legal right in claiming Sabah as their territory because it is an 'old story', what legal right do Muslims from the Middle East have in claiming Israel (or the occupied lands) as their territory when it is an even older story? (And remember, the British created Sabah just like they did Israel).

Malaysia supports the Muslim claim over Israel because Malaysia is a Muslim country and Muslims are 'officially' anti-Jews. Hence we take the Muslim side against the Jews. Okay, say Dr Jeffrey Gapari Kitingan's 'Christian' STAR were to kick out the 'Muslim' Umno government in the coming general election, would we now take the side of the Muslims from the Philippines regarding their claim over Sabah?

For the sake of Islam we take the Muslim side against the Jews. For the sake of Islam will we also take the Muslim side (although from the Philippines) against the Christians (although from Malaysia)? In the Middle East we are 'guided' by religion. Will we also be guided by religion if the Umno 'Muslim' government of Sabah gets kicked out?

We, especially the opposition, must be very careful when we express our foreign policy. Just because some Americans happen to be Jews (and Jews who support Israel) we cannot use that as the justification to declare them the enemy of Malaysia. That can also be interpreted as taking a pro-Hamas stance. And that would mean we do not regard Hamas as a terrorist group even though women and children are blown up with bombs.

We now call the Muslim 'intruders' from the Philippines terrorists and criminals. This is what Malaysia and the Philippines announced today. Are those Muslims who are fighting the Palestinian cause also terrorists and criminals? In that case what business does the government and opposition have in dealing with them? Aren't we dealing with terrorists and criminals?

It is not wrong, of course, in taking a stand, even in an issue involving foreign policy. But we need to be clear and consistent in the reasons why we take such a stand. And those justifications must apply in all cases, not apply in one case but not in another.

If it is wrong for the Malaysian government to deal with Jews from America known to be pro-Israel, then it is also wrong to deal with others who are pro-Israel as well.

Israel did not create itself. Israel was created by the colonial powers that also engineered the destruction of the Ottoman Empire. And the Sykes–Picot Agreement plus the Balfour Declaration were what made Israel possible. And these countries not only created Israel but they propped it up as well and are still doing so. So why are we still friends with them when they are the culprits behind the problem we are facing called Israel?

It is strange how we choose our friends and enemies. We apply certain reasons as to why someone is our enemy and then sidestep that same reason in those we want as our friends.

So let me get this straight. Anyone who is pro-Israel is our enemy, even those American citizens -- some who happen to be Jews. I suppose then almost every country in Europe must now become our enemy and Malaysians should be asked to leave the UK, France, etc., immediately.

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


The untold story of the Lahad Datu incident

Posted: 24 Mar 2013 01:00 AM PDT

On 16th July 2012, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim flew to Jakarta to meet Nur Misuari -- who is very close to Anwar since the days when Anwar was in the government -- and the military commanders of the MNLF. The meeting was held in the Crowne Plaza Jakarta hotel and was arranged by an Indonesian Member of Parliament -- another close friend of Anwar -- at the behest of Anwar. A second meeting was held in Manila on 4th August 2012 to finalise and seal the agreement.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I wrote about this matter eight years ago back in 2005. However, many of you were probably not yet readers of Malaysia Today in 2005 so you most likely did not read what I wrote then.

For those of you who can remember what I wrote, it was a very long story indeed but basically it was about the links between the Muslim leaders in the Malaysian government and the Muslim leaders in the Philippines and the role that Malaysia played in the 'internal affairs' of the Philippines.

Most Malaysians do not understand the difference with Sulus, MNLF, MILF and Abu Sayyaf -- as they do not know the difference between the PLO and Hamas. Nevertheless, let me simplify it by saying that they are all merely splinter or rival groups of the Muslims in the Philippines who are seeking self-determination, just like the Palestinians in the Middle East are. And Malaysia, being a Muslim country, sympathises with the Muslims of the Philippines -- as it does with the Muslims of Southern Thailand -- and is helping in any way it can to resolve both the Philippines and Southern Thailand issues.

Along the way, however, something went wrong. As I had written in 2005, certain promises were made that were not delivered. And this has a bearing on the Sabah 'IC issue' (you do not need a RCI for me to tell you that). And that resulted in the Sipidan hostage crisis and the involvement of Libya in helping to eventually resolve the crisis after many months of deadlock.

A reported RM50 million changed hands to secure the release of the hostages, the cost which Libya underwrote. Of course, no one is going to admit to this although they will not be able to explain how and why the hostages were eventually released.

But all that happened decades ago. We are talking about the start of the crisis in 1970, when many of you were not even born yet, and the hostage crisis 30 years later in 2000. Since then everything has been very quiet -- that is until last year when this whole thing was resurrected in preparation for the coming general election.

And this was what happened recently.

Anwar's and Nur Miusari's links go way back to the time Anwar was in government 

On 16th July 2012, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim flew to Jakarta to meet Nur Misuari -- who is very close to Anwar since the days when Anwar was in the government -- and the military commanders of the MNLF. The meeting was held in the Crowne Plaza Jakarta hotel and was arranged by an Indonesian Member of Parliament -- another close friend of Anwar -- at the behest of Anwar.

A second meeting was held in Manila on 4th August 2012 to finalise and seal the agreement. Anwar flew to Manila on flight MH 704 and if you were to check these flight details you can confirm that Anwar did make this trip, as he did the trip to Jakarta just two weeks or so earlier.

In that meeting, Anwar told Misuari that he needs the latter's help to win the coming general election. Pakatan Rakyat was confident of winning at least 82-85 of the 165 seats in West Malaysia. It was the 57 seats in Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan that he was not confident of winning.

Pakatan Rakyat needs to win at least 30 of those 57 East Malaysian seats to be able to form the federal government with an extremely slim but comfortable enough majority. (Anwar can always increase this majority later with crossovers from Barisan Nasional once they form the government). And for that to happen Anwar needs the support of the Muslims in East Malaysia, in particular in Sabah, many of them Filipino Muslims with Malaysian citizenship and voting rights.

Anwar promised Misuari that in the event Pakatan Rakyat takes over the federal government, Sabah and Sarawak would be given autonomy, as what they had been fighting for over 42 years since 1970. These two East Malaysian states would also be given 20% oil royalty, an increase of 15% from the current 5%. This would ensure that these two states would become very wealthy -- an estimated RM4 billion a year for each state.

Furthermore, all the non-Malaysian Filipinos in East Malaysia would be given Malaysian citizenship -- or at the very minimum permanent resident status -- so that they could seek employment in Sabah. Jobs for them will also be assured.

Nur Misuari agreed to these terms and subsequently appointed Haji Ibrahim Omar as the MNLF coordinator or 'unofficial ambassador' to Sabah to help Anwar garner the support of the Filipino Muslims in that state.

And that was why the Malaysian government hesitated to take drastic action when trouble first emerged in Lahad Datu. The government knew that there was more than meets the eye in this whole episode although it was not too clear yet at that time how this incident fit in to the bigger scheme of things.

To leave things alone is certainly out of the question. But taking military action would only play into the hands of the conspirators and convince the Filipino Muslims in Sabah that they must unite behind Anwar to gain autonomy from the federal government.

Yes, the Lahad Datu incident was certainly a 'wayang', as the opposition claims. Very few Malaysians would deny that this is so. Many Malaysians are also convinced that there are certain 'dalang' behind this incident. What they do not know is: who is the dalang? Well, Malaysia Today has just revealed the untold story and I challenge the Malaysian government to deny the authenticity of what I have just revealed.

Another point to consider is whether the 'war of words' between the MNLF and MILF is another wayang. By perpetuating this conflict, which will result in the torpedoing of the peace process, this gives them an excuse for continuing the armed conflict. However, the relationship between the MNLF and the other splinter groups does not appear as ruptured as what it shows behind the scenes, if the above photograph is anything to go by.

My conclusion to this whole thing is that there are many plots and sub-plots and at the end of the day we really do not know who is playing whom.

READ MORE HERE:

1. Accused: I was asked and paid: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55283-accused-i-was-asked-and-paid

2. Columnist claims Misuari helped Sulu siege to derail Bangsamoro peace deal: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55284-columnist-claims-misuari-helped-sulu-siege-to-derail-bangsamoro-peace-deal

3. Anwar claims of BN plot to implicate him in Sulu clampdown: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55320-anwar-claims-of-bn-plot-to-implicate-him-in-sulu-clampdown

4. Sulu military commander captured: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55327-sulu-military-commander-captured

5. Lahad Datu: Kg Tanduo chief's son is coordinator for Sulu group, say police: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55326-lahad-datu-kg-tanduo-chiefs-son-is-coordinator-for-sulu-group-say-police

6. Sultanate: 8 terror accused are Malaysians, not Pinoys: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55315-sultanate-8-terror-accused-are-malaysians-not-pinoys

7. There's much at stake in Sabah: http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/55346-theres-much-at-stake-in-sabah

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

Hostage crisis in the Philippines

(CNN, 23rd April 2000) - Abu Sayyaf gunmen attack a Malaysian dive resort on the island of Sipadan, seizing 21 hostages.

The hostages -- 10 tourists and 11 resort workers -- were taken to an Abu Sayyaf camp on the southern Philippine island of Jolo.

Over the following months all but one of the hostages, a Filipino, were released, allegedly after ransoms of up to US$1 million per hostage were paid to the kidnappers.

READ MORE HERE: Libya and the Jolo Hostages (20th August 2000) http://212.150.54.123/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=126

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

AFP mum over sultanate's Sabah intrusion

The intrusion occurred just as former Malaysian leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, also Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader, proposed that Sabah be granted autonomy.

(AFP, 16th February 2013) - ZAMBOANGA CITY: Philippine military officials kept silent over the daring intrusion of dozens of Filipinos into the eastern Malaysian state of Sabah, where authorities surrounded them and were negotiating for their peaceful surrender as of press time.

Reports said that the men are members of the sultanate of Sulu province and North Borneo and the Moro National Liberation Front (MILF), and that some of them were armed.

The Filipinos were believed to be active in the campaign to reclaim the Malaysian oil-rich island, which is part of the sultanate.

"The Department of Foreign Affairs has the sole authority to give a statement about that," Col. Rodrigo Gregorio, spokesman for the Western Mindanao Command, told The Manila Times.

The Philippine Embassy in Kuala Lumpur and the Department of Foreign Affairs in Manila have not issued any official statement about the situation in Sabah's Lahad Datu town, where some 100 Filipinos, many of them wearing military uniforms, were holding out.

Foreign Affairs spokesman Raul Hernandez said that they are still trying to ascertain and complete the facts of the Sabah incident.

The Sultanate of Sulu obtained Sabah from Brunei as a gift for helping put down a rebellion on Borneo Island. The sultanate of Sulu was a Muslim state that ruled over much of the islands off the Sulu Sea. It stretches from a part of the island of Mindanao in the east, to North Borneo, now known as Sabah, in the west and south and to Palawan province, in the north.

The Sultanate of Sulu was founded in 1457 and is believed to exist as a sovereign nation for at least 442 years. Malaysia, which is now brokering peace talks of Manila and the MILF, still pays a token to the heirs of the sultanate of Sulu around 6,300 ringgits each year.

Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said that they will do their best to prevent any bloodshed. Gen. Tan Sri Ismail Omar, police inspector, and Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Hamza Taib, said that the Filipinos arrived in speedboats and that police and military forces have encircled the men.

"In terms of strength, we have the upper hand in combat power to arrest them, but the government opts for negotiation to break the stalemate so that they leave peacefully to southern Philippines," the prime minister was quoted as saying by the Malaysian news agency Bernama.

"We have more and less identified the group. But let the police negotiate with them and hopefully, it will bear fruit and succeed. This is because they cannot go anywhere, they have been surrounded . . . They have no choice and have to find a solution," he added.

The intrusion occurred just as former Malaysian leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, also Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader, proposed that Sabah be granted autonomy.

Sultan Muhammad Fuad Kiram I, the sultan of Sulu and the sultan of Sabah, said that Malaysia illegally occupied Sabah. "Sabah is still the property and sovereign patrimony of the sultan of Sulu and the royal sultanate of Sulu to this day," he said in the website of the royal hashemite sultanate of Sulu, which is accessible at http://www.royalsulu.com.

He said that the sultanate supports "a free and independent Sabah [which] will be under our reign and our heirs and successors according to law of succession as the reigning sultan of Sabah."

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

Authorities urged to reveal if Sulu militants are 'Project IC' Malaysians

(The Malaysian Insider, 21st March 2013) - PKR has urged the government to reveal if the Sulu militants who invaded Sabah last month were given blue identity cards (ICs) under Project IC.

The Sulu sultanate said yesterday that Agbimuddin Kiram — the brother of self-proclaimed Sulu Sultan Jamalul Kiram III — was never issued a blue IC, but admitted that he had worked as an assistant district officer in Kudat on Sabah's north.

"The confirmation (by the Sulu sultanate) raises worries among many quarters whether the armed group in Lahad Datu involves Malaysians originating from the Philippines who hold blue identity cards," PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli (picture) said in a statement today.

"This matter raises the possibility of threats to national security, as a result from certain parties allegedly linked to (former Prime Minister) Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who allegedly gave citizenship without due process," he added.

Dr Mahathir, Malaysia's longest-serving prime minister who was in power from 1981 to 2003, has been accused of spearheading the so-called "Project IC", in which citizenship was allegedly given to immigrants for their votes.

PKR said yesterday that Agbimuddin was appointed in the civil service in 1974, based on a 1975 Sabah government payroll dug up from the state's archives.

The Sulu sultanate's spokesman, Abraham Idjirani, reportedly said yesterday that Agbimuddin was still alive after fresh clashes against Malaysian security forces that killed two Sulu militants yesterday.

The Sulu sultanate's "raja muda" or crown prince had led a 200-strong band of gunmen into Lahad Datu last February 9 and turned the Sabah east coast into a violent battleground in their bid to retake the state.

Rafizi also urged the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on illegal immigrants in Sabah to continue its proceedings to expose the illegal issuance of ICs in the Borneo state.

The RCI is due to resume on April 15, according to RCI secretary Datuk Saripuddin Kasim.

The RCI, which was formed on August 11 last year, has an additional six months to complete its probe after receiving the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's consent.

Former Sabah National Registration Department (NRD) officers have testified at the RCI that blue ICs were sold to Filipino, Indonesian and Pakistani immigrants in Sabah.

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

Misuari cautioned not to take advantage of Lahat Datu episode

(Daily Express, 21st March 2013) - Kuching: Deputy Foreign Minister Datuk Richard Riot on Wednesday cautioned former Moro National Liberation Front leader Nur Misuari not to try and take advantage of the Lahad Datu episode to advance his personal selfish agenda.

In rebuking Misuari's claim that Sabah rightfully belonged to the so-called Sultan of Sulu, he said, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had made it categorically clear that the State was part of Malaysia and no one should question its sovereignty and territorial integrity as a legitimate part of Malaysian territory.

"My advice to Misuari is, if he is a peace-loving man as he desperately claimed to be and if he really loves and cares for his Bangsamoro, he should support and join the efforts towards the peace agreement within the framework that was signed recently between the Philippines government and Bangsamoro for long-lasting peace in Mindanao," he told a media conference here.

Cautioning Misuari to heed the Malay proverb, "jangan menagguk di air yang keruh" literally translated as "not to fish in murky water," he urged him to devote his remaining energy and time to the peace accord for the good of his fellow countrymen and government of the Philippines, to which he owed his loyalty.

He said the promotion of peace was one of the pillars of Malaysia's foreign policy and, for which, the country would vehemently protect and defend every inch of Sabah against foreign aggression and any hostile action.

"We have witnessed that turmoil and instability in Southern Philippines have certainly brought no advantage to anyone but only to burden Malaysia and other neighbouring countries having to host those fleeing their homes for safety and better lives," Riot said.

There was nothing that Malaysia desired for its neighbours more than for them to enjoy peace, stability and prosperity, he said.

For that reason, he said, Malaysia had been actively involved in peace keeping missions all over the world and willing to broker peace efforts in neighbouring countries, particularly in the Philippines.

He said the warm bilateral relationship between both countries was reflected when the regional governor of the autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao, Mujir S Hataman, paid him a courtesy at his office in Putrajaya in October last year.

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

Lahad Datu: Misuari's claim a lie, says MILF

(The Star, 21st March 2013) - The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) has denied the claim that the Malaysian Government had used it to strengthen its claim on Sabah.

MILF secretariat head Mohammad Ameen also dismissed claims by former Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) chairman Nur Misuari that Malaysia was responsible for promoting disunity among the Moro people.

"This is a total lie and completely fabricated. Misuari has committed a sin for making such an irresponsible and callous statement against both the MILF and the Malaysian Government.

"He should rectify and atone for this," Mohammad was quoted as saying in a news report by the Luwaran News Centre yesterday.

He was responding to Misuari, who accused Malaysia of being a "stumbling block" in efforts to unite rival Moro groups in southern Philippines.

Misuari also said that the MILF was "the instrument of Malaysian colonialism" and that it was Malaysia which was "pulling the strings" behind the MILF.

Mohammad pointed out that it was Malaysia who called for the formation of the Bangsamoro Solidarity Conference (BSC) in 2002 to unite the MNLF and MILF factions, as well as to promote a common position among them, especially in their dealings with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

"How could Malaysia use the MILF to strengthen its claim to Sabah when Sabah has never been made part of the agenda of the peace talks since 2001?" said Mohammad.

He said Malaysia did not volunteer to facilitate the peace talks between the MILF and the Philippine Government, but it was the then president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, in 2001, who requested Malaysia to act as a negotiator.

Mohammad questioned why Misuari was so eager to raise the Sabah claim now when throughout his 21 years of peace talks with the Philippine government, he had never raised the issue.

"It is a pity that Misuari is blaming everyone else for the failure of his leadership and growing irrelevance to the Bangsamoro struggle to self-determination," he said.

"As a leader, Misuari has nothing more to prove. It is better for him to rest, write his memoirs, and allow the new breed of leaders to lead the Bangsamoro people towards the fulfilment of their true aspirations."

 

Talking to a ten-year old

Posted: 21 Mar 2013 06:19 PM PDT

The NEP is not just about stocks and shares and listings on the stock exchange. The NEP is about the aspirations of a two-prong attack: reducing the gap between the haves and the haves-not and reducing the disparity between the different races. Hence, while the Bumiputera ownership of stocks and shares or listed companies may have met a shortfall, what about the rest of us, which the NEP is also about? Are we still short in those areas as well, as we may be in corporate wealth?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Never mind whether I write a short article (The Chinese and Indians screwed up) or a longer article (Conjecture, imagination and suspicion), the average Malaysian still does not understand what I am trying to say. This only goes to show the low comprehension level of most Malaysians. And these are the same people we are depending on to make the right decision in the coming general election.

God help Malaysia when we need to put the lunatics in charge of the asylum and the monkeys in charge of the zoo.

Now, allow me to speak to you as I would to a ten-year old. The events of 1982 and 1992 that I talked about in the two previous articles regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP) were specific to the Malay Chamber of Commerce, which I was not only a member of but I also sat in the Central Committee.

Hence the discussion focused on issues of concern to the Malay Chamber -- and that would be the Bumiputera share of the corporate wealth of Malaysia. It does not involve other issues such as land, housing, education, jobs, etc. The Malay Chamber represents the Malay business community and the job of the Chamber (just like in any Chamber of Commerce anywhere else in the world) is to focus on the needs and aspirations of its members.

Hence it speaks on behalf of only the members of the Chamber. It would not, for example, be speaking on behalf of the taxi drivers, trishaw pullers, lorry owners, petty traders, teachers, bank employees, civil servants, ex-servicemen, ex-policemen, etc., who all have their own associations to represent their interests.

It is like, say, the Association of Chinese Barbers. This association does not represent all Chinese or all barbers. It represents only its members. So to say that the association should not speak on behalf of all Chinese or on behalf of all barbers (the Malay and Indian barbers included) is silly. And in that same spirit to say that the Chinese Chamber of Commerce does not represent all the Chinese in Malaysia is equally silly. Of course it does not. If you are not a member of that Chamber then it does not and cannot represent your interest or your views.

Now, what Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad tried to do in 1982 was to act as matchmaker between the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce so that both Chambers can work closely to resolve issues of concern to the Malay businessmen and women. If the business community can work together to resolve their issues, then the government can ease off and not get involved with what were clearly 'business issues'. And if the relationship works and there is close cooperation between both business communities, then the government can leave the businessmen and women alone and not force policies down their throats.

When it did not work, ten years later in 1992, the government organised a Bumiputera Economic Congress where everyone can get involved. This was not to be a Congress where the Malays make demands and hold the government to ransom. It was to be a Congress where everyone can come to a mutual agreement on what to do. This is not about what the Malays want. It is about what the Malays, Chinese, Indians and others jointly want. It was to seek a consensus of all the races and not listen to the demands of just the Malay business community, and only those who are members of the Malay Chamber on top of that.

The Malay argument was that after so many years of the NEP the Malay share of the corporate wealth increased from just 1% to 4% while that of the Chinese increased from 30% to 60%. The Chinese, however, argued that, in terms of percentage, the Chinese corporate wealth only doubled while that of the Malays increased four times. Hence the Malays saw four times the growth that the Chinese saw.

In terms of growth the Chinese are, of course, correct. The Malay wealth increased four times while that of the Chinese only doubled. In absolute figures, though, the Chinese are far ahead of the Malays at 60% compared to only 4% for the Malays.

Then there was another issue that the Chinese raised. Are you looking at Malay wealth based on par value at the time the shares were issued or at market capitalisation? At par value, say RM1.00 per share, the figure would be lower compared to market capitalisation, say, RM10.00 per share. Hence, are we comparing apples to apples?

The second point was: are you looking at Malay wealth based on what they currently still hold or based on what they were originally given, which had already been sold and at a huge profit on top of that. In other words, is your calculation based on current shareholdings or based on what has passed through the hands of the Malays? What the Malays currently hold in terms of stocks and shares may be only 10% or less of what they originally received. And the 90% or more, which the Malays have since sold, would have been sold at a profit, which is not reflected in the calculation of the corporate wealth of the Malays.

Hence, in short, what formula do we use to decide how wealthy the Malays are? And unless we can agree on that formula, and hence arrive at the correct bottom-line, how do we even begin to resolve the problem when we do not even know what the problem is.

(Now do you see why short articles do not work? There are many issues to an argument that need to be raised).

Now, remember that we are still talking about just the corporate wealth or corporate share of the Malays in comparison to the other races. But not all of us have stocks and shares or own companies listed on the stock exchange. Hence this debate, argument, disagreement, or whatever, does not involve all of us. What if you are a makan gaji (salaried employee), student, farmer, smallholder, fisherman, trishaw puller, food stall operator, etc? Whether it is 4%, 19%, 30% or 60% is of no concern to you. This is merely the concern of the Malay, Chinese and Indian Chambers of Commerce, and in particular to the members of those Chambers.

The NEP is not just about stocks and shares and listings on the stock exchange. The NEP is about the aspirations of a two-prong attack: reducing the gap between the haves and the haves-not and reducing the disparity between the different races. Hence, while the Bumiputera ownership of stocks and shares or listed companies may have met a shortfall, what about the rest of us, which the NEP is also about? Are we still short in those areas as well, as we may be in corporate wealth?

Yes, those are social issues that the social scientists need to address and which the Chambers of Commerce does not talk about. Do more Malays receive an education now than before? Do more Malays get to go to university now than before? Are more Malays employed now than before? Are more Malays living above the poverty level now than before? Do more Malays own homes now than before? Do more Malays own cars now than before? Do more Malays live in the urban areas now than before? Are there more Malay professionals now than before? And so on and so forth.

So there is more to the NEP than just stocks, shares and listed companies. But the story I told you in the previous two articles concerns the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce and even then specific to events in 1982 and 1992. But it appears like many of you just do not understand this. And this is why many of you posted comments that had nothing to do with the issue.

First understand what is being written and then comment. And the issue was regarding the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce and the events of 1982 and 1992 and what Dr Mahathir tried but did not work out mainly because the Malays and Chinese could not agree on the formula to apply and hence what the solution should therefore be.

And instead of trying to find the middle ground -- as in any 'peace process' there would always be a middle ground -- the Chinese chose to remain silent and not participate and allowed the government to do what it wanted.

That, in a nutshell, is the message I am delivering. However, those wearing blinkers would be hard-pressed to see this message.

 

Conjecture, imagination and suspicion

Posted: 19 Mar 2013 08:56 PM PDT

Long before 1970, the Chinese, led by Siew Nim Chee, the economic adviser to Lim Goh Tong, approached the Finance Minister, Tan Siew Sin, to propose a sort of economic policy to help the Malays. The Chinese realised that sooner or later there would be turmoil in the country if the economic imbalance between the Chinese and the Malays were not addressed.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Yesterday's article, The Chinese and Indians screwed up, was a good experiment in readers' mentality, comprehension skills, and IQ level.

Firstly, I cut my normal 3-4-page article to just one page in response to some readers who complain that they cannot understand long articles. If they feel that a 3-4-page essay is too long to understand, imagine what they would say if I wrote a 200-page thesis. This thesis would probably be lost on most of them.

Apparently, even if the article is a short one-page article they still do not understand what I am saying, as most of the 146 comments have proven. Hence it is not the length of my articles that is at fault but the brain of the readers that is to be blamed. Short article or long article, they still do not understand what they read.

Secondly, yesterday's article was in response to the whining, moaning, bitching, grumbling, lamenting and complaining regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP). When I revealed what happened in 1982 and then what happened again in 1992, most readers were caught off-guard. They were not aware about the 1982 and 1992 episodes. However, not wanting to admit their ignorance, they started posting comments that were way off the mark.

And most of these comments were not based on facts or eyewitness accounts but were based on conjecture, assumptions, guessing and speculation. I was there in 1982 and 1992 and was involved with what happened. Those who posted comments were not, but they still posted comments as if they knew what happened for a fact.

Thirdly, everyone assumes that the failure of the NEP was solely and entirely the fault of Umno and the Malays. Now that I reveal that the Chinese and Indians had been given an opportunity to correct the faults in the NEP and even end it and replace it with something else, but they did not do so, the readers deviate from the issue and raise all sorts of lame excuses such as the fear of Operasi Lalang, about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad being a dictator, that even if the Chinese and Indians speak up no one would listen, and so on.

Let me tell you something else that most of you are probably not aware of.

Long before 1970, the Chinese leaders, led by Siew Nim Chee, the economic adviser to Lim Goh Tong, approached the Finance Minister, Tan Siew Sin, to propose a sort of economic policy to help the Malays. The Chinese realised that sooner or later there would be turmoil in the country if the economic imbalance between the Chinese and the Malays were not addressed.

Siew Sin, however, did not take up the idea and when May 13 erupted in 1969, those Chinese who were in the know and who had tried to do something actually blamed Siew Sin for the race riots.

That's right, while you blame Umno and Tun Razak Hussein for May 13, the Chinese who had attempted to avoid such a thing as May 13 blamed Siew Sin for not listening and for not doing what the Chinese had proposed.

Ironical, don't you think so?

When Dr Mahathir took over as Prime Minister, he tried to get the Chinese to 'take over' the job of reducing the economic imbalance between the Malays and the Chinese so that the government could end the NEP in 1990. The Chinese, however, thought that this is not their job to nurture the Malays. Let the government worry about the Malays. Why should the Chinese worry about it?

The Bumiputera share of the 'corporate pie' in 1970 before the implementation of the NEP was just 1%. Hence the target was set at 30% although the Bumiputera population was 60%. By the time Dr Mahathir took over in 1981, the Bumiputera share had grown to 4% -- or 19% if you include the 15% share of the trust agencies and GLCs. By 1990, it still remained at the same level as in 1981. In short, it had stagnated mainly because of the economic slump of 1985-1987.

The main question and bone of contention then was can the 15% share of the trust agencies and GLCs be added to the 4% personal share of the Bumiputeras considering that the trust agencies and GLCs belong to the government and therefore to the nation? For example, does Petronas belong to the country or to the Malays?

That was one main disagreement between the Malays and the government. The government says that the Bumiputeras own 19% of the corporate pie while the Malays insist it was only 4% -- since what is owned by the nation does not belong to the Malays individually.

Nevertheless, while the argument was about whether it is 4% or 19%, whatever the case may be it was still short of the 30% target.

In 1991, the Malay Chamber of Commerce wanted to organise the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress to discuss the NEP. Dr Mahathir summoned the Committee to his office to inform us that the government will take over the organising of the Congress.

I was in that delegation to the PM's office and was appointed as the spokesman. I was told to protest the move by the government to 'hijack' the Congress. However, there were no two ways about it. The government will take over and there was to be no further discussion on the matter. Furthermore, we were told that the government was going to invite everyone to participate in the Congress.

When we were told this we protested. I stood up to argue that how can we call it the Bumiputera Congress when the non-Malays were going to be part of the Congress and would decide on what the new post-NEP policy was going to look like? But Dr Mahathir's decision was final. The government will be organising it and the non-Malays were going to be part of it. Accept that or the government will proceed without the involvement of the Malay Chamber of Commerce.

We were mad as hell but could not do anything about it. Clearly the Malay Chamber had lost its monopoly on the NEP. The non-Malays were now going to have a say in what happens post-NEP. And that was when many of us in the Malay Chamber swung over to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's Semangat 46.

Dr Mahathir and Umno had 'abandoned' the Malays and had opened up the new policy post-NEP to the non-Malays. This was a betrayal of the Malay cause; the way we saw it then. And Dr Mahathir was no longer regarded as the trustee of the Malays.

Surprisingly, Dr Mahathir had 'given the non-Malays a knife' but they did not use it. Dr Mahathir was in the mood to end the NEP and replace it with something else. We did not know what that something else was going to look like but surely with the non-Malays having a say in what it was going to be could not be something favourable to the Malays.

But the non-Malays did not pick up the knife offered to them. Dr Mahathir was clearly very angry. His response was that the government had given us the opportunity to sort this out amongst ourselves and since we had failed to do that then we have given the government no choice but to unilaterally decide what the new post-NEP policy was going to look like.

In 1990, Barisan Nasional won only 53.4% of the votes and 70.55% of the Parliament seats (and lost Kelantan to PAS-Semangat 46).

In 1992, the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress was held.

In 1995, Barisan Nasional won 65.2% of the votes (the highest ever: even better than in the 'historical' 2004 general election) and 84.38% of the Parliament seats.

The 'message' from the 1995 election result was that the people were happy. Hence I decided to leave the Malay Chamber of Commerce. It was futile to continue if the people were happy with the government and all our effort regarding what to do with the NEP, or post-NEP, had gone to waste.

Now you know why I get very vocal and abrasive with people who shout and scream about the NEP. And don't even try to give excuses as to why all this happened. I know what happened. I was there. You were not. And all your comments and views are based on conjecture, assumptions, guessing and speculation.

 

The Chinese and Indians screwed up

Posted: 18 Mar 2013 08:03 PM PDT

There is some chatter going on in the Internet regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP) so I thought that maybe I would address this issue. Some readers, however, have said they are incapable of reading my 3-4-page articles. Some say they only read the titles and then start posting comments based on the title. For the sake of these people who want to read brief articles, today I shall try to be as brief as possible.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In 1981, Tun (then Dato' Seri) Dr Mahathir Mohamad took over as Malaysia's Fourth Prime Minister.

Soon after he took office he invited members of the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce for dinner at the Equatorial Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. He then placed five Malays and five Chinese at each table for ten and made us all sit alternate to one another.

Dr Mahathir then told the Malays that the NEP had run for more than 11 years and had less than nine years to go before it ended. And, as promised, it will end in 1990 because it is not fair to the non-Malays to extend it beyond 20 years. Hence the Malays need to be prepared to face this day.

Dr Mahathir also told the Chinese that they would need to work with the Malays and help them achieve the aspirations of the NEP so that the government can end the NEP in 1990 as planned. If the NEP ended far short of the target, then this might create a lot of dissatisfaction, which is not good for the stability of the country when one race harbours a grudge against another.

In 1991, Dr Mahathir proposed that the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress be held at the PWTC where the various races, political parties from both Barisan Nasional and the Opposition, Malay-Chinese-Indian Chambers of Commerce, associations, societies, movements, NGOs, etc., could sit down for three days to discuss the ending of the NEP and how the government should face the post-NEP era and address the various short-comings in the social reengineering experiment of 1970-1990.

(SEE MORE HERE: http://www.pmo.gov.my/ucapan/?m=p&p=mahathir&id=210)

At this Congress, which was held in January 1992, the audience was shocked by the public quarrel between Anwar Ibrahim, the then Finance Minister, and Rafidah Aziz, the Trade and Industry Minister. These two Ministers plus the other members of the Cabinet could not agree on a common policy.

The non-Malay members of the Congress, in particular the Chinese and Indians, did not put forward any proposals and attended the session merely as silent observers. They just listened to what the Malay participants had to say without contributing any ideas.

Eventually, the Congress ended without any concrete proposals other than the 20-point Memorandum from the Malay Chamber of Commerce (which Raja Petra Kamarudin presented to Tan Sri Sanusi Junid), which the government accepted as merely an Addendum to the main Resolution from the Congress proper, which was that the Congress left it to the government to resolve the issue of what to do in the post-NEP era.

For all intents and purposes, the Congress failed because the Cabinet Ministers, the non-Malay participants, the members of the Opposition parties, and the Chinese and Indian Chambers of Commerce, did not contribute any ideas and proposals that the government could consider and adopt as Malaysia's new policy post-NEP.

 

Malaysia at the crossroads

Posted: 13 Mar 2013 07:41 AM PDT

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. So Umno ensures that the Malays never forget history and that once upon a time Malay territory was colonised for 446 years before it saw independence again mainly because the Malays were not united and that it is possible this can happen again if the Malays do not remain united.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Why do we need to learn history? One reason would be because those who do not know or forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. My usual example would be Hitler. He repeated Napoleon's mistake and thus suffered Napoleon's fate. Nevertheless, looking at things on hindsight is always easy. Everyone can be an expert on hindsight. It is whether one has foresight that matters.

The second reason for learning history would be so that one can develop analytical skills. Are you able to look at history from an unbiased and critical eye and analyse the events for what they were at that particular time and place? Most times we would judge history from our own point of view. And our own point of view would be influenced by our value system. And this value system would, in turn, be influenced by society's norms depending on era and region.

For example, how would you view the Conquistadors of the 1500s -- soldiers, explorers and adventurers in the service of the Spanish and Portuguese Empires? They were initially set up to recapture the Iberian Peninsula that was under Muslim control known as Al Andalus. Over the next 200 years they sailed through most of the world to conquer new territories on behalf of Spain and Portugal.

For all intents and purposes, the Conquistadors were professionally trained soldiers or mercenaries who were very ruthless. The Conquistadors were motivated by just two things -- religion and wealth -- and their objective was to spread Christianity at the point of the sword and to colonise new territories and rob those territories of its wealth.

Today, we would probably call these people pirates and terrorists. However, 500 years ago, they were considered Christian warriors and patriots who plundered the world and eradicated the anti-Christ with the blessing of the Pope in Rome. But how would you, the student of history, judge the Conquistadors? Would you apply today's value system and call them pirates and terrorists or the value system of those days and call them warriors and patriots in the service of God?

You would most likely say, who cares? What relevance is the Conquistador of the 1500s to Malaysia of 2013 where our concern is the coming general election and what the outcome of it is going to be? Well, it may have more relevance than you suspected and it may have more bearing on the coming general election than you had imagined.

First of all, the Conquistadors would not have existed had the Muslim army not occupied part of Christian Europe. Had the Muslims stayed in the Middle East then Christian pride would not have suffered and there would have been no reason to form a mercenary army to retake conquered Christian land.

Then, once this Christian army had fulfilled its task of driving the Muslims out of Europe, it embarked on its own conquest of the world and ventured into Africa, South America, China, India and South East Asia.

In April 1511, Afonso de Albuquerque set sail for Melaka with a force of 1,200 men and a dozen and a half ships. On 24th August 1511, they conquered Melaka and it became a strategic base for Portuguese expansion in the East Indies. The Portuguese, however, did not conquer Thailand. Instead, in that same year, the Portuguese established diplomatic relations with Thailand by sending an ambassador, Duarte Fernandes, to the court of King Ramathibodi.

Why did the Portuguese conquer Melaka but not Thailand? Well, mainly because Thailand was united and had a strong king while Melaka was divided and the other Sultans in Perak, Kedah, Riau, etc., did not come to the aid of the Sultan of Melaka.

In short, as Umno always tells the Malays, the disunity of the Malays resulted in the fall of Melaka and eventually the entire Malay Archipelago was colonised by the western powers -- starting with the Portuguese then followed by the Dutch and finally the British.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. So Umno ensures that the Malays never forget history and that once upon a time Malay territory was colonised for 446 years before it saw independence again mainly because the Malays were not united and that it is possible this can happen again if the Malays do not remain united.

To the non-Malays this may not be a significant point. To the Malays, however, this point is very relevant. Malay disunity resulted in the Malays becoming an occupied race. It was not until Umno was formed in 1946 did the fortunes of the Malays change for the better.

So, as far as the Malays are concerned, history is very clear about the issue. No Malay unity and the Malays become second-class citizens in their own country. Malays unite under the umbrella of Umno and the Malays retake the country that they lost.

Now, how do you address this belief? Umno is constantly reminding the Malays about what happened in August 1511 and why it happened. Umno is also constantly reminding the Malays about what happened in August 1957 and why it happened. And to the Malays this makes sense.

You may argue that what happened in 1511 is so long ago and is no longer relevant. Try telling the Irish that what happened in 1641 is so long ago and is no longer relevant. It is still relevant as far as the Irish are concerned and they can never forgive nor forget the events of 1641 when the English 'colonialists' led by Oliver Cromwell invaded Irish land. Hence, if the Malays are being silly then so are the Irish. History may, over time, be forgiven but it can never be forgotten.

This is a very difficult subject to broach mainly because it involves emotions and sentiments. And you can never rationalise emotions and sentiments. You must also never challenge emotions and sentiments head on. You need to carefully navigate around them. And the Malays are very emotional and sentimental, with feudalistic to boot. And Umno has mastered the skill of playing on the emotions and sentiments of the Malays.

No, this is not a non-Malay-bashing article. This is not an article bashing anyone for that matter. This is about what Sun Tzu said: know your enemy. And the 'enemy' here is the heart and minds of the Malays. You can't fight this type of 'enemy'. You have to win over this 'enemy'. The question is: do you know how?

The coming general election is going to be one of the most crucial general elections in Malaysian history. If Umno gets kicked out this may be the end of Umno for a long time to come. Hence Umno cannot afford to lose this election. But how do we convince the Malay voters that the defeat of Umno does not translate to Melaka falling to the Portuguese in 1511?

Well, this is the job for the politicians and I am not a politician.

 

The Deepak-Bala marriage: in Deepak’s own words

Posted: 10 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

That afternoon, Rosmah called Deepak regarding the SD matter and the discussion got to Bala. Deepak told Rosmah what he had found out from Suresh and she asked Deepak to try and help to resolve the attempt to frame her husband with the murder case. Deepak told Rosmah he will speak to Bala directly and get a true picture of the entire events and how this thing can be resolved.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Deepak Jaikishan was called to the MACC office a few times. This is already public knowledge and is no secret. What is still a secret, though, is what did Deepak tell the MACC? Until today we have not been given the gist of Deepak's statement. And what we are also not being told is why after more than a month still no action is being taken.

From what we know, based on the newspaper reports, Deepak's first couple of visits to the MACC office came to naught. Deepak told the MACC that he was 'not yet ready' to give his statement and went home, promising to return another day. Finally, on 25th January 2013, Deepak gave his statement to the MACC. However, until now, no one knows what he told the MACC. Neither Deepak nor the MACC are talking.

We are still trying to get our hands on a copy of the MACC report, and there is a strong possibility that that may happen very soon. In the meantime, while we try to get our hands on that report, maybe we can share with you the gist of what, according to our Deep Throat, Deepak told the MACC. Let us see whether this part of Deepak's story is going to appear in his 'official statement'.

What our Deep Throat said appears consistent with what Bala said in his exposé at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) on 27th February 2013 plus what he related in his Singapore interview (which you can see on YouTube) and in the London press conference earlier. It is also consistent with Deepak's interviews with Malaysiakini and Free Malaysia Today.

The only part that remains hazy is: did Bala contact Deepak or did Deepak contact Bala that resulted in the meeting in Rawang that same evening that the first SD was released? Both claim that 'the other person' initiated the meeting. Nevertheless, the rest of the story appears consistent -- except for the part that Bala was allegedly promised RM700,000 by M. Puravalen as payment for the first SD, which Bala has thus far never mentioned but which Deepak says did happen.

Anyway, read what our Deep Throat has to say about the matter.

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

In October 2006, Bala was in Razak's office at the time when they received a phone call from Puravalen (picture above). Puravalen said he had something very urgent to discuss with Razak concerning Altantuya. Razak then agreed to meet Puravalen who arrived not long after that.

Puravalen told Razak that the police were about to arrest him (Razak) for the murder of Altantuya. Razak suddenly went pale and started to panic.

Puravalen told Razak not to worry and that he will handle this matter provided that he (Razak) agreed that he (Puravalen) will act for him as his lawyer. Later Razak's family found out that Puravalen was actually linked to Kalimullah and was feeding information to the 'other side' (Karpal Singh included) through Kalimullah. Razak's family suspected that Puravalen, who is very close to Sivarasa, was trying to fix up Razak so they decided to sack Puravalen and replace him with Shafee Abdullah.

In July 2008, Puravalen was the one who introduced Bala to Sivarasa and Americk. Sivarasa then arranged for Bala to meet DSAI to discuss signing a SD to directly implicate Najib and Rosmah to Altantuya's murder. Bala met DSAI twice, the first time a few days before the SD was signed and the second time on the SD day itself wherein he sat beside DSAI and gave his PC flanked by his lawyer.

The first time Puravalen brought Bala to meet DSAI, he was promised RM700,000.00 if he agreed to come up with the SD by 1st July 2008. DSAI had agreed to pay the RM700,000.00 through Puravalen and the payment was to be made in two stages -- Part A, RM200,000.00, immediately and Part B, RM500,000.00, after the PC. On 1st July 2008, Bala made the SD and proceeded to conduct the PC on 3rd July 2008, organised by DSAI and his lawyers at the PKR HQ.

Unfortunately for Bala, after the PC, Puravalen only paid him RM100,000.00 although he had received RM200,000.00 from DSAI. Puravalen told Bala that DSAI had instructed for the balance to be paid after a few days. The balance RM500,000 Puravalen pocketed all to himself without Bala knowing. This angered Bala and he tried to contact DSAI through his lawyer, Americk, and other people he knew in PKR such as Sivarasa. But DSAI never responded at all to him because DSAI believed that Bala was fully paid.

At the same time, Bala started getting calls from the Brickfields Police Station and he became worried that the police will lock him up again like the last time during the Altantuya case. He started to panic as DSAI was not responding to him and the lawyer had just cheated him of his only income to enable him and his family to leave Malaysia. Bala doesn't know that Puravalen cheated him.

Bala, the next day after waiting for DSAI or his lawyer to call him, realised that he had been cheated of his promised money by DSAI and the lawyers. He then contacted Deepak through a mutual friend, Suresh, and asked to meet Deepak so that he could relate what had happened. Deepak informed Suresh that he will first discuss this matter with Rosmah and get back to him ASAP.

 

That afternoon, Rosmah called Deepak regarding the SD matter and the discussion got to Bala. Deepak told Rosmah what he had found out from Suresh and she asked Deepak to try and help to resolve the attempt to frame her husband with the murder case. Deepak told Rosmah he will speak to Bala directly and get a true picture of the entire events and how this thing can be resolved. Deepak spoke to Bala on the phone number given by Suresh and asked him if he was prepared to tell the truth of about SD conspiracy, which was now being exploited as a political asset by Najib's competitors.

However, Bala was reluctant to do so as he said he didn't want to trust any politicians as DSAI had cheated him on the amount of money promised and at the same time he was worried that Najib's people were going to get him arrested again like during the Razak Baginda case. Deepak told Bala don't worry because if he was willing to tell the truth he will be protected and will not be harassed by the police. He can get this assurance.

After a long chat, Bala was still unconvinced and told Deepak he will call back later. Deepak then called Rosmah and reported the entire conversation to her. She then told Deepak to come to the Putrajaya house and meet her husband to explain all the matters. Deepak went to Putrajaya, Sri Satria, and met Najib and Rosmah on the first floor lounge and detailed his conversation with Bala. Najib asked Deepak to convey to Bala that it was important that he speak the truth and tell about RM700,000 promise by DSAI.

The reason DSAI had asked Bala to make the SD was because to stop Najib from taking over PM post from Pak Lah and DSAI informed Bala that he needed Najib and Rosmah to be directly implicated. The timing was perfect and DSAI wanted this whole thing to implicate Najib and Rosmah to prevent him from becoming PM and thus allowing him to succeed with his September 16th plan to get the MPs in Sabah to defect so that he could become PM as they were demoralised at that time under PM Badawi's administration.

Deepak met Bala in Rawang at about 9pm and they had a long discussion about the entire affair involving the SD and his experience during the time he was employed by Razak Baginda. The next day Bala signed his second SD to contradict the first SD that he had signed.

 

Private investigator P. Balasubramanian's interview in Singapore

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXX0l1V_Ms4

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZdiTk48400

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tVzHDuyzyE

 

Deepak Jaikishan's statement corroborating Bala's story

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2o7lIVH1Dg

 

Previous news reports on the matter

1. Lawyer Puravalen to give police statement in PI Bala case http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/bar_news/berita_badan_peguam/lawyer_puravalen_to_give_police_statement_in_pi_bala_case.html

2. Lawyer M. Puravalen claims libel by NST, seeks apology or will sue http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/lawyer-m.-puravalen-claims-libel-by-nst-seeks-apology-or-will-sue

3. Explain alleged conspiracy, duo told http://www.nst.com.my/nation/general/explain-alleged-conspiracy-duo-told-1.127878

 

Umno Incorporated (part 4)

Posted: 06 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

In Realmild's accounts, the money appeared as a loan to the company from the shareholders of the company. Then the 'loan' was wiped out or written off in exchange for another company called Radicare Sdn Bhd. But then in the books it shows that Radicare was sold for merely RM2 and not RM200 million or whatever amount of 'shareholders' advances' that still reflected in the books at that time.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Daim-Anwar team

In 1992, Anwar Ibrahim, who had just taken over the Finance Minister's job from Tun Daim Zainuddin, made his move to control the mainstream media in preparation to challenge Tun Ghafar Baba (picture below) at the end of 1993 for the post of Deputy President of Umno and hence for the post of Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia as well.

 

Anwar's first move was to use Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd as the vehicle to acquire the media conglomerate, NSTP, and the Umno-owned TV station, TV3. Anwar's four nominees or 'fronts' for this exercise were Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. And they did this through a management buyout or MBO costing RM800 million, the largest MBO ever in Malaysian corporate history.

However, Realmild was too small to 'swallow' a media conglomerate to the tune of RM800 million so they had to beef up the company's balance sheet. And they did this by injecting cash of about RM200 million into the company.

But then who owns this RM200 million and where did the money come from? Did the RM200 million belong to Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad and if so how did they acquire this money when their tax returns do not show that they had earned that much money?

That is the first mystery. RM200 million appeared from nowhere and with no tangible evidence to account for it. But the even bigger mystery, however, is what happened to that money later and how did it just disappear as mysteriously as it had appeared?

In Realmild's accounts, the money appeared as a loan to the company from the shareholders of the company. Then the 'loan' was wiped out or written off in exchange for another company called Radicare Sdn Bhd. But then in the books it shows that Radicare was sold for merely RM2 and not RM200 million or whatever amount of 'shareholders' advances' that still reflected in the books at that time.

That is the second mystery.

And to camouflage this whole thing they signed a Settlement Agreement on 3rd August 1999, which the public or auditors were not told about. Basically, this Settlement Agreement was the camouflage to wipe the books clean and to not have to explain where the RM200 million came from and where it went to later.

I suppose this is what they mean by telling a lie to cover another lie.  

 

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Umno Incorporated (part 2)

Umno Incorporated (part 3)

 

Umno Incorporated (part 3)

Posted: 05 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

On 3rd August 1999, a 'Settlement Agreement' was signed between Nazri Abdullah and Mohd Noor Mutalib, the majority shareholders of Realmild at the time, and the company, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd. The purpose of the Agreement was to 'write-off' the RM148 million 'shareholders' advances' -- which was shown as RM182 million in the 1997 Annual Report but got reduced a year later. Hence RM34 million had somehow 'disappeared' over that one-year or so.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

When Munir Majid (picture above) approved the injection of Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd into MRCB it was based on projected profits of RM70 million expected from projects in-hand and RM42 million from projects yet to be secured. It was the first time ever that the watchdog Securities Commission gave an approval based on the mere speculation that MRCB would most likely secure projects in the future. More importantly, the 'injection' actually ended up as a reverse takeover.

The whole exercise was touted as a management buyout (MBO) and the four people involved -- known Umno cum Anwar Ibrahim cronies (just like Munir Majid himself) -- were Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad (picture below).

This was clearly not just a simple 'Ali Baba' exercise but a case of Ali Baba and his forty thieves. After the RM800 million Realmild MBO (see part 2 of this series), they injected the whole thing into MRCB and ended up getting a company worth more than a billion for nothing. That is the beauty of selling a bigger company with large liabilities to a smaller company. You clear your liabilities (the buyer takes over your liabilities) and you end up getting shares in the enlarged group free-of-charge.

One year after Anwar Ibrahim fell out of favour and ended up behind the walls of the Sungai Buloh prison, Realmild changed hands. Anwar was now out so his nominees -- Dato' Ahmad Nazri Bin Abdullah and Mohd Noor Bin Mutalib -- were forced to sell off their interests in the company to another Umno nominee.

And this is where it begins to get even more interesting.

The former head of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce, Abdul Rahman Maidin (picture above), alleged that he lost RM40 million on the 7.101 million Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd shares he purchased, which were said to actually belong to Umno and not to the people he bought the shares from.

What happened thereafter appears to be very hazy.

On 3rd August 1999, a 'Settlement Agreement' was signed between Nazri Abdullah and Mohd Noor Mutalib, the majority shareholders of Realmild at the time, and the company, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd. The purpose of the Agreement was to 'write-off' the RM148 million 'shareholders' advances' -- which was shown as RM182 million in the 1997 Annual Report but got reduced a year later. Hence RM34 million had somehow 'disappeared' over that one-year or so.

But where did this RM182 million (or RM148 million) come from and whose money is it? And where did this RM182 million (or RM148 million: less the RM34 million 'discount') go after that? Furthermore, what do they mean by 'shareholders' advances'?

Apparently, this money was siphoned out to pay off Rahman Maidin's debts of RM84 million. Hence did he really lose RM40 million as he claims or did he, in fact, make RM148 million (or RM182 million according to the 1997 accounts) as what the accounts and the Settlement Agreement show?

In return for this write-off, the outgoing shareholders of Realmild would receive 49% equity in Radicare Sdn Bhd, a company that was given the government concession to equip and commission hospitals and provide hospital support services that included clinical waste management, cleansing services, linen and laundry services, facilities engineering maintenance, and biomedical engineering maintenance.

Now, in the hearing more than two years ago, this Settlement Agreement was not declared. And it was not declared mainly because this was a cover-up for a fraudulent exercise to siphon out money. It was meant to camouflage an illegal transfer of funds. And you can read below the details of the Agreement, which definitely requires further explanation.

More puzzling is the statement in Realmild's June 1999-2000 accounts where it states in Note 27: "Subsequent to year end the company disposed its entire equity interest in an associated company Radicare (M) Sdn Bhd, for a consideration sum of RM2."

This means Realmild's interest in Radicare was sold for only RM2. But the Settlement Agreement states a figure of RM147,970,621.40. So, is it RM2 or RM147,970,621.40?

This can only mean that RM147,970,621.40 was paid but only RM2 went to the company. The balance must have gone into someone's pocket -- in this case that would be Rahman Maidin since he denies that he was Umno's nominee or that the interest he held in the company actually belongs to Umno.

Something is terribly not kosher here and it looks like everything has not been fully declared in the court hearing of 2010. Rahman says one thing but the accounts show something else. And there are too many unexplained issues that have remained unexplained.

Was the Settlement Agreement, therefore, kept from public knowledge because it was a cover-up for some missing money and hence leading to something illegal?

 

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Umno Incorporated (part 2)

 

Umno Incorporated (part 2)

Posted: 04 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

In January 1993, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd, a private company controlled by the management of NSTP and TV3, acquired 48 per cent of NSTP and 43 per cent of TV3 in a deal worth a whopping RM800 million -- it might still be the largest management buyout in Malaysia to date. Realmild was then controlled by four individuals closely linked to Deputy Premier then Anwar Ibrahim -- namely Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. The four were executives in the NSTP group, two of them -- Kadir and Nazri -- headed the English and Bahasa Malaysia sections respectively of the newspaper group.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In 1992, Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's Finance Minister, approved the management buy-out (MBO) of New Straits Times Press Holdings Bhd (NSTP), the largest media group in the country, and also public-listed TV3. Anwar directed Munir Majid of the Securities Commission to approve the injection of Realmild into MRCB, which led to Realmild Sdn Bhd controlling four listed companies -- MRCB, Malakoff, TV3 and New Straits Times Press Bhd.

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

MRCB's chequered past colours its future

(KinBiz, 21 February 2013) -- MRCB started out as Perak Carbide Sdn Bhd in 1969. In the early days, Teh Hong Piow, the Public Bank founder was among the shareholders of Perak Carbide.

Perak Carbide was renamed MRCB in 1981 after a change in its core business from the production of carbide to property development and investment.

In the 90's MRCB morphed into a political animal, controlling New Straits Times Press Holdings Bhd (NSTP), then a giant publishing company, the largest media group in the country, and also publicly traded TV3.

The MRCB story is often used to exhibit how corporate Malaysia works.

In January 1993, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd, a private company controlled by the management of NSTP and TV3, acquired 48 per cent of NSTP and 43 per cent of TV3 in a deal worth a whopping RM800 million -- it might still be the largest management buyout in Malaysia to date.

Realmild was then controlled by four individuals closely linked to Deputy Premier then Anwar Ibrahim -- namely Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. The four were executives in the NSTP group, two of them -- Kadir and Nazri -- headed the English and Bahasa Malaysia sections respectively of the newspaper group.

The four flipped Realmild's assets into MRCB in a reverse takeover.

Some say the corporate moves were an attempt by Anwar, manoeuvring to control the media before the impending Umno vice presidential elections in 1993.

With its political clout, MRCB grew to own such choice assets such as 20.2 per cent in Commerce Asset Holdings Bhd which owned Bank of Commerce Bhd (now CIMB)—via NSTP, a chunk of power generation companies like Malakoff Bhd, Sepang Power and Port Dickson Power among a whole host of other large assets.

In 1996, MRCB and Keretapi Tanah Melayu formed a joint venture to develop 77 acres of prime land in Brickfields which is MRCB's flagship KL Sentral, and two years later the government even forked out a support loan of RM336 million to build the station.

However things took a turn for the worse in 1998, when Anwar fell from grace and when the Asian financial crisis started to bite. Lacking in political clout, MRCB's downward spiral was a painful one exacerbated by the financial crisis of 1997-1998.

For its financial year ended August 1999, the company suffered losses of about RM1.45 billion from RM235.39 million in revenue.

As at August 1999, MRCB was saddled with short-term borrowings of RM923 million while the company long term debt commitments were RM473 million. On the other side of the balance sheet MRCB had cash and bank balances amounting to RM38 million.

For the year ended August 1999, MRCB's interest payments on borrowings was RM118 million, about three times the company's net profit.

After Anwar's fall from grace in Sept 1998 when he was removed as finance minister and deputy prime minister and charged with sodomy, Abdul Rahman Maidin, a close associate of former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, was brought in to run MRCB in July 1999.

Daim had been collared in by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to help deal with the financial crisis. Daim headed the powerful National Economic Action Council then.

But the slide continued. Daim himself appeared to have a rift with Mahathir and some of those who were close to him were removed from their position after their stakes in key companies were taken over by the governments. This included Halim Saad of Renong, Tajudin Ramli of Malaysia Airlines and Celcom (then under TRI) and Rahman Maidin at MRCB.

MRCB management went into professional hands with Abdul Rahman Ahmad and Shahril Ridza Ridzuan becoming managing director and executive director respectively in 2001.

Eventually MRCB was acquired by EPF in an apparent rescue of the group.

The EPF ended up with a chunk of MRCB's stock in a debt for equity swap, after Realmild was unable to service borrowings from EPF. A large portion of EPF's shareholding was obtained in January 2005, when the pension fund acquired a 20 per cent block of shares increasing its shareholding to 30.35 per cent then. Realmild ceased to be a major shareholder after that.

Shahril eventually became CEO of MRCB and left end-2009 after eight years. Following that Mohamed Razeek Md Hussain Maricar took over but left in August last year. Since then, MRCB has been without a CEO. Shahril himself became chief investment officer at EPF in 2010.

Under professional management, much was achieved at MRCB and the KL Sentral development has attracted much interest and has seen property prices climb. But it looks like now EPF has embarked on a path to inject entrepreneurship into MRCB.

This has happened through the proposed injection of Nusa Gapurna which has about 33 acres of prime land located in Petaling Jaya, Old Klang Road and Subang pegged with a gross development value of RM5.7 billion. Part of the plan is for Salim to eventually become managing director of MRCB.

EPF in a statement to KinBiz said: "The model is similar to that of SP Setia or Mah Sing, where an entrepreneur holds a significant stake and works on behalf of all the institutional and minority shareholders.

"The ultimate combination for the EPF is economically neutral as it had a 40 per cent stake in both businesses and will continue to have approximately the same stake in the combined entity going forward."

EPF as a related party cannot vote on this deal, meaning it will be left to the minorities to decide.

Analysts and observers however question the move to bring in Salim and ask whether Salim has the right credentials to run MRCB. After all it can be rightly argued that MRCB has far more expertise developing properties than Salim himself. So why opt for him at this juncture?

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

 

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Posted: 03 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

Rahman said he then purchased all the stakes in Realmild from Khalid, former Berita Harian Sdn Bhd group editor Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, former New Straits Times Sdn Bhd group editor Abdul Kadir Jasin and former NSTP director Mohd Noor Mutalib. The four were at that time aligned with then Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, before Anwar fell out of favour with Mahathir in 1998, at the height of allegations of sodomy against him.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The problem with public hearings, court cases and trials is that not everything is fully revealed in an open court, in particular the goings-on behind the scenes and the shenanigans in the corridors of power.

Some of you may have read the three news reports below back in 2010. For those who have not, first read these reports and then in part two of this series we will reveal what has not been reported. After all, Malaysia Today dabbles in the untold story or the story that those in the corridors of power would rather remain hidden.

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

Abdul Rahman Maidin

'Shocked to learn Realmild shares belonged to Umno'

(Malaysiakini, 2 September 2010) -- Former Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce chairperson Abdul Rahman Maidin told the commercial division of the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today that he had to bear losses of RM40 million for the 7.101 million shares he purchased in Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd, which were said to belong to Umno.

Realmild owns majority shares in conglomerate Malaysia Resources Corporation Bhd (MRCB), which once owned the gold mine media giant New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd (NSTP) and Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd (which operates TV3, among others).

Rahman, who was a director of Realmild when he purchased the stake in the company, is being sued for RM10 million by a former company stakeholder, Khalid Ahmad.

Also a former chairman of MRCB and former executive vice-chairman of NSTP, Rahman said sometime at the end of 2001, he was instructed by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to transfer all the Realmild shares in his name to Syed Anwar Jamalullail, without any consideration, and that he resigned from the two companies on Jan 8, 2002.

"I was told that the Realmild shares belonged to Umno. I was extremely shocked as I never at any time knew that Umno was the true owner of the shares."

"I undertook the acquisition of Realmild shares purely from a corporate and commercial standpoint. I raised funds for this exercise through my personal financial means, without any assistance from any political entity," Rahman said in reply to questions from his lawyer Alex de Silva. Eugene Jayaraj Williams is also acting for Rahman.

Told that the shares belonged to Umno

Rahman said he informed Mahathir that he had paid RM40 million for the purchase of the Realmild shares.

"He (Mahathir) told me there was no reason why I had to pay the money when the shares never belonged to the individuals concerned as they belonged to Umno. Therefore, he said, no payment will be made to me because the shares always belonged to Umno."

"I also met Nor Mohamad Yaakob, (then economic adviser to Mahathir), and he subsequently confirmed that the shares were to be transferred out by me, without me receiving any consideration as the shares belonged to Umno," he said.

Asked by Khalid's counsel Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus why he did not institute action against his client and three other Realmild directors, from whom he had purchased the stake, Rahman said he obviously had to believe the (then) prime minister.

"Furthermore, I did not want to do anything that would implicate the premier. That is why I did not want to proceed with any further action. I would rather take a loss," he said.

Tun Daim Zainuddin

Daim offered stake in Realmild

Recalling how he came to own the Realmild shares, Rahman said he was approached by the then Finance Minister, Daim Zainuddin, sometime in 1999.

Daim had asked him whether he was interested in taking charge of MRCB by undertaking and completing a management takeover.

"Daim knew me as chairman of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce. I expressed keen interest in taking up this challenge, and Daim told me he would leave the mechanics of taking control of MRCB to me.

"I readily accepted this opportunity as this was a major career advance. It was my understanding that this was a pure corporate exercise," he said.

Rahman said he then purchased all the stakes in Realmild from Khalid, former Berita Harian Sdn Bhd group editor Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, former New Straits Times Sdn Bhd group editor Abdul Kadir Jasin and former NSTP director Mohd Noor Mutalib.

The four were at that time aligned with then Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, before Anwar fell out of favour with Mahathir in 1998, at the height of allegations of sodomy against him.

Rahman said he took steps for the takeover of MRCB by raising funds through personal financial means.

He had paid RM30 million for Ahmad Nazri's stake, and another RM5 million each to Khalid and Mohd Noor.

Ahmad Nazri, a former director of Realmild, told an earlier hearing that he owned an 80 percent stake in Realmild, with 70 percent of it held in trust.

"I was holding (the stake) in trust for Dr Mahathir. The trust was prepared by legal firm Amin & Co. A copy of the trust was given to Dr Mahathir, another to Anwar and I kept a copy."

A. Kadir Jasin

Rahman: I did not pay the remainder

Rahman, also testified before Justice Mary Lim that he did not pay the remaining amount to Khalid as he had been told by Mahathir not to make any payment.

"I met the plaintiff (Khalid) and informed him of my discovery about Umno's ownership of the Realmild shares. The plaintiff admitted to me that he was aware of Umno's ownership of the Realmild shares, but he said the Umno ownership did not apply to his five percent stake, or 355,050 shares."

Saying Khalid was not entitled to the claim, Rahman said the Khalid had misrepresented to him the ownership of the 355,050 shares as these shares never belonged to Khalid.

"I verily believe that he (Khalid) knew all along that Umno was the real owner of the shares and that these shares could be directed to be transferred to any third party at any time based on the instructions of Umno leaders. This also demonstrated the wrongful actions of Khalid in suppressing material information and proceeding in this action against me," he said.

"I am also seeking recovery of the RM5 million I had paid Khalid, based on his misrepresentation as to the ownership of the shares," he said.

To another question from Khalid's lawyer, Rahman said he was unable to pay the balance (the remaining RM10 million) because he was concentrating on reviving MRCB, which was facing billions of ringgit in debt.

"MRCB owed (money) to over 30 banks and it was in a bad shape. That was the reason I did not have money to pay him (Khalid).

"I also do not agree that I owe Khalid RM10 million, as stated in the statement of claim, and do not agree that the purchase price of his portion of the shares was RM15 million," he said.

Khalid Ahmad

Khalid's suit

Khalid, a former director of Realmild and former managing director of NSTP, who was present in court today, had claimed that he owns five per cent of the Realmild shares and he had accepted Rahman's offer to buy his shares.

He said Rahman had paid RM5 million, and that both sides had agreed to the total selling price of the shares at RM15 million, which had been reduced from an initial value of RM30 million.

Khalid claimed that the price of RM15 million was agreed upon after the part-payment of RM5 million was made by Rahman, and that the remaining sum was to be paid within a year.

He said he had asked Rahman many times to pay up the remaining RM10 million, but Rahman had failed to do so.

He is seeking the RM10 million , interest at eight per cent, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.

Rahman in his statement of defence claimed the shares were owned in trust Umno and that he was asked to relinquish all his stake in Realmild to Syed Anwar.

Hence, he said, the amount owed was void or a mistake of fact, and was therefore seeking back the RM5 million he had paid to Khalid, as he had suffered a loss.

Earlier, Syed Anwar testified for Rahman and said got to know from Nor (Mohamad Yaakob), who was then second finance minister, that Rahman's shares in Realmild were held in proxy by Umno.

"My major task when taking over Realmild and MRCB was to turn them around," he said.

Justice Lim fixed Oct 4 for submissions.

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

Nazri Abdullah

Realmild-Umno links judgment on Dec 10

(The Malaysian Insider, 29 October 2010) -- When the High Court here hands down its judgment on the disputed sale price of Realmild Sdn Bhd's shares on December 10, all eyes will be trained on the grounds — whether Umno, the senior party in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN), has been ruled to be the shadowy company's real owner.

In taking their quarrel over the sale price of Realmild's shares from a decade ago, former company directors Datuk Khalid Ahmad and Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Maidin have showed how the political giant has fed and sustained its tight grip on power through control of several conglomerates starting from the early 1990s.

The suit was mooted by Khalid in March 2005 against his successor, Abdul Rahman, to claim RM10 million in payment for a block of the company's shares.

But Abdul Rahman made a counter-claim to be refunded the RM5 million he already paid, after being told by former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that Umno owned all Realmild's shares and the appointed directors were only nominees acting in the party's trust.

The nexus between Umno and certain conglomerates has been revealed in the court hearing that started in August this year involving the past shareholders of Realmild, the shadowy company that took over media giant The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd in 1993, and Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad (MRCB).

A number of high-flying corporate figures have entered the witness stand, most notably Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail, younger brother to the Raja of Perlis Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Ibni Al-Marhum Tuanku Syed Putra Jamalullail who also held the position of Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time of the contentious takeover.

Khalid is suing Abdul Rahman for RM10 million over the sale of a five per cent stake in the company in 1999, which took place during a shake-up and buy-out related to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sacking from government.

Abdul Rahman had paid RM5 million but later reneged on the remainder.

The silver-haired industry captain testified in court that Dr Mahathir, who was prime minister at the time of the buy-out, told him that the shares actually belonged to Umno.

Abdul Rahman, a former Malay Chamber of Commerce Penang president, also claimed to have received instructions from Tun Daim Zainuddin and Tan Sri Nor Mohamad Yakcop had previously instructed him to undertake a management buy-out of MRCB by purchasing the 7,101,001 ordinary shares in Realmild.

But Khalid maintained the five per cent stake was his own although he acknowledged that the majority stake was part of an "Umno trust".

The other directors in Realmild then were former Berita Harian group editor Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, New Straits Times group editor Datuk Abdul Kadir Jasin, and Mohd Noor Mutalib, who replaced Khalid as NSTP managing director in February 1993.

Realmild, originally a RM2 company, was then already the majority shareholder of MRCB, which is now developing the KL Sentral commercial and transport hub in Brickfields.

Representing Khalid is lawyer Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus.

Alex De Silva and Eugene Jeyaraj Williams acted for Abdul Rahman.

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

Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail

Realmild formed to protect Umno's interests, court told

(The Malaysian Insider, 30 October 2010) -- Realmild Sdn Bhd was a brainchild of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim when he was in government as a means for Umno to protect its business interests, a lawyer told the High Court here today.

The former deputy prime minister had also hand-picked four media people — Datuk Khalid Ahmad, Datuk Kadir Jasin, Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Mohd Noor Mutalib — to be its first shareholders and act as nominees for the ruling party, said Alex De Silva.

"In 1992, Realmild was formed in Malaysia. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim created it as a new Bumiputera vehicle to take care of Umno's interests.

"This is the genesis of Realmild," De Silva said in making the case for his client Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Maidin.

Khalid, a former TV3 boss, is suing Abdul Rahman to pay up the remaining RM10 million of RM15 million the former claims was the agreed sale price for the block of shares.

But Abdul Rahman disputes the amount — he told the court the agreed price was RM10 million and he had paid half before finding out from Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was then Umno president, that he did not have to pay.

Now Abdul Rahman wants his money back.

De Silva argued today that Khalid, as the seller, was not in a position to demand payment for the sale of a block of Realmild Sdn Bhd's shares wholly held in trust for Umno.

"My submission is that none of them were actually running MRCB. They were just put there by the powers-that-be...to take care of MRCB, NST and etc.

"It's completely illogical for Umno or anyone to own only 70 per cent [of the shares] and for 30 per cent to be shared out among the others," he added, noting previous testimony from another successive Realmild director, Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail, showed that Umno owned all the shares.

Syed Anwar is the younger brother to the Raja of Perlis Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Ibni Al-Marhum Tuanku Syed Putra Jamalullail who also held the position of Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time of the contentious takeover at the turn of the millennium.

Anwar who happened to be in court today for his Sodomy II trial, was evasive when asked to comment on his role in the Realmild-Umno deal.

"Seventy per cent was held by Dr Mahathir. It has nothing to do with me," said the 63-year-old politician, now PKR's advisor.

Khalid's RM10 million suit against Abdul Rahman, over the sale of a five per cent stake in the company in 1999 took place during a shake-up and buy-out related to Anwar's sacking from government.

"Yes, I was supportive of it back then but 30 per cent of the shares was owned by Khalid, Kadir, and Nazri, Mohd Noor," Anwar said.

"It was only when I exposed them in court, Dr Mahathir called for Realmild surrender 70 percent," he added.

Asked if he saw the controversial 100-storey Menara Warisan announced by Prime Minister Najib Razak reflected in Umno's continuing bid to protect the party's interests, the Opposition Leader remarked: "All mega deals protect the interests of the Umno elite".

"Realmild is a classic example, proven, it was led by Dr Mahathir. I'm convinced there are cronies involved," he said.

Back in court, De Silva stressed that Realmild was a "sendirian berhad" (private limited company) with four ex-NST journalists and accountant who became stakeholders of MRCB, a public-listed company, supposedly bought from Renong Berhad for RM800 million.

"It's clear as daylight none of the shareholders had the means or capacity to do so," De Silva said.

"Yes, they testified they raised the money on their own. [But] nobody wakes up one morning and says, 'Yes! I'm going to take over NST and TV3. Can you do this on your own? Impossible!

"My Lady, from the start of the scene, government hands or Umno hands were involved...to keep the media under control of Umno.

"It was not for personal benefit but for the benefit of the party. That's why Realmild took control from Renong. That's the genesis of Realmild," Abdul Rahman's lawyer repeated for emphasis.

De Silva also pointed out that none of the four had exercised their rights as owners after the buy-over from Renong and instead continued their daily duties as news men, which was typical of nominees.

Trial judge Datuk Mary Lim asked if they were nominees, whether it meant they can't transfer the title deeds to the shares; and whether it would not then require the defendant to show he had a title to pass on.

"Not necessary. What we are looking at is the concept of real ownership," De Silva replied, before adding, "Who were the real owners?"

He moved to back his argument by pointing to the large number of lucrative projects given to Realmild's construction subsidiary, MRCB, including building a power plant.

"MRCB was bestowed and granted huge government contracts and loans, subsequently...in 1997, the government awarded MRCB the KL Sentral project...two years later, they got a support loan of RM336 million," De Silva cited.

"All these point effectively to the fact they were formed by the government because MRCB was effectively owned by Umno," he argued further.

"Yes, the shares were held in their names, but when instructed to transfer, they transferred.

"And they all transferred all, together," he said slowly, lending emphasis to his submission.

But lawyer Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus, in pushing the case to be ruled in the plaintiff Khalid's favour, submitted that Abdul Rahman had failed to show documentary evidence that proved an Umno "trust" existed, adding the defendant's entire argument was pulled from oral testimony by parties not brought to court, including the former prime minister.

Ahmad even suggested that Abdul Rahman should have taken legal action against Dr Mahathir to recover his money instead of claiming it from Khalid.

"Why the defendant chose not to take action when he found out about the trust?

"His line, his basis is what was told to him by the PM [then, Dr Mahathir] that he would not get his money back and that the shares belonged to Umno," Ahmad said, referring to Abdul Rahman's testimony in court.

"It's not for the defendant to say the plaintiff held it in trust, held it as a nominee...that he was not accountable to pay...

"The transfer was valid. He was the registered owner, legally, and [it was] common for nominees to transfer shares to [their] principals; it's not for defendant to say no.

"If such a case, defendant still liable to pay for the purchase price as agreed upon for the transfer of shares at the material time," Ahmad concluded.

The nexus between Umno and certain conglomerates has been revealed in the court hearing that started in August this year involving the past shareholders of Realmild, the shadowy company that took over media giant The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd in 1993, and Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad (MRCB).

A total of five witnesses were called.

Verdict is fixed for December 10 at 9am.

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved