Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

• Much ado about nothing
• The market sabotage of Pakatan
• Is Selangor ripe for plucking?
• The Chinese Owe BN Nothing
• Ultra-nationalism comes to fore in pre-poll Malaysia
• Bully-boy Malaysia immature and Australia's reaction so limp
• Too many spanners in the works
• Over-politicised political campaign
• The real enemies of the state
• Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #4
• Proton distorts market, bleeds Malaysians
• We Need a new Huguan Siou
• Gangnam style
• Migrants in politics and the Borneo Xenophobia
• Mahathir enters fray as Malaysia braces for poll
• Gangnam twist for Malaysian elections

Much ado about nothing Posted: 18 Feb 2013 04:00 PM PST Sheridan said Xenophon was over-enthusiastic in his involvement in Malaysian politics, adding that he should instead visit Vietnam or Cambodia if he really cares about democracy in Southeast Asia. Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily Xenophon, a weirdly sounding name that should make a good candidate for the namesake of Samsung's next generation of smartphones. But of course, Xenophon is not a phone. He is a senator from Down Under. If not because he was barred from entering the country through the LCCT, and was sent off on the next plane, not many people would have the slightest idea who Nick Xenophon is. His deportation, along with a pathetic-looking self portrait taken at the airport, has caused quite a stir. Incensed by the move of the Malaysian authorities, Australia's politicians have launched aggressive assaults on Malaysia. Prime Minister Julia Gillard has sided the senator despite their lukewarm relationship. Who on earth is this Nick Xenophon? Is he the one the Malaysian government said "threatening our national security" and must be deported at once? I asked a friend returning from Australia about this man, and was told Xenophon is just one of the 200-odd senators in Australia. Never a big shot himself, he is nevertheless unusual in that he is an independent senator who does things his own way, unbound by any political entity. Although he is no celebrity in Australia, he has somewhat developed an affinity for Malaysian politics, having hammered the country's human rights records on Australian papers. A strong opponent of Malaysian palm oil, he made a personal trip to Kuala Lumpur last year in his capacity as Bersih 3.0 observer. Not fully contented with my friend's account on Xenophon, I visited The Australian website for a better insight into this man from the Australian perspectives. The Australian's foreign editor Greg Sheridan wrote in his op-ed "Nick Xenophon's grandstanding does us no good" that his "actions regarding Malaysia are either foolish or cynically self-promoting." Sheridan said Xenophon was over-enthusiastic in his involvement in Malaysian politics, adding that he should instead visit Vietnam or Cambodia if he really cares about democracy in Southeast Asia. Although Xenophon's style and stance could send the Malaysian government neurotic, sending him off and branding him "a threat to national security" are both oversensitive and impractical. While the government is legally justified to act this way, it needs to demonstrate some degree of self-confidence in exercising its sovereignty and jurisdiction. Moreover, if we bother about how democratic we are, we should not handle diplomatic matters with such a restrictive frame of mind. Even as we reject Xenophon's subjective views, we should refrain from such a hardline stance in responding to his presence.. To show our magnanimity, perhaps the government should allow him to come into the country, speak all he wants to speak and do all he wants to do, so long as he does not act beyond our laws. To be honest, given our already distinctly polarised political environment, there is hardly anything Xenophon can do to tip the balance.

The market sabotage of Pakatan Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:21 PM PST   Ali Cordoba, Free Malaysia Today  At this moment, weeks before the next general election, there are undeniable signs that a large majority of the capitalists in and outside the country are not in favour of Pakatan. Claims that the market would collapse and that it would bring down the nation's economy if Pakatan Rakyat wins the 13th general election, could be true, in the end. However, the truth could be stranger than fiction, and the scenario exposed here shows how the contrary could be real. It would also show how the country is now divided, more or less, on an economic line rather than on racial or ethnic line. MCA has warned the people of a huge financial disaster if Pakatan comes to power. The Barisan Nasional faction has predicted that the KL stock market indicator or KL Composite Index (KLCI) would likely drop 500 points. It added that this could happen within a week after Pakatan is in power. This scenario is a possible one. The warnings are true, so true that we must all be prepared for a long-drawn battle between the government and the economic powers of the country. And these economic powers are the filthy rich, the capitalists, hence the cronies of the BN regime. These multi-millionaires and billionaires hold the key to the KLCI, hence a fall of 500 points – though dramatic as it would seem – would only be an attempt to squeeze Pakatan out of its political might. An electoral victory for Pakatan in the next general election would mean it would form the next government, thus it would be a powerful political group. Whether the victory would be by a slim or large margin, would not be important. Once Pakatan has a stronghold on power, it would be the one ruling the country. At this moment, weeks before the next general election, there are undeniable signs that a large majority of the capitalists in and outside the country are not in favour of Pakatan. Besides the huge banners showing support to BN, statements of market panic and the bankrolling of BN campaigns, it could be said that the rich among the rich are not pro-Pakatan. It could also be said, without much ado, that these elements have a tight grip on the local marketplace and the stock market depends largely on their mood. They are enjoying the current economic boom – with the spilling of contracts and whatnot across the board. There is little doubt they would do everything to attempt a sabotage, if necessary, of a Pakatan regime. This has been predicted – to a certain extent – by the now famous Bank Islam chief economist Azrul Azwar Ahmad Tajudin. Azrul forecast that a fallout would result from the Pakatan win, with the stock market set to respond in "knee-jerk" fashion as well as an extended period of perceived instability. He did not rule out the possibility of "economic sabotage" by businesses and the civil service aligned to BN. Taxing the rich among the rich The recent claims by MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek, if it were to be taken seriously, falls right into Azrul's estimates that capitalists would try to sabotage Pakatan. Nevertheless, the people should not worry too much about the 500-point fall, as predicted by Chua. "So either the country would go bankrupt within two years, or Pakatan would target taxpayers for more funds." said Chua. "If that happens, the Chinese would suffer the most because they are the single biggest taxpayers group in the country," he added. The point is, why would the Pakatan attack its own voters with more taxes when it could simply tax the rich among the rich? Since it is being proven that the filthy rich are not pro-Pakatan, it would not be difficult to overtax them. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/02/19/the-market-sabotage-of-pakatan/

Is Selangor ripe for plucking? Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:11 PM PST   If Pakatan loses Selangor, it would be disastrous for PKR. After all, DAP appears unshakable in Penang, while come hell or high water, Datuk Seri Nik Aziz Nik Mat and PAS will hang on to Kelantan. What has PKR got?   N Shashi Kala, fz.com   ABOUT a week ago, I was sharing an exquisite teh tarik at a kenduri in Klang – not my favourite place, having had the ill luck to end up as a crime statistic there not once but twice – when I heard something interesting.   The table next to mine was in an animated diuscussion about, what else, the upcoming general election.    Now there was a sort of minor VIP at the table – a businessman who was a local bigwig and a staunch supporter of the Barisan Nasional (BN). He was telling those at the table – and all the evesdroppers such as myself – about a recent party machinery meeting where the division chiefs were told an interesting tidbit: according to the latest "intel" from Special Branch, Selangor will be back in the BN fold after GE13. We will win by a at least seven seats, said the VIP, who was smiling smugly.    The seats that he mentioned as "definitely winnable" included Seri Andalas, Pandamaran, and Seri Muda, all of which he claimed had been poorly served by Pakatan Rakyat (PR) reps.    "They can talk about how corrupt the former BN state government was, but basic services such as rubbish collection and maintanence of public infrastructure were carried out.    "Now, garbage collection is a major problem, and the rakyat is being held to ransom over water issues. What's the point of trumpeting free water when there's no water to begin with? So short-sighted. People are fed up.   "The midde-class may still talk about BN's flaws but after 5 years, the poor people in Selangor are talking about PR's flaws too. And there is enough momentum there to push PR out," he said in a booming voice to a not altogether appreciative audience.   Oh, he did add that BN components have not been idle, and that a lot of money is being splashed out to ensure that the message gets across. He claimed "a major property developer" is allegedly bankrolling the "Win Selangor Back for BN" campaign and hundreds of youths are being paid to "reach out to voters".   In all, it sounded pretty dire for Pakatan, and PKR especially as the seats "ripe for plucking" were all from Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's camp, with a few from PAS and two from DAP.    If Pakatan loses Selangor, it would be disastrous for PKR. After all, DAP appears unshakable in Penang, while come hell or high water, Datuk Seri Nik Aziz Nik Mat and PAS will hang on to Kelantan. What has PKR got?   Selangor was supposed to be the showpiece for the PR government – this is how we will manage the country, its leaders had said.   In some ways, the state can be proud of the way it has managed its coffers. It ranks top in investment according to latest figures, while the state has tabled a balanced budget in the past few years. Its cash reserves too, are high, around RM2.5 billion.   But it has not been immune from scandals – many originating from decisions made by its municipal councils. The councils of Klang, Sepang, Petaling Jaya, Shah Alam, Selayang and Ampang have, at one point or another, made headlines for all the wrong reasons.    The state's inability to get the councils in line and its councillors to do a better job in safeguarding the people's interest is a cause of frustration and an opportunity BN plans to exploit.   The prolonged impasse over the water issue is also not doing anyone any favours. The finger pointing and the lack of progress made in regards to increasing the amount of treated water in the state (either through reducing water wastage through pipe leakage, etc., or by building more plants) is only resulting in Selangor citizens becoming rather uneasy over their supply.   Read more at: http://fz.com/content/selangor-ripe-plucking

The Chinese Owe BN Nothing Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:03 PM PST   Najib should note that despite the barriers, the Chinese accepted their lot. And many Chinese – for whatever warped or bewildering logic – actually supported BN throughout the times they were marginalised!   Kee Thuan Chye   Najib the vendor of half-baked spin was at it again a few days ago when he said the Chinese owed their success to Barisan Nasional (BN).   At a 1Malaysia open house, he said BN formulated good policies and ensured there was harmony in the country and an environment that "allowed the Chinese to make a good living".   Najib had the cheek to say this.   He of course wants the Chinese to be thankful to BN and therefore vote for the coalition at the upcoming general election. But his half-baked spin completely ignores the other side of the story.   For instance, the Chinese also owe it to BN that they became second-class citizens in their own country because of BN's discriminatory policies – and, let's not forget, practices.   As a result, the Chinese have to work harder to succeed. To get places in Malaysian public universities. To have their children score the highest number of As and still not get accepted to do, say, Medicine in these institutions. And therefore be forced to send them overseas, at much higher cost.   The Chinese owe it to BN that they were compelled to leave Malaysia to seek fairer opportunities overseas, some never to return, and thereby contributing to a huge brain drain for which Malaysia is now paying the price.   Many who are now settled overseas may indeed be thankful that they left, but I'm sure Najib is not looking to them for gratitude. Some of them won't be eligible for voting, anyway, having taken citizenships in their countries of adoption.   The Chinese also owe it to BN that to take on business projects of sizable proportions, they have to pay kickbacks – some to BN bigwigs themselves, some to their cronies.   The Chinese owe it to BN that they find it virtually impossible to rise to the highest echelons of public service – in the judiciary, the military, the police, the universities, the civil service. Not because they don't have the merit to fill these positions; in fact, they do, which therefore makes it even more unjust and painful.   Can Najib name a single Chinese vice-chancellor in a Malaysian public university? Can a Chinese person become Inspector-General of Police or Admiral of the Fleet or Chief Justice?   Najib should note that despite the barriers, the Chinese accepted their lot. And many Chinese – for whatever warped or bewildering logic – actually supported BN throughout the times they were marginalised!   In fact, Najib should watch what he says in the run-up to the general election, especially if he is hoping to win Chinese support for BN.   As it is, many analysts believe that about 70 to 80 per cent of the Chinese are not in favour of the ruling party. If he wants to win at least some over, he needs to say the right things. More than that, he needs to do the right things. Although even then, one wonders if it might not be too late.   Many Chinese still remember what he reportedly said in 1987 on the eve of Operasi Lalang at the Umno Youth rally in TPCA Stadium. As the Umno Youth chief then, he displayed ethnocentric gusto in unsheathing his keris and announcing that it would taste Chinese blood by the end of the day.   It might have been an act of foolish bravado but it still resonates among some Chinese today. Considered together with the video that is making the rounds again of his address to the Umno and Malay NGOs audience in Putra Word Trade Centre (PWTC) a few days after Bersih 2.0, in which he said, with much tribal sound and fury, "We will show them whose country this is!", many wonder if the leopard has changed its spots.   For all his talk of 1Malaysia, Najib is still an ethnocentrist at heart.   He has said he will meet the Chinese educationist group Dong Zong to discuss the latter's demands in regard to Chinese education. In all likelihood, he will agree to meet some if not all of them as a last-ditch measure to win Chinese votes. He might even declare the Government's recognition – finally – of the United Examination Certificate (UEC), a dream the Chinese educationists have been pursuing for the longest time.   If this consequently prompts Dong Zong to endorse Najib and BN for the coming general election, it could sway a good number of Chinese votes in the direction of BN. Then, like they did in 1999 when they saved Mahathir Mohamad's bacon by strongly supporting his coalition when the Malays were swinging to the Opposition, they could hand BN a victory … and, who knows?, maybe even a two-thirds majority, which is what Najib desperately covets.   However, this is going to be a crucial general election. It is the one time when real change for the country can come about with a change of government.   The Chinese need to consider carefully about giving their vote to BN. They need to consider the long-term effects of another BN victory. They need to weigh the possibility of real reform in the event of BN being booted out and a new coalition taking over that could bring positive change.   They need to be wary of Najib's sweet talk and his gifts. If he gives them Government recognition of the UEC, more independent Chinese schools, whatever, they might want to just accept these politely, say thank you and think of voting according to what they think is right.   Dong Zong on its part should remain neutral and not take a stand by endorsing BN. For if it does and Pakatan wins the general election, it would find itself in an awkward position.   The Chinese have a big role to play now in this coming general election. Najib can say anything till he is blue in the face, but they have to weigh the truth or lack of it in what he says. Besides, ensuring harmony and a conducive environment for work and living in the country is, after all, the responsibility – indeed, duty – of any government for which no gratitude from the citizens is necessary. So the Chinese don't owe BN anything.   Above all, the Chinese must not forget about the corruption that has been rampant under BN rule for decades. And the rent-seeking. And the slow growth of our GDP since 1980 in comparison to South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. These affect the whole country, not just the Chinese, and are therefore all the more important.   So, when it comes to the crunch, the Chinese must vote for only one thing – a better Malaysia.     * Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians, and the latest volume, Ask for No Bullshit, Get Some More!

Ultra-nationalism comes to fore in pre-poll Malaysia Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:49 AM PST   THE focus on Nick Xenophon's being barred from Malaysia has been on the senator's calculated outrage, but the story behind it is the Malaysian government's emerging re-election strategy: a return to proud recalcitrance. Rowan Callick, The Australian  Prime Minister Najib Razak was educated largely in England, had a brief commercial career and then, inevitably, turned to the family business. His father, Abdul Razak, was Malaysia's second prime minister, and his uncle, Hussein Onn, its third. His public political style is almost one of reluctance, of gentility, rather than that of a cynical son of one of Asia's great party machines. His party, UMNO, has ruled Malaysia for almost 55 years. Four years ago, Najib was ushered into the prime ministership without a contest by his predecessor Abdullah Badawi, who had been dumped by the party machine after UMNO lost control of five of Malaysia's 13 state governments. Najib began as a reformer, removing bans on opposition newspapers and releasing 13 people held under the harsh Internal Security Act. He introduced the Government Transformation Program to make the public service more accountable and efficient. He fostered knowledge industries and foreign investment. He began to axe sugar and fuel subsidies and lowered the minimum ethnic Malay ownership in listed companies from 30 per cent to 12.5 per cent. But his name has become associated with a complex, shady tale involving the death of a glamorous Mongolian woman caught up in a series of defence purchases involving hundreds of millions of dollars. He was twice defence minister. More important, his popularity has fallen to its lowest for 16 months, and the ratings of the government are also slipping. The party backroom is becoming increasingly anxious since a general election has to take place by mid-year, and Najib has not yet faced the voters. Several months ago, they began to fret that tactics to prise apart the unusually unified opposition coalition led by Anwar Ibrahim were not yet working. So besides hiring costly consultants, especially from the US, it is back to the tried and trusted stratagems so successful for Mahathir Mohamad, the fourth prime minister, who ruled for 22 years until 2003. He remains, aged 87, a powerful presence within UMNO. On Sunday, he railed against the liberty granted new media, lamenting that "their freedom is almost total". Thus the dramatic turning back of Xenophon at the weekend is not exactly "surprising", as Foreign Minister Bob Carr described it. It is part of a reversion to the old successful pattern of uber-patriotism and uber-Islam that worked so well electorally under Mahathir. This is the new Malaysia Solution, tailored by Kuala Lumpur and not by Canberra. Read more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/ultra-nationalism-comes-to-fore-in-pre-poll-malaysia/story-e6frg7e6-1226580633406

Bully-boy Malaysia immature and Australia's reaction so limp Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:45 AM PST   Malaysia's decision to ban an Australian independent senator, Nick Xenophon, tells us a good deal about the state of its government, the world's longest-ruling outside the communist world, as it heads to an election. Australia's response tells us a few things about ourselves, too. Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald political and international editor Before critiquing the ruling party, the party of Mahathir, now the party of Prime Minister Najib Razak, we should acknowledge that it knows a thing or two.   First, it's worked out how to hold power continuously for 56 years, ever since Britain granted Malaysia independence. That's a serious accomplishment.   Second, it hasn't done a bad job of running the economy. Malaysia's sharemarket was one of the best-performing in the world last year and the economy is growing about 4 to 5 per cent annually. Advertisement     Malaysia is a pleasant, multi-racial country with the middle-income living standards that an average per capita GDP of $10,000 delivers, about the same as Turkey or Mexico.   So why is the government so afraid of Nick Xenophon? Why stop him at the airport with the confected explanation that he represents a threat to national security?   The reason is that he is an international observer campaigning in favour of a free and fair election. This is not a threat to Malaysia's national security, but it is a threat to the ruling party's grip on power. As the opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, told me some time ago: ''In a fair and free election, I am absolutely sure we will win.''   Xenophon says that his detention and deportation shows ''a high level of paranoia''. But is it paranoia, or does the ruling party really have something to fear at the election it must call by the end of April?   At the centre of the long success of the ruling party is racial politics.   The county had a history of communal violence; the coalition National Front or Barisan Nasional (BN) party addressed that problem because it was founded on the principle of power-sharing between racial groups, the Malay majority with the Chinese and Indian minorities.   This balance held in check the fear of racial violence on a communal scale. But another key concept in the long years of BN rule was that the native Malays were inferior. They may be numerically dominant, but they lacked the skills and abilities of the other races.   ''Deep within them,'' wrote Mahathir in his 1970 book The Malay Dilemma, ''there is a conviction that no matter what they decide or do, things will continue to slip beyond their control; that slowly but surely they are becoming dispossessed in their own land. This is the Malay Dilemma.''   How to address it? By granting the Malays special privileges, including guaranteed dominance of the public sector and automatic, unearned shares of national wealth. In short, affirmative action. ''It should not be wrong,'' wrote Mahathir, ''for the Malays to cling to a system which can elevate them to the status of other races, thus creating a more equitable society.''   The system kept the peace, but one side-effect of such a long stasis was that the government's monopoly on power allowed it to wield a near-absolute control over the other arms of the state, including the courts.   Mahathir shocked the world when he demonstrated the way that he'd managed to compromise all parts of the system when he moved against his deputy and potential nominated successor, Anwar, by trumping up charges that he'd sodomised his aide and speechwriter. Anwar went to jail for six years.   This was supposed to discredit Anwar permanently. But after moving to the US, the aide who testified against him recanted. In the police cells he had been ''brutalised to make a totally false confession'', he said.   Anwar, freed, led a barnstorming campaign as the leader of the opposition. He delivered the BN government a terrible shock at the 2008 election - it lost its customary two-thirds majority of parliament.   And while the BN retained a big majority in the parliament, the actual voting figures show that the contest was much closer than it appeared. BN won 51.4 per cent of the votes while the greater opposition gained 48.6 per cent.   The BN is protected by a gerrymander which means that while some electorates have more than 100,000 voters, others have as few as 7000. It's also protected by other systemic factors including a restricted press - the opposition parties need government permission just to print their own newsletters.   These are some of the awkward facts that Xenophon, as part of a wider international observer group, pointed out in a report last year. That group reported that in its discussions with the secretary-general of BN, Adnan Mansor, he'd stressed the importance of ''avoiding racial strife'' in Malaysia. He had posed this question to the group: ''Are our people mature for freedom?''   The Malaysian government is afraid not of an Australian senator but of this question. In particular, the Najib government is frightened that the answer might be ''yes.'' Read more at: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/bullyboy-malaysia-immature-and-australias-reaction-so-limp-20130218-2end9.html#ixzz2LJUCnE6H

Too many spanners in the works Posted: 17 Feb 2013 05:22 PM PST   Now here we have a prime minister who was educated by missionary brothers in St John's Institution and went to the University of Nottingham which have crucifixes on every steeple and wall — and that has not altered his faith as a Muslim. And while he is espousing 1Malaysia wherever he goes, there are the likes of Ibrahim who want to cosy up to him yet, spew rhetorical divisive venom. Terence Fernandez, The Malay Mail LET'S be honest. The prime minister is in the fight of his life. In an interview with The Malay Mail in December, Datuk Seri Najib Razak acknowledged that going into GE13 is not only the biggest challenge of his political career, but also in his 59-plus years of existence! Truth be told, he needs support from all sides to win. But it appears that his biggest obstacles to gaining the mandate he needs, and whom many say he deserves, appears to be within his own party and administration. There are many examples to cite. From the top of one's head, the Christmas open house in 2010 where he was the guest of honour comes to mind. Here, a senior officer from his office instructed the hosts at St John's Cathedral to remove all religious signs and ensure there was no singing of hymns.Jingle Bells was fine. Then there is so called "supporters" or BN-Umno friendly NGOs like Perkosa — sorry I mean Perkasa — and its head honcho Ibrahim Ali (whom I'm ashamed to say is from my beloved home state of Kelantan) who incite people to burn Bibles! Now here we have a prime minister who was educated by missionary brothers in St John's Institution and went to the University of Nottingham which have crucifixes on every steeple and wall — and that has not altered his faith as a Muslim. And while he is espousing 1Malaysia wherever he goes, there are the likes of Ibrahim who want to cosy up to him yet, spew rhetorical divisive venom. One is sure Ibrahim was just making political speak and never intended to burn anything but his bridges with the non-Muslim community. But the fact remains that his association with the present ruling coalition will damage the later's chances with non-Muslim voters at the polls. Then we have political partners who have been tainted by allegations of abuse of power and graft. These individuals should do the right thing and step aside instead of clinging on to power. It is akin to a child caught with his hands in the cookie jar but not only denying it — but demanding another piece. Of course, the reality of politics is that some of these politicians are powerful allies who can deliver blocks of votes hence, political expediency demands that they be tolerated — but for awhile. However wether the voters will be able to stomach this impunity is another matter. We also have administrators who act contrary to the interests of their political masters. The chaos on the streets during the Bersih 3.0 rally is one, where the on-going criticisms of highhandedness of the police is going to resonate with some at the polling booth. And closer to home The Malay Mail is now being investigated for criminal defamation for carrying reports on the death of a young woman in a police shooting, in Klang last month. While it may be within its rights to probe us, our stand is that it is intimidation and an attempt to silence the Press. The fact that I received calls from the Prime Minister's Office querying on that matter, reflects the concerns at the top. And while the 100-or-so armed invaders in Lahad Datu are being given a taste of Malaysian hospitality, our authiorities kick out an Australian senator merely because he seems to be cavorting with the Opposition. Again, the law is completely on the government's side. Unfortunately, the spirit of the law is often ignored, hence the accusations of selective persecution. Najib, with all his efforts — drum beating and all — has received kudos from a large section of the Malaysian public. As an individual leader, he has the best chance of regaining his two-thirds. But my take is, it will not happen. "In Najib we trust" was our headlines on Friday. While this may be true for many, sad to say the same cannot be said for some of those who are expected to be his close allies and right arm. But the prime minister did say in the interview to "give me a chance". Let him have his mandate and see the reforms that will take place. One is eager to give him that chance. The only nagging issue for me is the words of Najib's predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi when I interviewed him in 2008. "So what if I get 90 per cent of the mandate? If Umno does not want me, what can I do?" I want to believe that Najib is made of sterner stuff.

Over-politicised political campaign Posted: 17 Feb 2013 05:19 PM PST These strategies and approaches are being adopted by political parties on both sides. While a popularist approach might be attractive, it does great disservice and damage to the political process. Malaysians must show their displeasure with what is being adopted by political parties and call on political leaders and candidates to articulate the substantive issues of governance and why they deserve our vote. Denison Jayasooria, The Malay Mail POLITICAL party strategists are free to be creative and innovative in drawing voters. As we get closer to GE13 we are seeing worrying trends which we must resist and call upon politicians from both the political divide to focus on the core issues and not divert to what could be called unhealthy approaches We are seeing the trend towards entertainment such as spicy dance girls and engaging popular foreign artists. We also see others approaching political campaigning with incitement of burning religious scriptures, the justification for two-third majority to deny individuals of citizenship. Yet others are giving out numerous goodies through public funds in an unsustainable and short term focus only. These strategies and approaches are being adopted by political parties on both sides. While a popularist approach might be attractive, it does great disservice and damage to the political process. Malaysians must show their displeasure with what is being adopted by political parties and call on political leaders and candidates to articulate the substantive issues of governance and why they deserve our vote. Recently at the Malaysia Strategic Outlook Conference organised by ASLI Malaysia I highlighted five general trends toward GE13 which have long-term damaging effects. It is often said that politicians are just concern for short term either capturing power or retaining it. As responsible citizens, we must call on all political parties and potential candidates to focus on the real issues and not be distracted by side shows. Trend 1 — Politicisation of race and religion The worrying trend is the increasing reference to race and religion in political speeches. Here we see the incitement to burning bibles on one side and another is the poster war of political faces at Thaipusam. These are not election posters but non-Muslims seeking to ride on a religious festival through popularity or crowd catching. Concern has been expressed by the silence of political leaders linked to the Federal administration especially on extremely sensitive issues like incitement to burn bibles. The efforts by Kelantan chief minister in visiting the Penang Catholic Bishop and the efforts by civil society to re-agenda the burning of bibles to reading the bible are brilliant efforts by society to defuse the issues in the spirit of moderation, tolerance and appreciation. However these efforts were not initiated by Federal linked officials nor were there any action by the authorities. It is essential to reaffirm certain parameters for political talk and action. Malaysia has reached a stage of political maturity that we must focus on substantive political discourse and not a cheap fling on emotive aspects. Trend 2 — Politicisation of welfare and assistance There is a battle on the ground to give out short term, dependency driven cash hand-outs which is unsustainable. Federal and state politicians are using public funds to induce a culture of dependency which is unhealthy Trend 3 — Politicisation of the administration Federal and state officials and machinery are being used for political purposes. While ministers and Exco members officiate functions, the events are more like election campaigning. In some situations funds are being channelled via NGOs or voluntary oganisations to the grassroots. Its recipients are not broad base but focused on supporters or linked to political leaders. There is a thin line here between services and political favouritism. We must as citizens demand that all public sector agencies at all levels of government at Federal, state and local government must be A-political and politically neutral, serving all its citizens irrespective of political affiliation or association. Trend 4 — Politicisation of Election Commission While the Election Commission (EC) has taken efforts to explain the situation such as the reliability of the voter list, the recent Sabah Royal Commission of Inquiry via the statement of witnesses is impacting the credibility and neutrality of the agencies involved especially the schemes to enlarge the voter base through granting of citizenship to establishment favouring citizenship seekers from neighbouring countries. There is much distrust and it will be helpful for EC to work closely with civil society such as Bersih and Transparency International to enhance its image rather than seeing these public interest citizens based networks as just anti-establishment. The EC appointment of Election observers under tight conditions have not instilled greater public confidence. The conditions and type of organisations accredited must be reviewed so as to regain public confidence. However the matter for long-term structural change is the way EC commissioners are appointed. It must be a transparent and independent process with non-former civil servants appointed in contrast to the current composition. Trend 5 — Politisation of public discourse and media coverage Political discourse is most often propaganda style with mainstream media focused on pro administration and the social media for alternative views. While there has been a number of public debates, this approach is not popular among the politicians in a face to face debate. A majority shy away from these and those from the current administration. The very propaganda style is not good for the best interest of the citizen. The citizen-voter must be able to hear what the policies and provisions are in a calm and conducive environment. There must be a lively debate and interaction on issues pertaining to good governance, economic growth and equitable distribution, accountability and human rights compliance The real test is why any political party or candidate should secure a vote. The politicians must explain why. They must from all side focus on the substantive concerns and make a commitment. There must be a greater commitment for public reasoning. We must not treat the voter as uninterested in policy discussions and future trends of the nation. Some tends to treat voters as ignorant and only interested in hand-outs. The 2008 election results showed this was a wrong perspective. Malaysians are matured citizens who must insist that national interest and not personal interest is the character of the new politics. Some key policy areas of national concern which potential candidates must be able to answer are: • What are your policies to ensure economic growth and equitable distribution whereby inequality is addressed? • How would you ensure all-inclusive socio-economic development? • How would you address issues pertaining to ethnic discrimination, abuse of power such as excessive use of force by enforcement and curtail corruption? • How would you ensure all communities have their cultural and religious rights protected? • How would you protect and promote human rights and strengthen the human rights institutions and accountability at the parliament level? At the end of the day it is the citizen-voters, who set the agenda. They must not be passive and let these negative trends dominate Malaysian politics. They must set the agenda and ensure politicians and political parties are more accountable and treat the citizen-voter with greater respect and dignity Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria is the Principal Research Fellow, Institute of Ethnic Studies (Kita), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) & secretary-general Proham (Society for the Promotion of Human Rights.

The real enemies of the state Posted: 17 Feb 2013 01:47 PM PST By deporting Senator Nick Xenophon, the Malaysian authorities have given the impression that there is something to hide. S Vell Paari, FMT When I arrived in Kuala Lumpur from Perth two days ago, the first SMS that I received upon switching on my mobile phone was that Australian senator Nick Xenophon had been detained at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) and was awaiting deportation for allegedly being an "enemy of the state". The enemy of the state claim, to me, was bewildering. Setting aside his scheduled meetings with Anwar Ibrahim and certain NGOs, wasn't he and the delegation representing all the political parties in Australia scheduled to meet with the Election Commission and Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz as well? When a senior federal minister of Malaysia and the Election Commission could see fit to schedule a meeting with Senator Xenophon, where is this security treat? Let's be frank, Senator Xenophon is not an independent observer, he is aligned to Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat but have not our leaders like Xenophon been critical of foreign countries and their policies. Were this leaders considered a security threat and deported when they arrived in those countries? Dr Mahathir Mohamad during his tenure as prime minister made various threats against the US and Australia, was he ever deported during any of his visits there? Even recently he made statements against the US and Hilary Clinton but when he went there to receive an award, he was not deported for being an enemy of the state. It took three Bersih rallies before we realised that it is best to give an approval in the case of the Himpunan Rakyat, where everything proceeded peacefully and with praise for the police. Similarly, we should have just allowed Senator Xenophon together with the delegation to carry out their visit, hold their meetings, state their views and return back to Australia, without drama. By choosing to deport him, we have turned him into a hero. By deporting him, we have given the world an impression that we have something to hide. Just two weeks ago we had a similar group from Europe who came to look into the government's control over the mainstream media and their statement was not favorable to the government, which was aired by certain mainstream TV channels and online media. The real security threat What about George Soros? He visited Malaysia to launch his book. This man was accused of attempting to destroy the Malaysian economy and to bring Malaysia to its knees to beg IMF's help. But was he deported as an enemy of state? It is these sort of double standard approaches that brew disaster for Barisan Nasional. For example, recently about a 100 rebel fighters from the Philippines landed in Sabah fully armed. And the Home Ministry is still figuring out how to deal with them. Is this not a major security treat? Were they deported? I think it must have been Xenophon's V-neck T Shirt which is the cause for the security threat. READ MORE HERE

Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #4 Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:57 PM PST   Najib promised to, borrowing his latest buzzword, "transform" his administration. How could he possibly do that when all his ministers would again stand for election? If they win, they would surely again be ministers. What transformation did he have in mind? Hishammudin becoming Women's Minister?   M. Bakri Musa    Suaris Interview:  The Future of Malays Part 4:  It is said that Malays are at a crossroad. This is particularly so with the upcoming General Election 13 where the choice is between feudalism and liberalism. To what extent do you agree with that viewpoint? [The original in Malay appeared in suaris.wordpress.com on February 6, 2013.]   MBM:  I agree that we Malays are at a critical juncture. Our choice is between continuing on the present path that has led us to where we are today, with our minds still trapped, or make a sharp turn towards liberating them. Remember that the path to the dumpsite is the one well-trodden.   I do not agree that the forthcoming election (GE 13) will be a choice between liberalism and feudalism, as I understand both terms. Instead it will be between a party that has grown old, tired, and bankrupt of ideas versus another that is young, vigorous, and full of fresh talent.   As an aside, "liberalism" to me means a system that treats every human as having certain inalienable rights or freedoms granted unto him (or her) by Almighty Allah, among them, the freedom of thought, to choose our leaders, own properties, and pursue happiness. Feudalism on the other hand was the social system prevailing in Medieval Europe where humans were either lords or peasants. Land, property and peasants belonged to the lords. Your fate and place in society was determined at birth and remained fixed throughout life. Meaning, born a peasant, and you would remain one until death.   Clearly from the perspective of respect for human lives and values, liberalism is closer to Islam than is feudalism.   True, Malay society today still retains many feudal elements. Nonetheless we are free to choose our leaders. Even though we could not choose our sultans, we do not consider ourselves slaves to them. Yes, we use the term "patek" in referring to ourselves when addressing a member of the royalty. That is merely a habit. A sultan can no longer grab a village maiden for his palace collection. We hitherto peasants could now (if we wish to and can afford it) own a house more palatial than the istana and drive a car that could overtake the sultan's in speed, price and glamour.   Returning to GE13, before we make a decision as to which party to vote for, it is prudent to do a downstream analysis. There can only be three possible outcomes. First, Barisan be returned to power; second, Pakatan to prevail; and third, neither winning a decisive victory. By decisive I mean where the buying of a handful of victorious candidates would not alter the balance of power a la Perak 2008.             If Barisan were to win, that would mean voters approve of the current pervasive corruption and abuse of power. We would have gone further, essentially rewarding those who have destroyed MAS, Perwaja, Bank Bumiputra, and others. Expect the greed of ministers and their families to grow unabated. Our rotten system of education would continue its decline. Our professors and academic leaders would continue to be chosen based not on their scholarly contributions but their ability to suck up to the politically powerful. Najib would continue to lead as he has for the last four years – delivering an alphabet soup of acronyms, endless exhortations, and a surfeit of sloganeering, much like the character in Shannon Ahmad's short story Uggapan (Slogans).   Najib promised to, borrowing his latest buzzword, "transform" his administration. How could he possibly do that when all his ministers would again stand for election? If they win, they would surely again be ministers. What transformation did he have in mind? Hishammudin becoming Women's Minister?   Barisan leaders are scaring citizens into believing that our stability depends on their winning the election. On the contrary, if Barisan fails to secure a greater victory than in 2008, (no one is predicting it will win a supra majority), there will be an ugly power struggle at the top. The Najib/Muhyyuddin rivalry would eclipse the earlier Abdullah/Najib power struggle in its messiness. It would be even uglier than the Mahathir/Ku Li confrontation a generation earlier. The permanent establishment would be paralyzed, not knowing which faction to support. Mahathir has already sharpened the knife that he used with devastating effectiveness on Abdullah. This time the victim would be Najib.   In defeat, there would be much soul searching in Pakatan. Perhaps their leaders would now resolve to focus on the things that they could agree on that would benefit the nation and citizens, as with eradicating corruption and abuse of power, ensuring justice, improving the education system, while distancing themselves from such meaningless symbolic items as with an Islamic state and who could use the word "Allah." Those obsessions do not contribute to the well being of citizens, on the contrary, they divide us.   The second possible outcome would be a Pakatan victory. That would not mean that all our problems would magically disappear. Far from it! First, Pakatan leaders are only human; there would be a great temptation to regard their victory as a bountiful harvest. There are many more family disputes during such times! Expect a not-so-pretty grab for positions, and contentious issues like who would be Deputy Prime Minister and whether he (unlikely a she) would be a Malay or non-Malay. There would also be the jostling for key portfolios as with education, finance, and internal affairs. Those are to be expected.   The pettiness would challenge the wisdom and patience of Pakatan leaders. If they were to behave like kids at Hari Raya or Chinese New Year greedily grabbing duit rayas and ang pows, then their future and also that of the nation would indeed be gloomy. However, if they were to consider their victory not as Hari Raya but the beginning of Ramadan, meaning, a time to be tested, patient, and diligent, then their and our future would be bright.   More interesting is to imagine what would happen to UMNO in defeat. Those who joined the party not for the sake of the party and country but for their greed would quickly abandon it. Their flow of opium would be cut off. Meanwhile the new 2M team of Mahathir and Muhyuddin would be merciless on Najib. Erstwhile sleepy supporters of the equally soporific Abdullah Badawi would now be intent on exacting revenge on the two sides.             As ugly and embarrassing as that would be to Malays, it would bring only good to UMNO. The party would begin its slow and long overdue rehabilitation, back to it glorious past. Its members would now be limited only to those who truly love and are passionate about the organization and of Malays. The party might once again be the pride and love of our people and not as at present, an enabler for the corrupt and criminal.   There are two other much more meaningful consequences to an UMNO defeat. Consider that the corruption of Khir Toyo, former Chief Minister of Selangor, was only exposed with Pakatan winning the state. Had UMNO won in 2008, that slimy character would now still be its chief executive, with his greed and corrupt ways unabated. Because Pakatan won, he is now awaiting jail, pending appeal, for his corruption conviction. There are many Khir Toyos at the federal level; they could only be exposed with a Pakatan victory.   The second important consequence would be on members of the permanent establishment, from senior civil servants and heads of GLCs to sultans and professors. They would now realize that their careers are no longer dependent on their skills at sucking up to Barisan. They would be forced to examine themselves carefully and not be so politically partisan. The future of their careers would now depend on their dedication, diligence and professionalism, not their political skills and leanings. That could only be good for the country generally and its administration specifically.   Many, especially in UMNO, predict a vicious racial riot a la May 1969 with the party's defeat. I totally disagree. First, in 1969 the power shifted from Malays (UMNO) to Chinese (DAP). If UMNO were to lose in the coming election, power would still be in Malay hands except that those Malays would not be from UMNO. Second, our society is much more wise and mature now. The Chinese for example need not have to parade with their dragons to show off their might. A look around KL and Penang would be enough to reassure them and others. And if Malays were to run amok on the streets, those luxury bungalows and BMWs they would burn down might just belong to the likes of Khir Toyo and Abdullah Badawi!             In 1969 UMNO was still Malay, and Malays, UMNO. Today conditions have changed radically, as evidenced by the recent massive KL112 rally.   Extremists like Ibrahim the Frog could easily be taken care of. An offer of a directorship or two and trips to Macao would silence them. Alternatively, do not impede the anti-corruption agency. I am simply amused that Malay leaders from Mahathir to the academic Ramlah Adam would pin the hopes of our race to characters like Ibrahim the Frog.   For Malaysians, the greatest consequence to a Barisan defeat would be that we actually get to experience and benefit the meaning of free elections. That is, by merely putting an "X" in the appropriate box on the ballot paper, we could change our government. There is no need to riot or demonstrate on the streets. A Barisan defeat would effectively demonstrate the true meaning of checks and balances in a democracy.   The third and worst possible consequence would be if neither party were to win convincingly. We had a glimpse of that ugliness in Perak following the 2008 election. All, politicians from Barisan to Pakatan and members of the establishment from civil servants to the sultan, did not shine. Their behavior brought shame to the nation. They however, were oblivious of that.             Expect that, only worse, in Putrajaya. The behavior of these politicians would be more flagrant than those of the ladies of the evening. As odious as that would be, there would be some redeeming values. We would finally see those politicians for what they really are, worse than those prostitutes at Chow Kit Road. At least those ladies had the morality not to sell themselves so openly and in broad daylight.   The odiousness would so enrage many that able and honest citizens would now be encouraged if not compelled to offer themselves as candidates in the future. That can only be good! We would finally get to appreciate the awesome power of the ballot booth and that elections have consequences, prompting us to be more prudent the next time we vote. That is one invaluable lesson.   In short, the best outcome for Malaysia in GE 13 would be for Pakatan to win convincingly. Next would be for neither side to do so. The worst outcome would be for Barisan to be returned to power. Stated differently, a hung parliament would be a not-so-pretty Pakatan victory.   Next:  Suaris Interview. The Future of Malays #5:  You appear cynical towards things labeled "Islam." Many view you as not being enamored with "conservative Islam" as currently practiced by most Muslims and not with Islam itself. What's your comment?

Proton distorts market, bleeds Malaysians Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:51 PM PST   The thrust of the turnaround plan is to boost Proton's image by ditching the idea that cheap is the way to go. Nothing is being said here about value for money and being competitive. Obviously, bringing in a German associate company not so long ago to help with quality control is not working either.  Joe Fernandez It's interesting that former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad should reveal at this juncture, as Proton Advisor, that the privatized national car maker is putting the finishing touches to a turnaround plan. This man has an infinite capacity to continue spewing sheer nonsense in economics. The forthcoming 13th General Election no doubt figures prominently in the so-called turnaround plan. The idea is designed to make the embattled Barisan Nasional Government and the national car concept suddenly look attractive. If Proton has a genuine turnaround plan, it must mean that the market distorting parasitic vendors and suppliers a la Bumiputeraism will be phased out to open up the market to competition. This will never happen as this community continues to leech off the car owners unfortunate enough to own a Proton and need spare parts and service. Opportunities, the politics dictate, are to be hogged. The turnaround plan must also mean that there will be greater diversity in its workforce. Again, it's a non-starter, given the politics of "creating and keeping the jobs for our community alone". For another, turnaround must pledge that Proton will somehow conjure up a new series of engines and not through sheer magic. The engine, the core of what car-manufacturing is all about, is the national car maker's Achilles heel. It has no R&D facilities worth speaking about, no world-class engineers, and all this despite Government promises of continued financial and other support in this area. This leaves the so-called national car maker dependent on continued hand-outs from the tax-payer despite having gone private and Government protection to ensure that its market share of 50 per cent along with Perodua doesn't shrink even further. There's a limit to how much the Government can help protect Proton's market share. Foreign makes are likely to make further inroads into the domestic market, given their economies of scale and the newly-found tendency among Proton-allergic Malaysians to fork out ever-increasing amounts to get a foreign car model which will be worth their investment. The thrust of the turnaround plan is to boost Proton's image by ditching the idea that cheap is the way to go. Nothing is being said here about value for money and being competitive. Obviously, bringing in a German associate company not so long ago to help with quality control is not working either. Mahathir thinks in a contradiction in terms that producing more expensive versions, as part of the turnaround plan, will help pull Proton through and put it on the road to viability and sustainability. This hare-brained approach based on a simplistic notion fails to take into account the fact that it was a combination of Government protection, infusion of tons of money from the tax-payer and Petronas, and cheap pricing that in the first place initially won it the lion's share of the domestic market. That market share is now in grave peril as it's set to shrink year by year. The national car project, to rub salt into the wounds, does not enjoy the kind of economies of scale that has helped world number one Toyota for example to take the world by storm. It's said that no car manufacturer can be in the game for the long-haul unless production exceeds one million units a year, a new engine model is turned out every three years, and one has a share of the world export market. This is where Proton completely falls apart on all counts. Proton is congenitally incapable of raising production levels and even if could, it will not be able to sell the number unless the export market has no qualms about coming to the rescue of an uncompetitive and long outdated engine model. Clearly, Proton thanks to Mahathir during his long innings in power has painted itself into a corner and there's no way out. This is the end result of thinking like a communist – read Mahathir -- when it comes to economics and the market. Communism has proven that the idea of a national anything is a non-starter and it's anybody's guess why Malaysia chose that path under Mahathir. Ignorance is bliss, a little knowledge is dangerous, and the politics of race obviously had a lot to do with it. The Proton idea appears to have been hatched by a jaguh kampung over a teh tarik at a mamak stall: "If Japan can produce cars, why can't we? etc etc . . . Malaysia Boleh!" It's a certainty that the Proton idea would be killed in any change of Government in Putrajaya, and with good reasons. The future of the automobile industry is in India and China, a fact already recognised by global manufacturers in Japan, Korea and the West who are flocking to the two Asian giants. Proton cannot emulate the established car manufacturers to live and fight another day simply it has no standing whatsoever in the industry. Hence, any new Government will be foolish to fork out even a sen to the ailing national car maker and this will suddenly make the future all the more dangerous for it. If the carpet is pulled out from under the feet of vendors and suppliers, spares will suddenly dry up and car owners will ditch their vehicles in a panic. The bottom will fall out from the market. It's not clear to what extent the slack can be taken up by spares available from Japan and Taiwan. Proton cannot continue to be an ego game at the expense of long-suffering Malaysians, especially car owners. It was not so long ago that Proton started at the same time as Hyundai of Korea. Hyundai has gone on to achieve global recognition and ranking. Proton remains a manufacturer struggling still very much at the kampung level. If there's one thing that has done Proton in, it's taking Mahathir's advice on car manufacturing when he's no subject matter expert. If Mahathir reads widely and everything, as his apologists claim, he should have realized this ages ago.   Joe Fernandez is a mature law student, among others, who loves to write. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

We Need a new Huguan Siou Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:47 PM PST   THE CURRENT issue arising from the so-called declaration of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as Huguan Siou has another angle to it that the people of Sabah need to be aware of. But first, I say there is NO need for Anwar or PKR to apologise to KDCA. In fact I really feel the KDCA and its president, the Huguan Siou, should instead apologise to the Kadazandusuns for failing to serve them.   Richard Libun Adou, former Vice President of KDCA Jonathan Yasin and Datuk Wilfred Bumburing have now denied that Anwar was installed as Huguan Siou of Malaysia . But my purpose here is not to argue on that point. What I want to state is that there is a powerful reason why Anwar was declared, (oh, okay, given a sash that says) "Huguan Siou of Malaysia ." The reason this happened is that the new generation of Kadazandusuns are hungry for real leadership because their original Huguan Siou, Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, has become weak, ineffective and no longer acts as a fighter for the rights of the Kadazandusuns and Muruts (KDMs). To them, their Huguan Siou is a just a puppet with no teeth or courage to say and do what need to be said and done. The title of "Huguan Siou," I think, was chosen by the PKR leaders of Paginatan because they wanted Anwar to be seen mainly as a new leader of the KDMs. They could have chosen another word for "paramount leader" but unfortunately, the Kadazandusun language doesn't have any other word for that has equal weight as "huguan siou." Maybe it would have been a better decision to use a Malay title, like "Pahlawan Reformasi Malaysia" or something, but it would still be not as meaningful as "Huguan Siou" in the context of Sabah. Unfortunately, this decision rattled a lot of people. They have forgotten that the words simply mean "paramount leader" or "highest leader." Is the name really sacred? Is the KDCA the only body who has the exclusive right to use the name which is in the KDCA's Kadazan Dusun Malay-English Dictionary? What if another Kadazandusun association wants to give their president the same title? I believe in the old days each village in Penampang had its own huguan siou, so they were more than one huguan sious walking around in those days! Whatever the arguments going on about this, one thing is clear: the new generation of KDMs are crying out for a new and dynamic leadership which is strong and courageous in fighting for their cause. They need something new which fits the needs of the KDMs in the new globalized world. They feel that Pairin has betrayed them by being on a political platform which to most of them is against their spirit for rights and dignity. Many of them also feel that the Huguan Siou shouldn't be a politician, but someone who serves his people socially and culturally without any political affiliation. As it is Pairin is a Member of Parliament for Keningau, assemblyman for Tambunan and a deputy chief minister. With these responsibilities he has no more time to serve as Huguan Siou, or even as president of the KDCA. And because of this the KDCA has become weak and inactive. It no longer works aggressively to pursue the objectives listed in its constitution. It is as if KDCA has lost its spirit because its Huguan Siou is no longer osiou (brave) enough to do and say the right things because it has become subservient to a greater master. KDCA has become so quiet and lethargic, making noise only during the Pesta Kaamatan. A former deputy president of KDCA had prepared a strategic plan for KDCA to become more active and productive, but this was never implemented. This is so unfortunate because the Kadazandusuns are having their vision confused and blurred in a very challenging time. At one time the association was at least producing a good number of books, but now this productivity has stopped. It needs to organize the young members to compliment their knowledge and skills, or at least boost their morale and spirit and be proud of KDCA and their Huguan Siou. There is a need to groom them for leadership in their community. There is also a need for documentation works to record countless aspects of the cultural heritage which is fast disappearing, It cannot use the excuse that KDCA doesn't have the money because most activities, like producing CDs of traditional musical performance, need very little money, but such CDs can be sold to tourists for good income. Also Pairin and Dr. Maximus Ongkili if they wanted it aggressively, can get government funding for many worthy causes, such as youth leadership seminars, or cottage industry courses. Sadly these are not done by KDCA or the Koisaan Co-operative because of a lack of dynamic and creative leadership. In fact by now the Koisaan Co-operative should already have a franchise of KDM-owned minimarkets all over Sabah offering discount prices to KDMs. The immigrant people such as the Bugis and Pakistanis have their respective bodies to help their own people go into business but we the so-called proud natives are unable to do this. Even the management of the Pesta Kaamatan at the Hongkod ground had overlooked the need to help our own people as proven by the mistake of charging extremely high rental for the stalls and canopies during the Pesta Kaamatan. The rent are so high that many sellers had to share stalls. This is against the spirit of helping our own people. It will hurt the feelings of many KDMs when someone says the Paramount Leader may have become a No-amount Leader, but this is the reality of our fate as a people. We don't dare tell our leaders there need to step down no matter how ineffective he has become, thinking that such an advise would go against the sacred, or that it will cause ousung (cursed for going against an elder). But the truth is the concept of ousung is dragging us back into the stone age.

Gangnam style Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:25 PM PST   Young people may well enjoy watching Psy on YouTube — the music is infectious and the dance steps are great fun but that doesn't mean they'd select their leaders in the same way: entertainment is one thing, politics is another. Political strategists have been very focused on how to win over Malaysia's all-important new voters. There are now more than five million young people aged 20-29, most of whom are first-time voters with no clear political loyalties. Over the Chinese New Year in Penang, the prime minister made a stab at winning their support. Sharing a stage with the global YouTube sensation Psy of "Gangnam Style" fame, he sought to enhance his "coolness" and therefore his electability. Firstly, it's worth mentioning that YouTube sensations like Psy are exactly that — momentary blips on the radar of celebrity. Bringing him into Malaysia to drum up support shows that Barisan Nasional is behind the curve in understanding this youthful demographic because these fads pass very, very quickly. They aren't anticipating or leading: they're just following. Secondly, if Malaysia was a presidential-style democracy, such tactics might stand a chance. However, we are not. For better or for worse, we've adopted the Westminster system: a system that requires strong political parties, solid constituency representation as well as an adept collective leadership. Thirdly, the event with Psy also reveals the pitfalls of seeking to win over the younger voters by associating yourself with something "cool". Being "cool" isn't easy. Moreover, once you try too hard you're instantly the opposite of cool, something the PM experienced on that stage on Monday as he implored people to vote for Barisan. Finally, there's also a major tactical error at work. Young people may well enjoy watching Psy on YouTube — the music is infectious and the dance steps are great fun but that doesn't mean they'd select their leaders in the same way: entertainment is one thing, politics is another. For young Malaysians and especially those with degrees, the issues they're facing are very straight-forward. A cool PM is great but one who can solve sky-rocketing car prices, dismal starting salaries and the soaring price of housing would be truly rocking... With this in mind, I've spent some time talking to some Malaysian graduates — especially those pouring out of the country's 20 public universities and 50 or so private institutions of higher learning. For them, the job market is extremely challenging. A 2011 Graduate Tracking Index released by the Ministry of Higher Education in September 2012 revealed that at least 40,000 of these graduates were unemployed 12 months after they had completed their studies. Johari (not his real name) is recent graduate from the International Islamic University (IIU) in Gombak, Kuala Lumpur. First mooted under the current Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim when he was in the administration, the IIU with its lavish suburban campus has become a leading tertiary educational institution, in part because the course-work is conducted in English. Working at a non-profit, Johari earns a seemingly comfortable RM3,000 per month. However, as he explains his take-home pay is very quickly reduced to a far more modest amount: "I'm every lucky that my parents live within commuting distance of the city. Friends from Terengganu or elsewhere have to fork out another RM400-500 on accommodation. Having said that, I spend about the same amount on my transport, leaving home every morning by 6.15am. More often than not, I only get back to the house by 10 or 11 at night." Transport is a big chunk of Johari's monthly expenditure. He'd like to buy a car but he knows he can't afford to run it and more especially pay for parking in the city. Separately, he resents Malaysia's inflated car prices — a legacy of the Mahathir era especially that of the national car project Proton. "I go on the Internet and compare prices for cars in Malaysia with Thailand or elsewhere. We're paying so much more for the same models because of the duties!" In fact, he's read the criticisms of the Malaysian automotive policy from the up-and-coming opposition politician Rafizi Ramli. Johari adds: "I'm not a political person but I have to agree with Rafizi's arguments." However, Johari stresses that he does not necessarily agree with all of the opposition's populist rhetoric. For example, he rejects their more radical views on student loans dished out by PTPTN (National Higher Education Fund Corporation). "I believe we should be responsible for paying for our own tertiary education. However, I would add that if we're good students and win better grades this should lessen our repayments." At the moment, he's accumulated some RM28,000 in student loans that he's paying off at the rate of RM100 per month. He acknowledges that he won't settle this debt until he reaches 40. Housing is a further source of complaint and he says: "I don't know if I'll ever be able to afford a house in the Klang Valley. I imagine that I'll have to settle for a small flat somewhere. Saving enough money for a deposit will take a very long time and that's before we're even talking about marriage! As graduate I should be able to bring mas kahwin (dowry) of at least RM12-15,000. My last girlfriend was quite straightforward about her expectations. Status really matters." Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/gangnam-style/

Migrants in politics and the Borneo Xenophobia Posted: 15 Feb 2013 05:37 PM PST Logically, I would have assumed that as 25% of parliament was allocated to Sabah and Sarawak since 1963 to date, they would have increased the seats to 7% by the 2013 General Election. No other demographics have changed except the vast oil and gas potential of Sabah and Sarawak and of course the population size. So, you see, there really isn't any excuse to deny Sabah and Sarawak 35% of parliamentary seats in this country. Nilakrisna James Xenophobia is a morbid fear of foreigners. At the heart of Sabah and Sarawak lies a deep distrust of foreign people, foreign cultures and foreign intrusion. It has formed the backdrop of our policies and Federal-State relations the past half a century; a crippling phobia that may never end and which may mar the judgments of all present and future political representatives that we send to parliament. This will be the downfall of the Borneo states. It is this deep distrust of foreigners that made us afraid of Malaya in the first place but when it came to the White People ("Orang Putih"), we treated them as rajahs or masters. Yet, one of the same colour and stock can never be our superior and to this day the descendants of head hunters and migrants refuse to bow to a brown authority. These descendants will continue to demand autonomy and rights and a Borneo Agenda and some have gone as far as asking for a similar exit as Singapore, even going so far as thinking that our former colonial caretaker may still have pity for us and take our woes seriously. FEDERAL AGENDA VS. BORNEO AGENDA I was asked whether Malaysia is made up of three separate nations under one federation or a federation made up of 13 states. Good question but I ask humbly, what difference does it really make? I stand by the premise that the Malaysia Agreement stands paramount as the document which binds this nation together and gives the country, known as Malaysia, legitimacy. In its paramount status, it can neither be revoked nor amended nor breached. In the Malaysia Agreement, four separate territories stood on equal grounds to agree to an amalgamation that respected the equality of these territories, neither one being less equal than the other. Britain was merely a signatory to release her obligations as caretaker. Singapore eventually exited. Three separate territories remain, with the United Nations clearly recognising that these three territories have gained independence from Britain, with two independent territories—Sabah and Sarawak—gaining their independence by joining Malaya, a country that had already gained its own independence six years earlier. The United Nations and the Commonwealth now recognise these three separate territories as one nation, which in 1963 agreed to call itself Malaysia. Sabah and Sarawak were officially "swallowed" into one nation and henceforth lost their separate and independent status as territories in their own right. It is the Federal Constitution, which has been amended no less than 650 times, which makes Sabah and Sarawak merely "States" in the entire Federation. This officially and legally makes us two separate States out of 13 in the Federation; an arrangement agreed to by our forefathers; men who were clearly not in any position to argue otherwise. Herein lies your answer. We are a federation made up of 13 states, nothing more, nothing less, because the Malaysia Agreement allows us the freedom to determine our status via a Federal Constitution in accordance with the recommendations made in the Cobbold Report of 1962. It is even more chilling to note that though the Borneo Agenda may have been a crucial part of the negotiation process in 1962, Appendix F of the Cobbold Report of 1962 reinforced the recommendation that the principle of a strong Central Government must never be prejudiced by the safeguards demanded by the Borneo territories and I quote directly from that Memorandum:- "The Committee, of course, is of the opinion that whatever safeguards might be provided for the Borneo territories must conform with the expressed wish of the Borneo people themselves but that such arrangements should not prejudice the principle of a strong Central Government or curtail the fundamental liberties of the nationals of the Federation of Malaysia." Therein lies the true motive of Malaya and the final scenario wherein the Federal Agenda must never be compromised or prejudiced by the Borneo Agenda. In this respect, we have deliberately drafted a Federal Constitution that would prioritise forever a situation that would be very much in line with Prime Minister Najib's 1 Malaysia concept. It hopes for unity on the premise that the rules of the Federal Government are complied with fully. WAY FORWARD: INCREASE BORNEO PARLIAMENTARY SEATS Of course, we could be romantic and start a process of wishful thinking and hope that the fragile nature of our Federal Constitution (which can be amended anytime) may one day create a scenario where a new Government could reverse that whole motive and bow to the demands of the Borneo States. That will only happen if the Borneo States end up in a better bargaining position because West Malaysia remains so hopelessly divided that they have no choice but to look towards Borneo for extra political leverage. We can't always bank on West Malaysian disunity though. At some point, West Malaysian leaders will tire of our Borneo demands and will learn to bridge their own divides to keep Borneo MPs under control. Politics isn't about holding your peers and opponents to ransom. It is about negotiating your values for the greater good. I asked what difference this all makes because ultimately the only way our fate in Borneo will take a turn for the better is if we increased our parliamentary representation significantly so as to be able to actually make a difference in policies and at least protect further erosion of Borneo's interests through unfair legislation. We need AT LEAST 35% of MPs to come from Sabah and Sarawak who could en bloc (it is hoped) exercise their power of veto and at least think in one mind when it comes to Borneo's interests. The current situation is this: 222 seats in parliament; 56 for Borneo (25%) and 166 for West Malaysia (75%). The total number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak do not even make up 35% of parliament to allow us the right to veto a Bill or an Act of Parliament, even if such legislation to be passed were to the detriment of the two Borneo states. Even if we were granted 35% representation, our Borneo MPs are so deeply fragmented between political parties whose interests and loyalties are so fundamentally rooted in the Federal Agenda that it still ends up being a far-fetched dream. But it would be the first step forward. The Cobbold Report 1962 suggested that the number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak, respectively, must be determined by taking into account the population, size and potentialities of the two States. In 1963, the population of Malaysia was 8.9 million. 13% lived in the Borneo States: 5% lived in Sabah and 8% lived in Sarawak. In 2010, the population of Malaysia was 28.2 million. 20% lived in the Borneo States: 11% lived in Sabah and 9% lived in Sarawak. 60% of the total land area of Malaysia is in Sabah and Sarawak but only 20% of the population live in Malaysia's Borneo States, an increase of 7% in population since 1963. Logically, I would have assumed that as 25% of parliament was allocated to Sabah and Sarawak since 1963 to date, they would have increased the seats to 7% by the 2013 General Election. No other demographics have changed except the vast oil and gas potential of Sabah and Sarawak and of course the population size. So, you see, there really isn't any excuse to deny Sabah and Sarawak 35% of parliamentary seats in this country. WILL THE BORNEO STATES SEEK INDEPENDENCE? I read it now often in various blogs and am often questioned by so many different people, who are so sick of the political situation and lack of prospects for their families in this country, if there is a way out of Malaysia. There was a time when nobody dared to raise this issue for fear of being thrown into indefinite detention without a fair trial under the Internal Security Act. Lately though, people have become bold, more vocal and more willing to risk their freedom to find a solution because nearly all the people who ask me this question want to migrate to another country but simply cannot afford it. So, when left in a rut without choices, these people feel angry, frustrated and dissatisfied. The majority turn their anger towards new migrants who threaten their political legitimacy and, probably, may also be doing better financially, but quite a sizeable few are now taking their anger onto the streets, the NGOs and political parties, and they will vent this anger towards the ruling government of the day. The thought of Sabah and Sarawak being on their own in the hands of present leaders who are also accused of corruption and wrong-doing quite frankly scares me more than an annoying Malaysian environment. Within seconds of freedom, they would be at each other's throats trying to be the next Sultan! In any event, even if these angry people took their case to the International Courts, the United Nations and the Commonwealth, the demands for independence would require the mandate of the majority of the residents of Sabah and Sarawak by way of a State Government led referendum. This scenario may not be entirely impossible but is highly unlikely to succeed given the fact that the majority of the people of Sabah and Sarawak consider themselves to be secure, financially stable and relatively at peace in the system that Malaysia has built for them the past 50 years. We can be frustrated with the political chaos in this country but level headed people would understand that this is a natural evolutionary process in politics when a civilised bipartite system begins to form and not necessarily a situation that would justify an exit from a country they have grown to love. By nature, Sabah and Sarawak people are unwilling to challenge the status quo they have grown accustomed to since 1963 and though our native forefathers may have willingly chopped people's heads off, our natural instinct is to be a migrant like our ancestors and run away from revolutions and wars by jumping on the next boat out to sea. Ultimately, we just want to live a settled and prosperous life. We are no different to the aliens. In addition to this, the voices of those who are angry are moderated by the voices of new migrants who have happily settled down in the Borneo States. In Sabah, at least, the new migrants are now apparently in the majority and they will not be voting in favour of an exit from Malaysia. We are angry because it is alleged that these new migrants came through illegitimate channels in droves for a more sinister political reason aimed at neutering our local political voice. We can afford to be angry when these methods are illegal. So, in recent months, we have attempted to challenge their legitimacy in the Royal Commission of Inquiry, yet I frankly believe that even if their status is confirmed to be illegal, the Government would take years and millions of tax payers' money to resolve this situation. Their status as new migrants would probably not be resolved in time for the next General Election. And while we continue to complain and bicker and blame these new migrants, the Federal and State Governments would have amicably found a proper way to streamline and legitimise migration into Sabah and Sarawak for more people to settle permanently in the Borneo States. In the long run, new migrants will outnumber old migrants and they will have a legitimate reason to cast their votes in future general elections. Our best option in Sabah and Sarawak is to accommodate old and new migrants, legal or illegal, and increase the population and power bargaining status of our two States so as to eventually demand a reasonable increase in our parliamentary seats and our Federal budget. With so many mouths to feed in Sabah and Sarawak we could finally justify a bigger annual budget. Many natives would not want to be drowned by the political voices of groups from Indonesia or the Philippines but the reality is that as our borders worldwide become more porous, humans will move and migrate between various nations to seek a better life, more economic opportunities and better infrastructure. People only form political parties in this country when they feel their racial groups need representation or when they feel disenfranchised. So the more we reject new migrant groups and insult their very existence or their religion the more likely they are to retaliate and create descendants who are more than willing to form their own vocal NGOS and political groupings. By then the native population would have been reduced even further so as to render us completely irrelevant. This ultimately is where the real danger lies when it comes to native xenophobia in Borneo. The future of Sabah and Sarawak lies in peaceful co-existence with migrants. By treating them as stray animals we deny our own humanity and risk our own future legitimacy. If we therefore continue to see ourselves as being separate from the rest of Malaysia by drawing upon our racial divide, we run the risk of self-extinction. If we absorb new migrants as one of us, we become a stronger political force and can continue to exercise certain controls and demands even if the Borneo Agenda ceases to be relevant. THE END OF RACIAL POLITICS AND A NEW MALAYSIA With these realities, Sabah and Sarawak will remain in Malaysia and the racial demographics will change in the next 50 years as racial groups continue to inter-marry as a matter of economic and political survival. The new racial demographics will break down political barriers and eventually lead to a more acceptable form of civilised politics that can transcend beyond race and religion. One day only two parties will be acceptable to the Malaysian people who see themselves first as Malaysians, race as second. Those parties will have no necessity for component race based parties and will have no place for racism. They will be multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic and above all, progressive and issue-based. If mosquito parties should exist, they, too, will be issue-based to represent policies which perhaps the two main parties are unwilling to resolve or discuss. By then political racism will be passé, illegal and completely unacceptable. If we continue with racial polarisation and refuse to react to the pulse on the ground and pacify the budding seeds of discontent, this country will descend into anarchy and revolution. Everything we have worked so hard to achieve will be demolished within a decade. It is this fear that has driven millions of Malaysian talents to seek their fortunes overseas and, ironically, it would be Malaysians who end up roaming the planet as new migrants. This country will one day grow up and embrace the reality of happy citizens who were all once of migrant stock; of white, of black, of brown, of bloods that bear one colour: Red. We will eventually also honour the reality of their dual love and dual citizenship for their country of origin and their country of adoption. Until such time as we have leaders of integrity and worth, the road continues to be a rocky one. "Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists." –Franklin D. Roosevelt Copyright  16 Feb 2013 and published with permission from the writer. Nilakrisna James is a Sabah-based lawyer, writer and activist who co-founded the apolitical NGO United Borneo Front (UBF) in 2010. She left the group in 2011 and remains a member of the ruling Barisan Nasional.

Mahathir enters fray as Malaysia braces for poll Posted: 15 Feb 2013 09:32 AM PST "Cheating and fraud could be the deciding factor" ... opposition activist Ambiga Sreenevasan.   Lindsay Murdoch, Brisbane Times    As Malaysia approaches its tightest election in half a century, the opposition activist Ambiga Sreenevasan has shrugged off calls for her to be stripped of her Malaysian citizenship.   ''This will be the dirtiest election ever because it is the most closely fought … Cheating and fraud could be the deciding factor,'' Ms Ambiga, who heads Bersih, a group campaigning for free and fair polling, said. This will be the dirtiest election ever because it is the most closely fought.  ''There are many discrepancies appearing on electoral rolls, particularly with the sudden registering of foreigners, many of whom appear to be migrant workers.   ''The mainstream media is far from free and fair … [The ruling parties] are doing everything they can to stay in power.'' Advertisement   Mahathir Mohamad, the former prime minister who ruled for 22 years, last week called for Ms Ambiga to be stripped of her citizenship.   Ms Ambiga said she and her family had lived in Malaysia for generations and she would leave it to others to judge whether Dr Mahathir - who broke a promise to stay out of politics when he left office in 2002 - was playing race politics in a country where ethnic Malays made up about 65 per cent of the population of 28 million. Ethnic Chinese account for another 25 per cent and ethnic Indians 8 per cent.   Opinion polls show the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition has lost much of the support of the Chinese, who have been alienated by corruption and policies favouring ethnic Malays, leaving the coalition heavily reliant on Malay votes to stay in power.   Ms Ambiga said voters had become empowered through the internet and social media and were no longer prepared to accept corruption. ''There is also for the first time a strong opposition which has brought out the scandals … I can sense the momentum is picking up,'' said Ms Ambiga, whose organisation has brought tens of thousands of people onto the streets to rally for free elections.   With only a few weeks remaining before the Prime Minister, Najib Razak, must call an election, religious tensions are also flaring over a call by an independent Muslim MP for the mass burning of Bibles which use the word ''Allah'' to refer to God.   Lim Guan Eng, the chief minister of the opposition-ruled island of Penang, put police on alert after a note was found at a church promising a Bible-burning ''festival'' this weekend. ''Let's teach 'em a lesson,'' the note read.   Financial markets are jittery over the political uncertainty in a country where the BN has never lost an election since independence from Britain in 1957.   At the last election in 2008, the BN lost its two-thirds majority as well as five out of 12 contested state governments. Mr Najib, who became Prime Minister in 2009, has abolished repressive national security laws and hopes Malaysia's strong economic performance and handouts to poorer Malaysians will shore up his support.   In a bid to placate Malay voters, he has also softened an earlier pledge to replace a 40-year-old affirmative action policy that favours Malays with a ''new economic model''.   In one poll released in January, Mr Najib was only one percentage point ahead of the charismatic Anwar Ibrahim, a former deputy prime minister who heads the multi-ethnic opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat (People's Pact).   An opposition rally drew close to 100,000 people in Kuala Lumpur on January 12, one of the country's largest-ever shows of political strength.   More than 3 million new voters have registered since the last election, deepening uncertainty about the result.   Analysts say many of them are young voters who are likely to be more open to change.   Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/world/mahathir-enters-fray-as-malaysia-braces-for-poll-20130215-2eifv.html#ixzz2L1OxSy39

Gangnam twist for Malaysian elections Posted: 15 Feb 2013 09:28 AM PST   The episode shows that while the ruling BN coalition has vast human, financial and media resources at its disposal for the upcoming election campaign, social networking tools continue to expose government gaffes and blunders, magnifying and slanting them to audiences several times larger than spectators at the original event.  Anil Netto, Asia Times Online  PENANG - As a pivotal general election looms in Malaysia, online social media tools are playing a prominent role in challenging the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition's overwhelming dominance of traditional print and broadcast media.  Election campaigning took a Gangnam Style-twist on February 11 when popular South Korean musician Psy staged a live concert in Penang. BN Politicians who hoped to gain a popular boost from the global singing and dancing sensation, however, lost more face than they gained, underscoring the growing power of social media to influence public opinion.  Seeking favor with youth and ethnic Chinese voters, the BN coalition invited Psy to perform during Lunar New Year celebrations held in Penang. The concert was strategically held at the Han Chiang College, the same venue where the opposition Democratic Action Party held a mass rally just days before sweeping to power in the state at the 2008 general election.  Federal level BN politicians likely thought they had pulled off a local electoral coup by securing Psy's presence at a free open house event organized by the Malaysian Chinese Association, a BN component party. Both the open house celebration and PSY's performance were advertised widely on BN-aligned television stations and newspapers. Elections must be held by June but have not yet been officially called.  However, a series of blunders spread over social media arguably turned the event into a public relations disaster for the BN. Critical bloggers were quick to note that the Gangnam Style dance is actually a parody of the high-flying ways of the wealthy elite in Seoul's Gangnam district, similar to the extravagant lifestyles many BN politicians are known to lead.  Fans in Malaysia pleaded on Psy's Facebook page for him to snub the event to avoid being used by the BN as a political tool. Questions were quickly raised about whether public funds were used to bankroll the performance, though the private company that managed the event later said it was neither engaged nor paid by the government.  On the night before the event, thousands of flags bearing the logo "1Malaysia" - Prime Minister's Najib Razak's slogan in promotion of national unity in the ethnically divided country - were put up on roadsides around Penang in a clear attempt to associate Najib with Psy's highly anticipated performance.  On the morning of the actual performance, Najib himself took to the stage at the concert, asking the crowd repeatedly, "Are you ready for Psy?" Each time, the crowd of about 40,000 in the sweltering heat roared back, "yes".  Najib followed up by asking the crowd, "Are you ready for BN?" Video clips of the beck and call showed clearly that the "no's" overwhelmed the "yes's" to the question. Najib asked twice more and each time the "no's" grew louder. Within 24 hours, different copies of the one minute video-clip of the rebuff had gone viral on Youtube with over half a million collective views.  BN leaders tried to downplay the incident, including in affiliated newspaper coverage that portrayed the concert as a blow to the political opposition. "Not everyone present had yelled 'no'. We have video records showing a large segment of the audience had yelled 'yes' when the prime minister asked that question several times," a Penang BN leader was reported as saying.  More red faces emerged when invitations to Psy to join in the tossing of the 'yee sang', the Lunar New Year salad, with BN leaders including Najib on stage went unheeded. Despite repeated several loud calls by the event's emcees for the Gangnam Stylestar to return to the stage to join BN politicians, Psy failed to appear.  To many observers, Psy had partially heeded the call of his fans not to be used as a political tool ahead of what are expected to be hotly contested general elections. A video-clip of Psy's no-show on stage has since been released on Youtube and received 100,000 views in two days.  Read more at:

You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

Treachery in Johor? Posted: 18 Feb 2013 03:24 PM PST CJM left the MCA party for PKR ONLY AFTER he was unsuccessful in his attempt for a deputy presidential post. He knew with Chua Soi Lek and Liow Tiong LIE controlling the party delegates he would have diddly squat chance of ever getting into the MCA top two posts. So he left for what he hoped would be greener pastures in Pakatan's taxi sapu, PKR. But in leaving MCA for PKR he forgot to inform many of his MCA supporters, abandoning them to gasp for air when they heard of his shock departure from MCA. I know one of these supporters who had been so faithful to him - bloke expressed his utter frustration with such a 'leader'. Politicians casting off or abandoning supporters (after using them) reminded me of a Chinese kungfu movie where the warlords were playing f* with their respective supporters who fought valiantly for them. The movie had the two opposing warring warlords having a friendly get-together, indulging in an orgy of women, wine and feast while gambling on fighting crickets - the bet was for the loser to withdraw from an agreed sector their men were then fighting over. Of course the movie script called for the loser of the cricket game to vacate his sector which many of his soldiers had just won after dying fighting for. Such could be the callousness and lack of considerations of some 'leaders'. Hmmm, I wonder whether Gobalakrishnan is reading my post, wakakaka. In a previous post Malaysia's Papal 'Indulgences' I had written about the medieval Catholic Church selling 'indulgences' which were religious 'pardons' for sins extended by the Church to those who could pay for them. I stated that a papal 'indulgence' released a sinner from bearing the spiritual burden of all his or her naughty thoughts and misdeeds. The more money one paid, the more sins were pardoned, until there was a belief that sinners could buy their way into becoming a saint and thus allowed automatic entry into heaven ... ... which then led to the Great Reformation in Europe, and its subsequent similar* problems, especially in America. * similar in many ways to medieval papal 'indulgences', wakakaka In Malaysia we have such 'sanctified indulgences' too but of a political kind. But whether one needs to pay and in what form would depend on the political party.  For example, PAS' Pak Haji Nik Aziz had in an earlier election (2004) promised those who voted for PAS would virtually get a ticket to heaven.  Chinese and Indian towkays also had enjoyed, are enjoying and no doubt will enjoy 'indulgences' from UMNO and friends, where their 'heaven' is presided by the God of Wealth, wakakaka. During PKR's wooing of MIC wannabe defectors*, MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek had expressed puzzlement as to how the supposed sinners (MIC wannabe defectors) who leave BN to join PKR could become overnight saints. * wooing MIC wannabe defectors is essential as there has been a high turnover of Indians in PKR - don't believe me? ask Nallakaruppan, Gobalakrishnan, wakakaka. Overnight saints? Mucho 'indulgences' then, wakakaka. I also recall RPK had once written a piece that raised this same question about CJM, formerly one of MCA top leaders and now a PKR Vice President. In fact, CJM is PKR's top bloke in Johor. RPK has not only pointed out CJM's 'record' as BN Health Minister but also posted this. But let's ignore RPK lah since many of you who previously adored him now detest him, wakakaka. On the basis that CJM has been entrusted by none other than the Great One to spearhead PKR's campaign in Johor, a state identified by Pakatan (not just PKR) as a vital election battle ground in GE-13, we have to accept that CJM, despite his not inconsiderable MCA background and what RPK has written about him, has no doubt been beatified and then canonized, and is now a saint, all thanks to the Great One who has already granted an 'indulgence' for lucky CJM, wakakaka. Alas, we now have Karpal complaining about St Chua JM. Is Bhai Karpal playing Dr Mahathir's role, namely, that of the Devil, wakakaka? No, it's just that CJM misread Anwar's appointment of him as head of PKR's campaign in Johor. He thought he was head of Pakatan's campaign in Johor, wakakaka!  Don't you think he and Azmin Ali share such similar mistaken beliefs, wakakaka - thunderous applause please, wakakaka again. In another post Fixed deposits? What interests? I wrote of CJM as follows: I am reminded he was once in MCA, and while we shouldn't hold that against him as we shouldn't hold an UMNO past against Anwar, there are conditions for excusing his MCA background, equally as there would be for Anwar Ibrahim's UMNO lamentable track record. READ MORE HERE

You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

• The Art of Making Promises to Indians
• Anwar's Last Gamble
• Senator Xenophon in Malaysia Again?
• Australian Newspaper Calls Xenophon Foolish & Cynically Self-Promoting
• Are elections all about bribing?
• GE13 Should be Held on June 23, 2013
• A Non-tick for Nong Chik!
• PM Najib and Oppa Gangnam Penang Style
• No way, Hisham!

The Art of Making Promises to Indians Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:00 PM PST   P.M. Sivalingam   "If Pakatan Rakyat takes over Putrajaya, we will abolish tolls, we will abolish PTPTN, we will abolish excise duty to make foreign cars cheaper, we will bring down the price of petrol, free education for all right up to university, we will do this, we will do that….". These are the famous promises made by Anwar Ibrahim in his bid to become PM. He ignores the fact that even if he magically reduces corruption to zero, he still will not be able to pay for all these sweet promises.   We wonder why Anwar and his non-elected Indian advisors in PKR don't make or deliver promises that directly addresses the problems of the Indian community. Pakatan Rakyat has no specific agenda to help uplift Indians and provide specific long-term solutions. What Anwar and his cronies did was to belittle Indians with incredible and impossible promises, such as the promise of granting 300,000 ICs in 30 days. Realising how absurd his first promise was, he later changed his story and said that he will solve all citizenship issues in 100 days. This means he will identify 3,000 people every day, help them complete the necessary documentation and have the registration department and the police approve them all in one day!   A more recent statement by Anwar that he will implement Hindraf's five-year blueprint on resolving Indian community issue within 100 days after taking over Putrajaya once again proves that Anwar only knows to make incredible magical promises to buy Indian votes. He does this because he knows that he will never win Putrajaya as the vast majority of all foreign and domestic experts say that BN will maintain Federal control, and so he will never have to fulfil yet another promise to Indians.   On the other hand, Anwar refuses to sign Hindraf's pledge to address all issues contained in the blueprint. No one can explain why it is that when it comes to the Indian community, Anwar seems to discount the community and has NEVER committed himself and Pakatan Rakyat to resolving Indian issues. The much touted Buku Jingga is a collection of motherhood statements which PKR, PAS & DAP knows it can spin as there are absolutely no Indian specific promises to Indian specific problems.   When asked specifically on Friday, 15 Feb 2013, whether he would appoint an Indian as Deputy Prime Minister should Pakatan win the next GE, Anwar said he cannot commit to that as he does not want to make empty promises. Amusing though, when he can make empty populist promises for everyone, but when the Indians ask for something big, NO, we need to ask other Pakatan parties, we can't commit, read Buku Jingga and the list of excuses goes on….   Any logical person can see that Anwar & Pakatan will only make promises to Indians which are vague and whose execution depends on others. This way, when questioned later on, they can twist and turn and play with words and make many excuses of why it can't be done. On the other hand, when asked to make specific promises to Indians, neither Anwar nor any other Pakatan leader will do so.   On the question of an Indian DPM, the hapless Anwar was caught off guard also for one other important reason; there is NO senior enough elected Indian leader in Pakatan who can be made DPM. Of the supposedly thousands of Indian members in the DAP & PKR, only ONE is elected to the national leadership committee level, and even he is just an ordinary member of this committee. As we all know, PAS only allows Indians to be second-class members of its party and so no Indian candidate can come from there.   This situation of having no Indian leaders elected did not happen by accident, it is a traditional Anwar tactic to keep pliable and manipulable individuals such as Surendran & Xavier with him as they have absolutely zero power bases of their own. The Indians in Malaysia have a very important task of putting in place the right Government to deliver for them and lead the nation. Would they trust a man who has delivered specific solutions, resources and funds in the last 4 years to the Indian community that eclipsed what has been done for the last 40 years combined OR would they trust a man who thinks they are fools who will believe anything this "Shivaji the Boss" says?   Well, I think you can fool some Indians some of the time, but remember, you cannot fool all Indians all the time!

Anwar's Last Gamble Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:57 AM PST   Arasaratnam Mahalingam  Anwar Ibrahim has littered his recent political past with promises he cannot possibly keep. And now he has made the mother of all promises. He has promised to champion the race and religious specific cause of Hindraf. This promise could be his undoing. Anwar was quoted by the social media yesterday as saying that should Pakatan Rakyat assume federal power, Hindraf's five-year blueprint on resolving the Indian community's problems will be implemented within 100 days. Anwar knows he has bitten off more than he can chew. Why then did he make that promise? Simple. He was blinded by his all-consuming ambition to move into the Prime Minister's residence in Putrajaya. When asked at the meeting in Shah Alam on Friday night whether he would support Hindraf's six-point demands, he was caught between a rock and a hard place.  Since September last year, PKR had been dragging its feet when Hindraf asked it to endorse its blueprint for the Indian community. More recently, Hindraf leaders became impatient at PKR's foot-dragging. They warned that Pakatan's "inordinate delay" in endorsing the blueprint may result in the coalition losing Indian support in the coming election. So, this time around, if he had not made a firm commitment to Hindraf, his goose would have been cooked.  He would have permanently lost Hindraf support. Faced with that prospect, he was forced to respond positively. Now, Anwar has to face the consequences of his hasty reply. And the repercussions are grave for him, for his political party and for the opposition coalition. In essence, the Hindraf's six demands in its blueprint are Indian-specific. Therefore, by agreeing to back Hindraf's demands, Anwar has committed himself and unwittingly his Pakatan partners to fight for Indian causes. If he pursues this line, he will be dumped by the Malays and sabotaged by the Chinese, the Dayaks, Ibans and all the other natives of Sabah and Sarawak because he has not made similar promises to them. He will also have to face the wrath of his coalition partners who have made no similar concession to any other race-based NGO. Even the Buku Jingga, which the three partners cobbled together, is not race-specific. So how will Anwar try to extricate himself? Just as he has always tried to do. And that is by trying to be too clever by half. He tried that trick again at the gathering in Shah Alam. He refused to reduce his commitment to Hindraf in writing. He said he would not sign on the dotted line. Now that is his exit strategy.  Or so he thinks. Indians are no more the gullible people Anwar takes them to be. They are wise to Anwar's double talk.  They won't rest till they get the PKR Supremo to give them a written undertaking to support their blueprint.  They will not settle for anything less. Anwar's 2013 commitment to Hindraf also means he agrees to their demand to end 'institutionalised racism', a term which is their label for special privileges benefitting only Bumiputeras.  But what has been Anwar's public stand on this issue of Bumiputera special privileges? In 2009, Anwar defended Malays' special privileges and added that these rights should not be questioned by non-Malays. He has since not changed his stand. So, Anwar stands for Malay special privileges and also supports Hindraf's call to abolish them? Surely Anwar has dug his own grave. He has made a promise to Hindraf that he can't keep. But maybe he always knew this to be the case and was simply playing for time. Anwar will also be in hot soup with his coalition partners for not seeking their sanction before making his commitment to Hindraf. Their prior consent is necessary, said PKR Vice-President Tian Chua. Tian Chua was recently quoted as saying that "when it comes to formulating a political programme, we have stressed to Hindraf that PKR will not act unilaterally or without consensus from all 3 "partners" in Pakatan Rakyat. The blueprint proposed by Hindraf must first be presented to the Pakatan Rakyat leadership council for discussion and approval. This process is yet to take place, therefore it is too early to announce the signing of any agreement." Observers say this promise was another of Anwar's ploys.  He has no intention of keeping his promise, and that's why he is refusing to sign the document. He is simply lying to Indians just to get their votes.  He will ditch them afterwards. What has hitherto been his or his coalition partners' record when it comes to championing Indian causes anyway? The answer; a very disappointing and weak record. Distrusted by many Malays, viewed with suspicion by many Indians, and treated with caution by many Chinese, is Anwar Ibrahim on a roller coaster ride to political oblivion? The answer…

Senator Xenophon in Malaysia Again? Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:37 AM PST   Eunece Teh   SENATOR Nick Xenophon's deportation from Malaysia is regrettable. Given the close ties between Canberra and Kuala Lumpur, it is not unreasonable to have expected the Malaysian authorities to have adopted a less heavy-handed approach when he arrived at the country's international airport as part of a delegation of Australian MPs looking at election arrangements. That said, the gadfly senator from South Australia, unless he is naive, cannot be surprised by the less than welcoming reception he received. He has, after all, long been an outspoken and at times intemperate critic of Malaysia's government. Last year, he was in the thick of an anti-government demonstration in Kuala Lumpur led by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. More recently, he is said to have acted as an emissary on behalf of Mr Anwar, carrying a letter to the Gillard government warning of possible fraud in the country's election. Even Malaysia's palm oil industry has been in Senator Xenophon's sights; he has demanded labelling to show if it is from deforested areas, produced in a way that endangers orang-utang habitats. Authorities in Kuala Lumpur have become increasingly irritated by Senator Xenophon's insertion of himself into their domestic political processes, especially with a general election just around the corner. Malaysian officials are legitimately asking what the response would be in Australia if one of their parliamentarians turned up in Canberra to lecture us. Senator Xenophon's grandstanding does neither himself nor Australia any good. He needs to understand that he is an Australian parliamentarian, not a Malaysian politician doing the bidding of the country's opposition. Foreign Minister Bob Carr is, however, right to express his "surprise and disappointment" over the deportation and that no ill should come from having an Australian senator observe the Malaysian election. The trouble is that by becoming a participant in the political processes of another country, Senator Xenophon has compromised any authority he might otherwise have had in making criticism. Valid concerns do exist about the conduct of the election. Authoritarianism and possible fraud are issues. But, as Senator Carr says, Malaysia's elections are a matter for the Malaysian people, and that is something Senator Xenophon would do well to recognise.

Australian Newspaper Calls Xenophon Foolish & Cynically Self-Promoting Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:32 AM PST   Senator Nick Xenophon is deluded into thinking that the Malaysian government is an oppressive draconian regime. There is simply one good reason behind this thinking: He is a friend of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's biggest liar and political chameleon.   Imran Sulaiman   "NICK Xenophon's actions regarding Malaysia are either foolish or cynically self-promoting in a year in which he faces re-election," wrote Greg Sheridan in The Australian. Mind you, this is in an Australian news portal. Obviously not run by UMNO or the Malaysian government. While many may regard Senator Xenophon as a sort of fighter for democracy, others regard him as a troublemaking outsider meddling with the affairs of a sovereign nation. Last year, Xenophon landed in hot soup when he was explicitly involved in the Bersih 3.0 rally. His foolish act to deliberately support the Bersih cause showed that he had no respect for the Malaysian Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 that specifically mentions in Section 4(2)(a) "a person commits an offence if being a non-citizen, he organizes or participates in an assembly and should be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit." Let's not forget that he also broke the Geneva Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961. Article 41 Paragraph 1 clearly states, "It is the duty of all persons enjoying the privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state and have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of the State." Senator Nick Xenophon is deluded into thinking that the Malaysian government is an oppressive draconian regime. There is simply one good reason behind this thinking: He is a friend of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's biggest liar and political chameleon. December last year Xenophon was embarrassed in his own senate when Australian foreign minister Bob Carr rejected his motion to send election observers to Malaysia. Bob Carr immediately responded that it would be inappropriate for Australia to interfere with Malaysia's elections just as it would be "for Malaysia or another government to have a say in how Australian elections are run." Greg Sheridan shared Carr's insight in The Australian. He wrote, "Xenophon wants the Australian government to send electoral monitors to the forthcoming Malaysian election. This idea is stupid and impractical." "Why isn't he in Vietnam, leading protests outside the jails where Buddhists and Catholics are incarcerated? Why isn't he in Cambodia, inquiring about the elections that keep Hun Sen permanently in power?" added the journalist. Malaysia is one of the most democratic and freewheeling nations in Southeast Asia. It is redundant to ask, "how do you explain the ruling coalition losing its two-third majority and 5 states?" but I will keep on asking. Because there are people out there who easily forget. Malaysia has every right to deny Xenophon entry to this peaceful and prosperous country. Immigration Department Director General stated that Xenophon was denied entry because he broke Malaysian Immigration Law during his last visit. The Malaysian government took no action on him the last time, why should we as a sovereign nation entertain this maverick Australian politician the second time? Respect our laws, and we will respect you. Right now, for Malaysia, you are a persona non grata, Nick. In other words, you are not welcome here.

Are elections all about bribing? Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:30 AM PST   Instead of debating their policies and ideas to overcome the predicament faced by the people, BN leaders are resorting to bribing voters in order to stay in power, laments P Ramakrishnan. Never ever did we have an occasion when the Barisan Nasional Government had indulged in such a blatant form of corruption as have in recent times! For almost a year, the Prime Minister has been on a bribing binge to entice Malaysians with all kinds of goodies and cash payments. Let us not misunderstand or misinterpret this BN gesture as the generosity of a caring government. It is only the reaction of a frightened government that stands to lose its grip on power and foolishly thinks that voters can be bought easily to avert the impending disaster! If it was the generosity of a caring heart, then this so-called-assistance could have been the order of the day as soon as Najib took over as Prime Minister from his predecessor in 2009. But that did not take place. Only when he realised that Malaysians are truly fed up with the BN for all the policies that only favoured the cronies and marginalised the majority of Malaysians without connections did he – in dire desperation – resort to bribing the voters! Does he really think that all these years of neglect and indifference to the plight of the poor and the weak will be obviated by suddenly splashing money and appearing to be caring? Does he really think that Malaysians have such a short memory that all the past ills, exploitation, corruption and plundering will be forgotten and forgiven? This was what Tun Mahathir used to think – and it worked in his time not because Malaysians were insensitive to his rotten governance. It was simply because he was all powerful that he could detain Malaysians at will, rob them of their freedom and liberty – on false charges as happened to Anwar – and put the fear into them. But the rakyat remembered how innocent people had to pay a heavy price so that he could continue to remain in power. Payback time came in March 2008 and the voters really relished routing the BN in four states and denying them their two-thirds majority in parliament! Coming back to the point, how is it that there is so much money now to throw about so freely to entice the voters but incredibly there is no money when it comes to deserving causes and needs? Many necessary and vital drugs are not available to the poor and the disadvantaged at general hospitals – in contrast to how powerful people seem to get everything for nothing – simply because there is insufficient allocation for the needs of the poor. Nexium, for example, is an effective drug for gastritis. I was on it once and it helped me tremendously. I asked the doctor who prescribed it to me what it was. And he replied, "This is what doctors take when they have gastritis!" Recently I was with a friend when he went to see the specialist about his medication. He was suffering from a severe case of gastritis. I related to the specialist my own experience as to how Nexium helped me greatly. He curtly replied, "If we give Nexium to every patient, the government will go bankrupt." It was a stupid response. You don't prescribe Nexium to every patient – only to the deserving and those in real need of it. If it is true that the government can go bankrupt by making available effective drugs to people who are sick, why is it that it doesn't go bankrupt by throwing billions of ringgit indiscriminately to bribe the voters? The government coffers are seemingly bottomless when it comes to enticing the voters but strangely it seems hard-pressed for cash when it comes to the essentials. But these doctors have no qualms in prescribing this expensive medicine to their friends and the titled patients who come to them. Economic consideration only comes to play when the poor are involved! Likewise, poor heart patients don't have access to effective medication because they are expensive – but they are essential and necessary for certain heart patients. Strangely, it can be dispensed to the wealthy and the connected without a second thought. But it seems to become a problem when it has to be dispensed to the poor. Last year that there was a big cut in the allocation for medicine, causing problems in purchasing medicine and for this year again there was a reduction of 50 per cent – which will make it even more difficult for the poor to obtain their medication at general hospitals. Not only that, there was also a 50 per cent reduction for in-service training programmes in the Penang General Hospital which are meant to improve the skills and enhance the knowledge of hospital personnel. It is imperative that this training be continued so that doctors and staff can be kept up to date with medical developments in the interest of the patients under their care. Certain equipment could not be purchased by the general hospital because there was no allocation last year. As a result, certain investigations have to be carried out at private hospitals with the necessary equipment at exorbitant costs – which is not a problem to the wealthy. But for the poor it is a long wait stretching over many months before they can have access to this facility. Some sadly don't make it through the long wait. In certain departments at the hospital, doctors are squeezed into cubicles because there is no allocation for expansion. They work in extremely taxing conditions with little or no space for themselves and their patients. Is it a wonder that many doctors prefer to go to the private sector where they are more comfortable and earn many times what they are paid in government hospitals? Welfare assistance and pensions for old timers are shockingly meagre in these times of rising prices and hardship. They deserve to be given extra assistance monthly so that they can live in dignity. When it comes to regular assistance, there is no money but when it comes to one-off giveaways that run into billions, we are never short of money. But Najib is simply throwing money in a one-off effort to win over voters, not minding whether it is prudent or otherwise. What is the point in throwing money for smart phones? Who benefits from this scheme? Likewise giving RM100 and RM200 to students irrespective of their financial background makes no sense. Why give to the wealthy students? By not giving to the well-to-do students, more could be given to deserving poor students. That would be meaningful assistance. That would make economic sense. As for the recipients of Brim 1.0 and 2.0, what do they do after the one-off payments? How do they survive for the rest of the year? Shouldn't they be put on welfare assistance so that their lives will be less burdensome? But Najib is not interested in long-term assistance to the deserving. He is only interested with his immediate problem: how to get elected! We cannot have a government that places so much importance on its survival and cares very little in solving the long-term hardship of the citizens. We cannot condone the conduct of a corrupt government that goes around bribing the voters. Instead of debating their policies and ideas to overcome the predicament faced by the people, the BN leaders are resorting to bribing in order to stay in power. All that they are good for is money politics and nothing else! We must destroy this culture of corruption. That can only be done by getting rid of the BN!  P Ramakrishnan is the immediate past president of Aliran

GE13 Should be Held on June 23, 2013 Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:24 AM PST   There has been a lot of pressure by the opposition and the alternative media to call for an early election whether for political reasons or otherwise. As for the ruling government, they are maximizing the window period to dish out as many goodies as they can to make it favorable to them whereas the opposition is only rushing it so they can be in power.      Wong Mun Chee  Naturally, the election date remains anyone's guess with speculation amidst the commentators, opposition politicians and the alternative media.     This speculation has been going on since early 2012 and they are still pressing hard for the answer to this one million dollar question.      Legally speaking, since the 12th parliamentary mandate expires on April 28, 2013, the Election Commission will be forced to hold an election within 60 days thereafter, thus being June 27, 2013         I actually chose June 23, 2013, a Sunday, allowing many registered voters to make their way to polling booths at their convenience.       There has been a lot of pressure by the opposition and the alternative media to call for an early election whether for political reasons or otherwise. As for the ruling government, they are maximizing the window period to dish out as many goodies as they can to make it favorable to them whereas the opposition is only rushing it so they can be in power.      As the general public, two months or four months more is not going to make such drastic difference to their well being who is eventually going to rule as long as the voter will have all the opportunities to weigh the scales without being political about it but rather what efforts are being taken to address the woes of the community.   Surely we all acknowledge that the ruling government has been the devil whereas the opposition seems to be the darling boy of the future, yet whether it is the devil or the darling of tomorrow, what is the harm in waiting for another four months to gain as much as possible from these politicians to see whether their conviction is for the people's will or their own political will.   As we all know, these politicians are only seen around when the election is around, otherwise the public per se becomes irrelevant during the tenure that they reign. These politicians whether it is BN/PR have a tendency and the ability to be the clairvoyant to foretell what is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next year and then have the ability afterwards to explain why it did not happen.              I am sure we are mature enough to understand that the politicians are rarely truthful in their objectives for the community but rather the result of the election and what power that comes with it.      So, what is the rush for us the community for an election? Let the politicians dish out the goodies and make all the real promises that we can haunt them for if they are not able to fulfill it. Let's squeeze them dry for once for the better bargain that we can get for our community; an opportunity that only arises once every five years when the election is around.

A Non-tick for Nong Chik! Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:04 PM PST   At every street corner, a pasty face with creepy veneers and still hair would pounce out at unsuspecting motorists without woeful warning of the wimpy visage! Public property has been plastered with pimping portraits of bribe-brocaded BN bumpkins.   Shenaaz Khan 'Twas a glorious day indeed as devilry had ceased momentarily and I was met at my neighbourhood street junction by the fine featured face of the legitimate Lembah Pantai lawmaker. This was rather unorthodox of course, given the vile vindictive vandalism perpetuating through my Pakatan-held constituency. Having been a resident of Bangsar Baru for 38 years now, I have never quite witnessed such unashamed UMNO unlawfulness as I have in the last 2 years. The blatant breaching of by-laws has been bolstered with barefaced belligerence and Bolshevik brute! At every street corner, a pasty face with creepy veneers and still hair would pounce out at unsuspecting motorists without woeful warning of the wimpy visage! Public property has been plastered with pimping portraits of bribe-brocaded BN bumpkins. And patches of grass outside private homes have been plunged with BN billboards, erected on the directive of (SPOILER ALERT!) the Federal Territories Ministry! This nugget of information came as a terrible horrible shock to ABSOLUTELY NO ONE!! For awhile now, many Bangsar folk have been subjected to this menacing modus of a moustached mooching marauder called Raja Nong Chik. A non parliamentarian and kitchen entrance minister, Raja Nong Chik is, for all intents and purposes, a perfidious politician who offensively plies the peasants of Pantai Valley with his patrician pity! And with hideous regularity, he is seen bouncing about and brunching with the Bob's and Betty's of Bangsar, venturing to vulture votes. Hardly acts of hardiment one would think! Nonetheless his blog boasts a sudden stellar track record of service to the people of Lembah Pantai and could lead one to believe that Nong can do no wrong!! His catalogue of kindness includes stalking, soliciting and spamming the simple people of Lembah Pantai! Yes, everywhere a voter wanders, there he is. Just a fortnight ago, I received a box emblazoned with his smug mug, filled with festive fruit. Actually for this, I was rather thankful as I quite enjoy ingesting oranges and my cats love turning cardboard into confetti. But the endless stream of text messages, mails and postcards pointlessly piled onto Pantairians carrying the "Nong Chik is no chickadee" chants has all but made many quite sick of Nong Chik. Yes, much like the Great Mustachio Prime Minister NAJ1B, who drums for support with a demeanour that demands a diuretic, Nong Chiks ballot begging has produced bile in many bellies. And Bangsar bellies are further upchucked by Chiks bastionhood of banner bullying. Yes, BANNER BULLYING! Tis a riveting game of brashly binning banners of one's foe and then brandishing beastly banners bearing BN blockheads! The cheek of him! Now the Nong-Nurul imbroglio has courted much contempt from both campaigning camps! Hence, last week, the democratically elected Member of Parliament for Lembah Pantai, Nurul Izzah Anwar, invited the resident rounding Raja to a public powwow on policies and performances. She proposed a date and a bipartisan mediator. But the foul fowl frowned upon the offer as he has a debilitating disdain for democracy and diplomacy! This was abundantly justified of course, as a debate debacle could easily prove Nong to be one humongous nought! To those who have beheld the idiocy of indignation, it was delightfully obvious that Nuruls' debate demand dilemma-ed dear Nong and frightened the faeces out of the FT fronter, who favours flibberti-gibberti falsehoods to irrefutable facts! Now I don't mean to get philosophical, but Nong is no Nietzsche and is more accustomed to spin than Spinoza. So he says NO to his nemesis, feebly fearing that Nurul, the novice, would nimbly numb his neurons with nuanced knowledge of his niggling nepotism. A King among cowards, he instead opts to spinelessly spew spiteful slander from platforms made of plastercine and pipes and trumpet his trivial triumphs to troupers, trustees and Tamagotchis. Mindful that any public debate would expose Nurul's natty nature against his nonsensical natter, the mischievous minister maligns my MP's movement with madcap monologue. Two days ago, amidst a barrage of barren bollocks, the cowardly Chik commanded us to feverishly fear the onslaught of dingling democracy should those tongue twisting, freedom frothing, homosexual hosting Opposition win the next general elections! The ninth circle of hell will then be upon us and we shall become the Nubian slaves of Godless heathens! Malaysia shall be imperilled, for the Opposition is going to Khmer our Rouge and hurl us into Das Kapital damnation! How very tragic! Yes, Nong certainly neighed some knee-slapping nuttiness when he compared the Opposition to the Khmer Rouge. My, my, such asinine assertions would confound both Mulder and Scully alike! One can't help but be nonplussed by Nong's nonsense. His chid of the Khmer Rouge is like the pot calling the Pol Pot black! It is after all the BN regiment that represses the rights of its rakyat with racial and religious discrimination and rampant abuse of power! And they do this all while taking a whack at the nation's wealth. Poor Raja- his thoughts must have been stuck at the taxidermist and he must have confused the Khmer Rouge with Moulin Rouge. But if Raja Nong Chik wishes to invoke horrible histories, he ought to reflect upon these hard-hitting truths of yesteryears- Elmer Fudd never killed Bugs Bunny, Wile E Coyote never out ran the road runner and Gargamel could not impede the smurfs from becoming Ipad icons, even if it was the last thing he ever did! And Raja Nong Chik best remember that on March 8th 2008, the people of Lembah Pantai handed divorce papers to the malfeasant Madam Shahrizat and retained custody of our pride. We value our vale far too much to ever let anymore thieving, smirking BN overlords leech on to our land. So, so long Nong! And may the rest of the nation bid adieu to the BN blisters and their rotting residue!

PM Najib and Oppa Gangnam Penang Style Posted: 17 Feb 2013 11:56 AM PST   Najib's Oppa Gangnam in Penang has shown that he is serious about wanting to be a Prime Minister for all. For that, he has my respect. I hope he and those like him be they from BN, PR or civil society will continue to work towards being a Malaysian leader no matter what. Even if you receive millions of  'NOs!" Anas Zubedy  I grew up in Penang. I grew up amongst the Chinese, mainly Hokkiens. Thanks to the experience, I am familiar with them and conversant in their dialect.  Those who grew up amongst them will be familiar with their logic and reasoning during mediation. There is a favourite defence mechanism.  It goes like this; "Wa bo sa lah." [I'm not in the wrong] "Lu bo ka wa kong." [You didn't tell me (from the very beginning] "Lu bo sia lok lai ma." [There's no written agreement] The above sequence is an automatic response typically whenever they are in a debate or dispute. It's almost like a standard operating procedure. And because of this line of thinking, it is not entirely surprising that when the Prime Minister asked, "Is Penang ready for BN?" during the Chinese New Year gig; there are those among them who boldly answered 'No' without feeling any guilt. Let me explain. Unlike the Malays generally, the Penang Chinese do not easily feel 'terhutang budi' when someone extends a kind act as did the BN. When they extended a gift, like bringing Psy to Penang, many Penang Chinese generally do not see it as an obligation to be nice in return. Their reaction is simple, "I did not ask you to do it. If you do it… that is your problem lah." Basically, Wa bo sa lah. Lu bo ka wa kong. Lu bo sia lok lai ma. If Penang Gerakan or MCA hope they can wrestle the votes of Penang Chinese in favour of BN simply because they brought Psy to Penang, I will be genuinely surprised. It will be asking far too much. Penangites will go and have fun at the concert with Psy entertaining them, eat the free food, but they are still likely to vote for the DAP. There was no earlier 'agreement' to require voting for BN in return for the kind act of bringing Psy and the party; and therefore, they do not feel that they are in the wrong. Wa bo sa lah. Lu bo ka wa kong. Lu bo sia lok lai ma. This is especially true where DAP supporters are concern. As their leader, CM Lim Guan Eng openly told them it is okay to be a freeloader and go have free fun, eat the free food, and dress in symbolic opposition colours. But does that mean BN had a public relations disaster as per pro-opposition pundits are trying to sell? Not at all! Unfortunately today in Malaysia, extreme partisanship has made critics from both sides exaggerate situations way far off reality with the hope to paint the other side as bad as possible and colour their side as best as they could.  Through the CNY show BN may have achieved the following. 1.    The Chinese New Year gathering  has reminded the Penang Chinese that BN/Gerakan/MCA are still around, can still move things in a big way and Penang is not the monopoly of the DAP. It was an occasion for BN to engage the rakyat directly. The event was a good PR opportunity for a re-launch of sorts. 2.    Furthermore, the Penang rakyat including hard core DAP supporters get to meet, see, and listen to the Prime Minister in person. With his earnest effort to woo and mingle with the grassroots it helps to bolster the image of a leader who mati-mati wants to be a Prime Minister for all Malaysians. By stressing that he wants to be the Prime Minister for all, including the Chinese who currently are seen solidly with the opposition sits well among the fence sitters of all races. His willingness to risk going into 'an enemy territory' and be humbled and snubbed portrays him as a leader who is soft in the outside but very strong in the inside. 3.    Chances are those who answered either 'yes' or 'no' to the Prime Minister at the gathering, would have answered the same regardless. But this event is advantageous to the BN for it is luring the fence-sitters. And they form the bulk of the electoral roll nationwide. What happens in Penang does not stay only in Penang.  Both BN and PR should worry about what these non-partisan undecided voters think of BN and PM Najib after the event instead of focussing on hard core supporters from each side who are already decided. In this coming election, the non-partisans are the kingmakers. 4.    As suggested in item 3, what happens in Penang does not stay in Penang. I have strong convictions that scores of Malays will not take kindly that a 'Malay' leader like PM Najib has been snubbed openly by a mainly Chinese crowd. Many Malays will see this as rude, unbecoming, and uncultured. In the Malay way of being and ideals, when one comes bearing 'gifts' – in this case, an international star performer and good food – and you decide to take it, at the least one must be courteous and considerate. Acting any other way can be construed as 'tak berterima kasih' and ill-mannered. Some will say, if they can do it to Najib a Prime Minister, imagine what will they do to us, we the rakyat jelata. At most, from a Malay standpoint, one should just remain silent instead of answering 'No'. By not saying 'yes' it will mean 'no', but in a nicer way. Malays are sensitive to such things.  In the late 90s, many Malays while not being Anwar's supporters and may even agree with Dr Mahathir's point of view did not take kindly with the manner the former DPM was treated. Such behaviour by the Penangites, coupled with other incidents like CM Lim Guan Eng using the Allah issue in his Christmas message for political purpose (which probably baffled even people in PAS his own comrades in PR) and the recent rude 'gesturing' to Her Majesty The Queen by someone many Malays see as a DAP supporter will make them rasa was-was with the DAP leadership. This will have a direct impact on the average Malays be they from UMNO, PAS, PKR or party less. In short, Malaysian politics is far more complicated and sophisticated and by far more dynamic than one might aspect. For example, when CM Lim Guan Eng uses the Allah issue for political purpose perhaps to gain the support of the Christians in Sabah and Sarawak, he dented his own team mates in PAS and PKR within the Peninsular. Similarly, when Ibrahim Ali and right wing Malay groups like Perkasa reacted by suggesting the burning of the Bahasa Malaysia Bible, the act will move various parties in differing ways. In short, what one group does have repercussion in many forms across the nation. Playing to one group, will affect another – it is no easy task to win the leadership of Malaysia. Leaders must find a delicate balance. To lead this nation, and to be Prime Minister of Malaysia, each candidate no matter if you are in a Malay or Chinese stronghold; in Penang or Kelantan or Sabah or Sarawak you must be a leader for all. It is not enough to have the Malays supporting you. You also need the support of the Chinese, the Indians, and the communities of Sabah and Sarawak. You will need the support of people in urban areas and rural areas. You will need support from the old, the middle aged, and the young. In doing so, a Malay leader cannot be too Malay, the Chinese cannot be too Chinese, the Indians cannot be too Indian, the Sabahans cannot be too Sabahan, the Sarawakians cannot be too Sarawakian. They all have to be Malaysian first. Najib's Oppa Gangnam in Penang has shown that he is serious about wanting to be a Prime Minister for all. For that, he has my respect. I hope he and those like him be they from BN, PR or civil society will continue to work towards being a Malaysian leader no matter what. Even if you receive millions of  'NOs!"

No way, Hisham! Posted: 16 Feb 2013 03:19 PM PST Nicole Tan Lee Koon I would like to comment on Hishamuddin's statement on the 16th of Feb, 2013 that the Registrar Of Societies can investigate DAP and DAP run the risk of being deregistered just like UMNO in 1987 : http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/ros-boleh-mula-siasat-dap-kata-hishamuddin/ In his haste to finish DAP off, Hishamuddin made a huge blunder by jumping the gun. His motive was manifested ever so clearly. The 60 days period that he mentioned can be found in Section 14 of the Societies Act 1966. Section 14 stipulates that every registered society shall forward to the Registrar inter alia, copies of AGM minutes; attendance; amendments to rules (if any); list of office bearers; address of the society; accounts within 60 days after the holding of its annual general meeting. For those who are familiar, it is actually the filing of Borang 9 returns. DAP has filed the necessary returns in accordance to Section 14 as confirmed by  DAP NS State Chairman and also National Organising Secretary , Anthony Loke Siew Fook in response to Hishamuddin's press statement on the same day.          What Hishamuddin meant was probably Section 16 which stipulates that if the Registrar is of the opinion that a dispute has occurred among the members as a result of which the Registrar is not satisfied of the identity of the persons who have been properly constituted as office-bearers of the society, the Registrar may serve notice on the society requiring the society, within one month of the service of such notice, to produce to him evidence of the proper appointment of the lawful office-bearers of the society and if any such notice is not complied with to the satisfaction of the Registrar within the period of one month, the Registrar may take steps to cancel the registration of the society. What the ROS should have done was to issue the notice pursuant to Section 16, which the ROS did not do so. I opine that even if the notice was issued, DAP does not run the risk of being de-registered as follows. Firstly, pursuant to Section 16, we can produce evidence of the proper appointment of the lawful office bearers i.e the internal and external auditors' reports which clearly states that the manual counting and results were proper and valid. However, there was a "copy and paste" error when the results were transcribed to the computer. The mistake was then rectified.  Secondly, under Sections 18A-18C (provisions applicable to political parties only), where there is any inconsistency between Sections 18A-18C and any provisions in the Act, Sections 18A-18C shall prevail. Section 18C stipulates that the decision of a political party on any matter relating to the affairs of the party shall be final and conclusive and such decision shall not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed, quashed or called in question in any court on any ground, and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any suit, application, question or proceeding on any ground regarding the validity of such decision. I repeat emphatically that the decision of a political party on any matter shall be final and conclusive. What more having been vindicated by the external auditor's report. When UMNO was deregistered in 1987, they wanted to ensure that history does not repeat itself and hence enacted Section 18C.  Chedet pre-empted any moves by political opponents to de-register a political party back in 1987 (but Section 18C only took effect in 1990). Therefore, Hishamuddin is wrong to say that DAP situation is the same as the time UMNO was deregistered. Karmic ? Further, the Court in the case of Pendaftar Pertubuhan Malaysia v PV Das (Bagi Pihak People's Progressive Party of Malaysia (PPP)) concluded that under the circumstance the election of the plaintiff as President of PPP and the approval and endorsement of the defendant's Presidency of the PPP are the decisions of a political party within the meaning of Section 18C of the Act and that the business of electing the president or the approval and endorsement of the president are 'matters relating to the affairs of the party'. Therefore, decisions on such matter in the view of the Court are final and conclusive decisions and the court has no jurisdiction to question the validity of such decisions. Section 18C of the Societies Act makes such disputes matters of internal affairs of the political parties and a non-justiciable political question not fit for judicial determination. The section precludes the courts from exercising jurisdiction in matters relating to the internal affairs of political parties.  De-register DAP ? No way, Hisham !!  I urge the Home Minister to do some homework before making a press statement which threatens to deregister a formidable rival political party !   Nicole Tan Lee Koon Secretary, Seremban branch, DAP NS Tweet handle : @loyarbaik Facebook : http://www.facebook.com/nicoletanleekoon Facebook Page : http://www.facebook.com/nicoleleekoontan Blog : Nicole Tan Lee Koon, Social Politico

You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

• Keluar Pakatan: Dewan Ulamak PAS sokong Hadi
• Xenophon dikritik campur tangan politik Malaysia
• ‘I Love New PM’ sambut Anwar di majlis Dong Zong

Keluar Pakatan: Dewan Ulamak PAS sokong Hadi Posted: 17 Feb 2013 02:42 PM PST Ketua Penerangan Dewan Ulamak PAS Pusat, Datuk Nik Muhammad Zawawi Salleh berkata, pihaknya sentiasa mempertahankan kepentingan Islam melebihi kepentingan-kepentingan yang lain. Pada masa sama Dewan Ulamak PAS menyokong penuh kenyataan Presiden PAS Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang bahawa PAS akan keluar dari Pakatan Rakyat jika ia merugikan Islam. "Kami percaya ucapan beliau tersebut adalah tersangat jelas dan ianya merupakan satu jaminan PAS kepada umat Islam dan seluruh rakyat Malaysia bahawa kepentingan Islam akan terus dipertahankan oleh PAS dan ianya adalah penentu keberadaan PAS dalam Pakatan. "PAS tetap setia dengan Pakatan selagimana kepentingan Islam menjadi keutamaan dan agenda utama," katanya dalam satu kenyataan media. Abdul Hadi memberi jaminan tersebut ketika berucap di himpunan kebangkitan rakyat PAS Ganti Umno (PGU) 7.0 di Kampung Banggol Peradong, Terengganu Sabtu lalu. Presiden PAS dipetik sebagai berkata "PAS memberi jaminan kerjasama dengan parti Pakatan Rakyat dengan DAP, dengan PKR selagi dapat mempertahankan Melayu Islam. "Sekiranya kerjasama itu merugikan Melayu Islam, merugikan Islam…PAS keluar dari Pakatan Rakyat dan tidak ada ragu-ragu lagi. Sehingga hari ini, kita (PAS) bersama Pakatan Rakyat" Nik Muhammad Zawawi  berkata, rakan-rakan di dalam Pakatan Rakyat dan seluruh rakyat hendaklah memahami serta menghayati akan perjuangan dan prinsip perjuangan Islam yang dibawa oleh PAS. Sejarah telah membuktikan betapa konsistennya PAS dalam agenda dan usaha ini, kata beliau lagi. "PAS akan mengkaji kedudukannya dalam Pakatan Rakyat sekiranya ianya membawa kerugian kepada kepentingan Islam dan umat Islam di Malaysia. Dalam masa yang sama agenda keadilan Islam kepada seluruh bangsa di Malaysia akan terus menjadi dasar perjuangan PAS dalam usaha meruntuhkan kezaliman terutamanya apa yang telah dan sedang dilakukan oleh kerajaan pimpinan Umno BN sekarang," tambah beliau.

Xenophon dikritik campur tangan politik Malaysia Posted: 17 Feb 2013 02:34 PM PST Editor berita luar negara akhbar The Australian, Greg Sheridan, berkata tindakan Xenophon meminta kerajaan Australia memantau pilihan raya umum di Malaysia nanti adalah "bodoh dan tidak praktikal". Sheridan juga menuduh Xenophon "berkempen hanya untuk sebelah pihak politik Malaysia — pihak pembangkang". Beliau berkata Menteri Luar Bob Carr bertindak betul dengan tidak memperbesarkan isu pengusiran Xenophon dan dengan bersetuju terhadap kenyataan rakan sejawatannya dari Malaysia bahawa isu itu tidak akan menjejaskan hubungan kedua-dua negara. "Carr tidak perlu mengambil tindakan lanjut berhubung perkara itu dan kemungkinan pun tidak," katanya. "Mereka (Malaysia) sepatutnya sama ada memberitahu Xenophon lebih awal yang beliau tidak diterima masuk atau sepatutnya membiarkan sahaja lawatan itu tanpa disedari. "Bagaimanapun, apabila berdepan dengan ahli politik Australia yang mencampuri urusan politik negara dalam beberapa perkara akan memberi kelebihan kepada parti pemerintah. "(Tindakan) beliau boleh mencerminkan bahawa pihak yang beliau sokong mungkin mempunyai elemen paling kukuh sebagai parti Islam paling ekstrem dalam arus utama politik di Asia Tenggara," kata Sheridan. Memberi contoh masalah pilihan raya di Vietnam dan Kemboja, Sheridan berkata Malaysia "dalam sudut apa sekalipun ialah antara negara paling demokratik dan bebas di Asia Tenggara". "Pilihan rayanya mungkin tidak sempurna, tetapi mereka lebih baik daripada kebanyakan negara lain di dunia. "Malah, keterbukaannya membolehkan individu seperti Xenophon untuk menunjuk-nunjuk di sana."

‘I Love New PM’ sambut Anwar di majlis Dong Zong Posted: 16 Feb 2013 04:02 PM PST Kehadiran Anwar bersama isteri dan pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat disambut dengan tiga plakad bertulis 'I Love New PM'. Plakad sama sebelum itu digunakan ketika menyambut kehadiran Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak sebelum ia diubah suai dengan menambah perkataan 'new' iaitu baru bagi menyambut kehadiran Anwar. Salah satu plakad itu juga menambah 'I Love New PM Anwar'. Anwar tiba kira-kira jam 11.30 pagi. Sama seperti Najib, Anwar juga tidak menyampaikan sebarang ucapan kepada kira-kira 5,000 hadirin yang menghadiri sambutan Tahun Baru Cina kali ketiga anjuran Dong Zong yang bertempat di Kolej New Era di sini. Sama seperti ketika menyambut kehadiran Najib, acara "Lao Shang" dan aneka persembahan turut disajikan kepada rombongan Anwar. Meskipun begitu, masyarakat yang hadir dilihat begitu teruja melihat Anwar dan bersalaman dengan pemimpin itu. Bahkan laungan reformasi turut kedengaran. Turut mengiringi Anwar ialah Adun Kajang, Lee Kim Sin; Penasihat DAP, Lim Kit Siang; Naib Presiden Pas, Datuk Mahfuz Omar dan Naib Presiden PKR, Tian Chua.

You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net