Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Two time-bombs in Sabah
- Anwar Ibrahim’s welfarist manifesto makes decision difficult
- Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #6
- Sabah, Merdeka and Aquino
- Harris’ RM 200m formula a non-starter
- Pakatan manifesto leaves many ‘perplexed’
- Politicians in heat
- Lahad Datu invasion: The real story?
- BN using Anwar to confuse voters?
- Populist policies will hit us hard
- Silence is easy
- A manifesto that hoodwinks voters
- Busy fighting the enemy within
- Hey, where's my share?
| Posted: 04 Mar 2013 01:53 PM PST
Lim Mun Fah, Sinchew.com The deadly clashes in Sabah after the intrusion of a Sulu army took place at the most sensitive period when the country is counting down to the general election. Inevitably, it has triggered all kinds of speculation while showing us how some netizens simply comment and criticise in this Internet age. Many people do not know the history of Sabah and have no idea about the gunmen claiming to be the Royal Army of the Sulu Sultanate, let alone the army's historical grievances with the Brunei Sultanate, Spain and the British colonial government. They just simply commented and criticised. Of course, it is now a democratic era and no one can stop netizens from commenting on the issue. However, remarks made with a lack of basic historical knowledge and international perspective will easily tend to be superficial and turn out as a tool to vent emotions. Therefore, when the government negotiated with the Sulu army, some questioned why the government did not just open fire and annihilate them; and after an outbreak of clashes, some people wondered why the police force, not the military, was deployed. Some ridiculed when they heard that a few policemen were killed and some even related the issue to a conspiracy theory and questioned why we do not just give it back since it is other people's territory. Frankly speaking, not all netizens have commented pointlessly. Many people would like to know the answers to some questions and the government needs to clarify them as soon as possible. However, we should always remember a non-negotiable principle, that is, Sabah is part of Malaysia, and territory and sovereignty are sacred and inviolable. The Sulu Sultanate is a collapsed administration and is now only part of the Philippines. As for Sabah, it has joined Sarawak and Malaya, also Singapore at that time, to form Malaysia, with the recognition of the United Nations. The Philippines has also given up its territorial claim based on this unalterable fact. History is not a black-and-white picture. In fact, all countries today are result of historical agreements, despite some agreements being unfair. There are only about 200 countries in the world today; if countries are formed based on religion and language (there are about 8,000 languages in the world), it would be an unimaginable chaotic scene. Therefore, the problem to be resolved is not whether more independent countries should be built based on religion or language, but whether the existing countries can respect and be fair to every one of their citizens, regardless of race, religion and language. The Lahad Datu standoff is undoubtedly a great challenge to the government's crisis management capabilities. The quality of any decisions and actions of the government could bring impact to the next general election. Regardless of the election results, the Sabah state government and the federal government must face up to the Sulu Sultanate's threats in the future. How are they going to prevent the Sulu army from intruding Sabah again? How are they going to solve the bitter fruit of illegal immigrant issue (According to the Philippine media, at least 8,500 Filipinos are staying in Sabah.)? The people will continue to feel ill until the two time-bombs are dismantled!
|
| Anwar Ibrahim’s welfarist manifesto makes decision difficult Posted: 03 Mar 2013 06:30 PM PST
Wan Saiful Wan Jan, TMI I congratulate Pakatan Rakyat (PR) for launching its manifesto recently. PR has always wanted to shift Malaysia's political debate from one that is obsessed with race and religion towards policy. By launching their manifesto early, PR under Anwar Ibrahim shows continuous commitment to making our country a more mature democracy. I am very impressed with what PR has achieved over the years. Unlike Barisan Nasional (BN) which has access to the vast federal government machinery, PR has very limited resources. Yes, PR may be able to tap into the resources of a few states — and they do — but that is miniscule compared to what BN can access at the federal level. Therefore it is no mean feat for PR to come out with something as major as this manifesto. Clearly they are preparing for government, and they are very serious in wanting to transform Malaysia. If all our politicians are as committed to mature policy debates as the PR leaders, Malaysia would be a much better country. Dubbed as "The People's Manifesto", the document contains some wonderful proposals to enhance our political freedom. My favourite one is actually the very first thing listed in the manifesto — "eliminating racial discrimination and the incitement of antagonism between community groups to ensure the people's unity and harmony". This is a promise that all parties will make, but, I think BN has failed miserably to show commitment to this important agenda. I have not seen strong enough attempts by BN's top leadership to even dissociate themselves from the many inflammatory statements and incidences that have taken place over the last few months. Thus my hope on this aspect is with PR. PR dedicated a whole section to describe how they would improve the way government is run and improve our political freedom. There are clear promises to remove political interference from the civil service, make elections more clean and transparent, reform the judiciary as well as the MACC and the police force, strengthen Parliament, restore media freedom, and enhance academic freedom. These are reforms that our country very much need. Unfortunately that is where the good news ends. If one were to analyse the document from a liberal perspective, one would quickly find that the overall spirit of the manifesto is quite scary. Frankly, with this manifesto, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's coalition looks set to make Malaysia a welfare state, and catapult us firmly to the left. The vision underpinning this manifesto is actually very well summarised in a line on the very last page of the document, in an imaginary letter written by a common Malaysian after 10 years of PR government. The sentence reads "Most importantly, I am proud that the Malaysian administration has proven its ability to distribute and create prosperity for everyone." Perhaps it is just a Freudian slip, but the positioning of "distribute" before "create" explains exactly what this manifesto is about — i.e. a welfare state redistributionist agenda that puts more emphasis on how to spend rather than how to create wealth. The list of handouts, subsidies and costly initiatives is a long one. And it looks like under PR the tentacles government will be everywhere in our lives. Let's have a look at just some of them. In the workplace, PR will increase minimum wage to RM1,100 per month. If that's not enough to increase unemployment, PR will encourage employers to remove low-skilled workers by creating a RM2 billion fund "to provide automation incentives." I hasten to add that BN is the biggest culprit in this issue because it was the BN who introduced minimum wage in the first place. In dealing with an ageing society, even if you are a millionaire, PR will give you RM1,000 every year once you reach the age of 60. They call this a "Senior Citizens' Bonus Scheme." This is the first time I heard about people getting a bonus simply for ageing. To attract votes from the armed forces, PR promises to provide several types of handouts. They will create a RM500 million fund to assist the participation of ex-soldiers in economic activities. They will increase the government's contribution to Armed Forces Fund Board (LTAT) from 15 per cent to 20 per cent so that ex-soldiers have higher pension fund. And non-pensionable veterans will be given RM2,000 per year.
|
| Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #6 Posted: 03 Mar 2013 01:10 PM PST
PAS has two fundamental flaws. First, it is confused on whether to be a political party, meaning one that aspires to one day hold power and lead the country, or a religious entity. The two are not necessarily incompatible but PAS has yet to choose which one has the greater priority. The price for this blurring of objective is that the organization does not excel in either. M. Bakri Musa Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays Part 6. What is your view on PAS and its leadership? Do you think that their policies and struggles would usher or obstruct Malay/Muslim development in our country? [The original in Malay appeared in www. Surais.wordpress.com on Feb 20, 2013.] MBM: The leaders and policies of PAS do not impress me. That however, is irrelevant. More pertinent is that those leaders and their policies will cause Malays and Muslims to regress. Whether we would enter Paradise under PAS, only God knows, and He is not telling me or anyone else. PAS has two fundamental flaws. First, it is confused on whether to be a political party, meaning one that aspires to one day hold power and lead the country, or a religious entity. The two are not necessarily incompatible but PAS has yet to choose which one has the greater priority. The price for this blurring of objective is that the organization does not excel in either. Second, PAS is not democratic. The highest and ultimate authority lies not with its members, as it should be, rather an unelected Council of Ulamas. Worse, that council is restricted only to ulamas. Where is it written that only ulamas have the ability, wisdom or privilege to lead? In a democracy, the ultimate power must lie with voters or members. Were PAS to govern, would its ministers be answerable to Parliament or the Council of Ulamas? Which body has the higher and ultimate authority? According to our constitution, it is Parliament; to PAS, the Council of Ulamas. This is no small matter. Consider the current crisis in Iran where its unelected Majlis Syura is in conflict with the elected Parliament. I have no problem with the Ulama Council being merely advisory. The Ulama Council must respect and defer to Parliament. There is no place for anointed leadership in a democracy. Sovereignty lies with citizens. On another level, PAS is consumed with labels rather than content. Its leaders are obsessed with hudud and the Islamic State but fail to declare what they mean by those terms. Which Islam state do they hold up as a model? Iran and Saudi Arabia? Likewise with hudud; as non-Muslims are spared, criminals would be punished based not on the crimes they commit rather their faith. A Muslim committing adultery would be sentenced to death by stoning; a non-Muslim would suffer only the fury of their spouse. A Muslim caught stealing would have his hand chopped off; a non-Muslim would suffer merely a fine or jail sentence. Is that just? If it is not just, it cannot be Islamic. PAS has yet to address let alone reconcile this conflict. The party's greatest weakness is that its leadership core singularly lacks management talent. The skills needed for running a modern state are very different from that of being an ulama. The training, academic qualifications and experience of our ulamas are very narrow. They have never been exposed to the behavioral sciences, while their understanding of modern science and technology is abysmal. Their mindset is equally circumscribed. As for their political skills, PAS leaders have not shown the ability and aptitude for cooperating with like-minded players, specifically their fellow partners in Pakatan even on already agreed-upon goals. They behave little kids; play ball my way or I'll take it away. They view compromise as a sign of weakness. They forget that politics, as Bismarck wisely observed, is essentially the art of the possible. Kelantan reflects the management talent or lack thereof with PAS. After leading it for decades, cholera, which has been wiped out elsewhere, is still endemic. Low level of public health is directly the consequence of managerial ineptitude. The people of Kelantan, overwhelmingly Malays, remain the poorest in the nation. Again that reflects the limitations of a PAS administration. I have tremendous respect for Tok Nik Aziz as an ulama but voters elected him to be chief minister, not chief ulama. He should be humble enough to acknowledge his significant limitations as an administrator. That is his major weakness and fault. Had he been aware, or humble enough to be made aware of, he would have sought competent advisors. Consider Reagan, revered as one of America's greatest presidents. He readily acknowledged his intellectual and managerial limitations but he was very confident of where he wanted to take his nation. So he recruited the most talented and accomplished individuals to his cabinet so they could help him achieve his goals. There are many such Malaysians, Kelantanese specifically. Why couldn't Tok Aziz co-opt a few of them? Perhaps they could not recite the Koran and do not wear big turbans and flowing robes but if they are competent executives, that should be good enough. Frankly I could not care less even if they were not Malays or Muslims. You want someone to make sure that the rubbish is picked up regularly and the welfare of citizens taken care of. PAS is obsessed with the Islamic State. Many, and not just non-Muslims, disagree with that. Yet PAS remains stubborn. Wouldn't it be more meaningful and productive if PAS leaders were to understand and appreciate the reasons for the lack of enthusiasm and outright opposition? The greatest fear is that Malaysia would become another Iran or Saudi Arabia. Even Tok' Aziz's wife would oppose that. Imagine, women not allowed to drive! How do your allay their fears and make them see your viewpoint? One thing is certain. If you label them as apostates or kafirs, that would surely alienate them. PAS should focus on content and not be consumed with labels. Work with your Pakatan partners to get rid of corruption, abuse of power, and those laws that denigrate the human condition. Those are all wrong from the Islamic perspective. Do that and we that much closer to an Islamic state. To me, an Islamic state is one where there is peace, justice, prosperity, free of corruption, and abuse of power. Never mind the label. Clearly UMNO today has strayed far from our Islamic ideals. Corruption, cronyism, and abuse of power are the antithesis of things Islamic. They cannot be mollified with the building of ornate mosques or having gala Maulad Nabi parades. The upcoming general election will be a choice between a party that has a wee bit of competence in statecraft but is riddled with greed, corruption and abuse of power among its leaders, UMNO, versus another that is sorely lacking in managerial capability but whose leaders are pious, honest, and not obsessed with materialism, PAS. Which would one choose? Of course we all would like the choice of competent, honest and efficient leaders, but Allah has not given us that. Elections are like multiple choice tests, you select the best answer from the list given. Given the choice we have, I would unhesitatingly pick PAS over UMNO. We can easily train someone to be better executives or help them by supplying those talents. It would be considerably more difficult if not impossible to change someone's inner core of greed, corruptness, and repeated breaches of faith. Leaders with those ugly traits would continue to get worse, if given the power and opportunity. This upcoming election is an opportunity for Malaysians to deny the corrupt, the cheaters, and the greedy that power and opportunity. Cont'd: Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #7: Touching on the economy, while to date Malays have made some progress nonetheless the new generation considers that as insignificant. They demand a bigger share of the cake, at least 30 percent. How can we achieve this target?
|
| Posted: 03 Mar 2013 12:29 PM PST
Is it possible to understand Muslim Mindanao without looking at Malaysia? Perhaps not. This stern neighbor has played its hands rather wisely: feeding a Filipino rebellion on one hand, and helping end it on the other. Glenda Gloria, Rappler Sabah has been home to thousands of Muslims who once fought for independence under the Marcos dictatorship. It was their refuge when the military continued to pummel them with bombs and bullets in Mindanao. Sabah was always part of their real -- and imagined -- community. Before colonizers carved out superficial boundaries in that part of the world, the Muslims of Sabah, Tawi-Tawi and Sulu were one community that freely traded goods with each other, paid unhampered visits to one another, and spoke the same language. The imperious Sultanate of Sulu reigned over these islands. Thus while Manila has consistently put the Sabah claim on the back burner, the reality is that to many Filipinos, Sabah has long been theirs. They grew up on the island, got married there, raised their kids, and put up businesses. An estimated 65,000 Filipinos carry passports as "political refugees" in Sabah. In the capital city of Kota Kinabalu, I once asked a former member of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) why he had chosen to live there. "It's our land. These are my brothers," he said. They call themselves "Suluks" not Filipinos. At the height of the MNLF's secessionist campaign in the 1970s and 1980s, Muslim rebels sought refuge in Sabah. In Sabah they mapped out plans to bring down the Marcos military to its knees. In its lush jungles they trained young recruits in guerrilla warfare. While Nur Misuari toured the Middle East to raise funds for his movement, his young commanders held clandestine meetings in Sabah to plot the war against Marcos. Which begs the question, why would Malaysia tolerate this when it could not even put up with a ragtag group of old guards now holed up in Lahad Datu? The answer partly lies not in Sabah or Sulu or Tawi-Tawi but in another place that keeps the dark secrets of a bungled special operation to invade Sabah: Corregidor Island. Jabidah, Ninoy Aquino In March 1968 -- 45 years ago this month -- the Philippine military shot dead young Muslim recruits whom they had trained to invade Sabah as part of Ferdinand Marcos' adventurous pursuits at the time. The underground plot was named Oplan Merdeka (freedom in Bahasa Melayu). Trained under a commando unit called Jabidah (the name of a beautiful woman in Muslim lore), they were recruited from Muslim provinces such as Sulu, Tawi-Tawi and Basilan. Army officers led by then Maj Eduardo Martelino first taught them the rudiments of warfare on the sleepy island of Simunul, Tawi-Tawi. A picturesque town, Simunul is home to the first mosque in the Philippines built in the 14th century. It is also a breath away from Semporna, an island off Sabah. Last month, it was in Simunul where followers of the Sultan of Sulu prepared to sail to Sabah to begin the standoff. Back then, Simunul lacked the environment for rigorous training. Thus the Army boarded its recruits on a ship to the forlorn, tadpole-shaped island of Corregidor. Promised a monthly allowance, the recruits waited patiently for cash to send to their parents back home. It never came, triggering widespread demoralization that culminated in a petition addressed to Marcos. The Army was ordered to fix the problem, but the situation was doomed. The young Muslims mutinied against their training officers. Oplan Merdeka was about to be exposed. The government panicked and ordered the Army to silence the recruits forever in what is now infamously known as the Jabidah massacre. A few survived (including one who would tell the story), but more than two dozen got killed, their bodies burned before being thrown into the sea by the Army's elite forces on board a presidential helicopter. The senator who did his own sleuthing and pushed for a high-profile congressional probe on the massacre -- and Merdeka -- was no less than the President's father, then Sen Ninoy Aquino Jr. The Jabidah massacre was the spark that lit the Muslim rebellion. It also changed Malaysia forever. Times were different then. The Philippines was ahead of its neighbors and was in the best position to claim Sabah. Malaysia seemed an easy target at the time: the Federation had just been born in 1963, Singapore had just broken away, and Indonesia was becoming a problematic neighbor. Malaysia took Jabidah to heart; never again would it be vulnerable to its neighbors. Sabah began getting the attention it deserved through projects and a huge budget. To spite Marcos, Malaysia welcomed MNLF rebels to its fold to the extent of arming and providing them sanctuary. Eventually the rebels got integrated into Malaysian society. This didn't cause problems in multi-ethnic Malaysia. Because while Marcos unleashed his sword to defeat Muslim rebels, Mohammad Mahathir took the more sophisticated path -- discouraging Islamic extremism by mobilizing and spending state resources to allow moderate Islam to flourish. Teaching Misuari a lesson Its porous borders, however, made it difficult for Malaysia to stop the entry of job-hunting Filipinos. The number of undocumented Filipino workers in Sabah reached 400,000 at one point. This would not have been a problem if not for the 1997 financial crisis that forced Malaysia to deport Indonesian and Filipino workers. In 1999, Zamboanga City felt the brunt as it witnessed the arrival of a few hundred deportees via commercial ships. The situation called for bilateral cooperation. But then President Joseph Estrada had just thrown his support behind Mahathir's jailed opponent at the time, former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, and this severely strained the excellent ties that both countries enjoyed under the Ramos administration. The situation turned for the worse in 2000, when Abu Sayyaf bandits kidnapped tourists on one of Malaysia's prime islands, Sipadan, brought them to Sulu, and earned millions of dollars in ransom. Malaysia deported about 700 Filipinos from Sabah after the incident, but denied it was a retaliatory move. And then something happened in 2001 under the Arroyo government. Malaysia's old friend ran into trouble. Misuari quarreled with the Arroyo administration and incited a revolt in Sulu. When the military moved against him, he counted on one ally to save him from getting jailed. On a pump boat, Misuari escaped to Sabah. Malaysia is a friend. Or so he thought. Shortly after reaching the shores of Jiamperas in November 2001, the Muslim leader who once awed the Islamic world was handcuffed and detained by the Malaysian police. He was deported to the Philippines in January 2002, briefly detained on charges of leading a botched revolt in Sulu. Malaysia's move proved how it regarded Misuari and how aware it was of its bigger priority -- to co-opt another rebel movement that was being lured by radical Islam. Thus its decision to host the peace talks between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. Read more at: http://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/22943-sabah,-merdeka-and-aquino
|
| Harris’ RM 200m formula a non-starter Posted: 03 Mar 2013 11:21 AM PST
Now we have heard it all from former Sabah Chief Minister Harris Salleh. He wants the Federal Government to pay RM200 million of our hard-earned money in "compensation" to some riff-raff, for want of a better term, in the Philippines who claim to be "heirs" of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. At last count, there were some 60 claimants to the Sulu Sultanship. Joe Fernandez The "heirs" involved in the on-going standoff in Lahad Datu claim that the defunct sultanate owns the entire Sabah and has private property rights to it. The Brunei and Sulu sultans, terrified of the fierce headhunters, incidentally never ventured inland beyond the coastal stretches in Borneo. Under Adat, the entire land area of Sabah is NCR (Native Customary Rights) and belongs to the Orang Asal i.e. the Dusunic and Murutic Groupings. The Sovereignty of Sabah rests with its people. This Sovereignty has never been transferred to Brunei, Sulu, Spain, Britain, the Philippines or Malaysia. No Referendum was held on Malaysia in Sabah, Sarawak, Malaya or Brunei. In Singapore, the people were given the choice of a simple Yes or No vote: independence of Singapore through merger with Malaya via Malaysia. We know from history that the Sulu sultan at one time used to extort tolls from terrified traffic along the waterways in eastern Sabah. Later, the extortionist activities were extended to the waterways in northern by courtesy of the Brunei sultan, the previous extortionist, who gave up this "right" to the former. Brunei, Sulu claims not by war, conquest These virtually criminal activities, by no means, confer territorial rights or any transfer of sovereignty which at all times resides with the people. Neither the Brunei nor Sulu sultans can claim like William the Conqueror of Normandy, France that they acquired the ownership of the entire area by the act of war and conquest to set up a feudal kingdom. William defeated English King Harold II at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 and declared that he now owned the entire land area of England. The sovereignty itself, the last time we heard anything about it ages ago, was "transferred"– if there's any such thing -- to the Philippines Government by one of the many pretenders to the Sulu Sultanship. Manila then had the claim to much of eastern Sabah inserted in the Philippines Constitution and maps and flogged the issue at the time of Malaysia in 1963. Harris' suggestion obviously takes its cue from the fact that every year; the Malaysian Embassy in the Philippines issues a check in the amount of 5,300 ringgit (US$1710 or about 77,000 Philippine pesos) to the legal counsel of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu. Malaysia considers the amount an annual "cession" payment for the disputed state, while the sultan's descendants consider it "rent. By the Mackasie Declaration of Dec 13, 1939 by the High Court of Borneo in Sandakan in Civil Suit No. 169/39, C. F. Mackasie, the then Chief Justice of Borneo, ruled that nine Plaintiffs were heirs of the defunct Sultanate of Sulu and were entitled to the yearly RM5, 300 cession monies from the Malaysian Government. Two versions of 1878 Agreement The nine were listed as Dayang Piandao Kiram, Princess Tarhata Kiram, Princess Sakinur Kiram, Sultan Ismael Kiram, Sultan Punjungan Kiram, Sitti Rada Kiram, Sitti Jahara Kiram, Sitti Mariam Kiram and Mora Napsa. Alfred Dent, the founder of the Borneo North Borneo Chartered Company, and the Sulu Sultan came to an agreement on 22 Jan 1878 and wherein the former agreed to pay the latter 5,000 Malayan dollars in annual pension money in return for "transferring the sultan transferring his rights in North Borneo" – meaning in eastern Sabah – to Dent and/or his Company. On 22 April 1903 His Majesty Sultan Jamalul Kiram signed a document known as "Confirmation of cession of certain islands", under what he either "grant and ceded" or "leased" additional islands in the neighbourhood of the mainland of North Borneo from Banggi Island to Sibuku Bay to British North Borneo Company. The sum 5,000 dollars a year payable every year increased to 5,300 dollars a year payable every year. British version of the 1878 Agreement "hereby grant and cede of our own free and sovereign will to Gustavus Baron de Overbeck of Hong Kong and Alfred Dent Esquire of London...and assigns forever and in perpetuity all the rights and powers belonging to us over all the territories and lands being tributary to us on the mainland of the island of Borneo commencing from the Pandassan River on the north-west coast and extending along the whole east coast as far as the Sibuco River in the south and comprising amongst other the States of Paitan, Sugut, Bangaya, Labuk, Sandakan, Kina Batangan, Mumiang, and all the other territories and states to the southward thereof bordering on Darvel Bay and as far as the Sibuco river with all the islands within three marine leagues of the coast." Sulu version of the 1878 Agreement "do hereby lease of our own freewill and satisfaction to...all the territories and lands being tributary to [us] together with their heirs, associates, successors and assigns forever and until the end of time, all rights and powers which we possess over all territories and lads tributary to us on the mainland of the Island of Borneo, commencing from the Pandassan River on the west coast to Maludu Bay, and extending along the whole east coast as far as Sibuco River on the south,..., and all the other territories and states to the southward thereof bordering on Darvel Bay and as far as the Sibuco River, ..., [9 nautical miles] of the coast." We don't know under what law the Dent-Sulu Agreements was made and whether it was registered in any Court. Philippine President Benigno Aquino has in recent days publicly indicated that his office will study the "legal basis" of the claims by the Sulu "heirs". If so, why did previous Philippine Governments raise the Sabah claim? Easier for Company not to deal with Orang Asal The Company subsequently "acquired further sovereign and territorial rights" from the Sultan of Brunei, expanding the territory under control to the Putatan river (May 1884), the Padas district (November 1884), the Kawang river (February 1885), the Mantanani Islands (April 1885), and additional minor Padas territories (March 1898). It was easier for the Company to deal with the Sulu and Brunei sultans than with the Orang Asal of Sabah. Meanwhile, in 1885, the United Kingdom, Spain, and Germany signed the Madrid Protocol of 1885, which recognized the sovereignty of Spain in the Sulu Archipelago in return for the relinquishment of all Spanish claims over North Borneo. In 1888 North Borneo became a protectorate of the United Kingdom and remained so until 1 Jan 1942 when Japan, by the act of war and conquest, demolished the British presence in Sabah and the so-called Sabah claim, if any. It was not until 1945, when Japan surrendered, that the Company returned to Sabah. In 1946, the Company sold Sabah to the Colonial Office in London for Sterling 1.2 million. The Mackasie Declaration is the only claim the "heirs" of the Sulu Sultan, recognized by the High Court of Borneo, have on the Malaysian Treasury. There's no reason why Malaysia should unilaterally alter the sum mentioned in the Mackasie Declaration just because Harris Salleh woke up one morning on the wrong side of the bed and came up with "a better idea". Adat came long before the so-called agreements between the Company and the Brunei and Sulu sultans. Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. 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.
|
| Pakatan manifesto leaves many ‘perplexed’ Posted: 02 Mar 2013 03:08 PM PST
The Pakatan Rakyat manifesto has addressed heavy and obvious' issues affecting the people. However, the manifesto has left many unhappy by leaving out glaring points. These measures are already being implemented by the Barisan government which says it cannot emulate its rival's populism but has to be a responsible government. Nevertheless, Pakatan populism is benefiting the people, by forcing the Barisan into changing long-standing policies like reducing car prices, turning study loans into scholarships and building affordable homes. Baradan Kuppusamy, The Star IN the charged political atmosphere of today with the Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional finally ready to face the people, anything that either of the political coalitions put out come under heavy scrutiny. If in the past, manifestos were hardly given serious attention by the electorate, but this time it is different. The Pakatan Rakyat manifesto, as expected, has come under a barrage of criticism from Barisan Nasional leaders. But what is surprising is that even NGO activists, environmental groups and Indian organisations have something negative to say about the manifesto. They are unhappy that their special interest has been left out of the document and among the bigger group are minority Indians who are unhappy the manifesto does not specifically mention them. Predictably, Barisan leaders slammed the manifesto as another litany of promises that the opposition could not fulfil. But when the Barisan unveils its manifesto, it can expect the same degree of scrutiny. The Barisan questioned how the Pakatan can promise to reduce fuel prices and provide free education, among other measures, while at the same time reduce car prices and abolish road tolls. They want to know from where Pakatan would get the money for its populist policies. Pakatan defended its manifesto, termed The People's Pact, The People's Hope, saying it is an inclusive document that is need-based and not race-based. It even phases out NEP-like affirmative action policies if the coalition captures Putrajaya. "It's need-based and not race-based," PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli explained at a briefing on Wednesday. As a political document, the manifesto addresses rising prices, commodities, lodging and good governance that all communities face. It offers to cut car prices, offer free education, lower fuel prices and ensure that every Malaysian family earned at least RM4,000. It will pay for the higher national costs of its populist policies by prudent management, thrift and ending leakages. Unlike the more comprehensive Buku Jingga which outlines the three parties' common policy framework, the manifesto falls short of satisfying special interest groups like the disabled and environment activists, but also fails to mention minorities like the Indian community. The manifesto is an important document and a lot of thinking and planning should ideally go into preparing one but the current document falls short of expectations. It is meeting a barrage of criticism for its failure to mention the Indian minority who is already suspicious of the intentions of Pakatan leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Now a manifesto that does not mention them and their special need is only expected to fuel more suspicions. While Anwar has sought to quickly minimise the damage, saying that the manifesto transcends racial groups, the failure to specifically mention the Indian minority is set to rankle them. From a fixed deposit previously, nearly 82% of Indians backed Pakatan in the 2008 general election and several factors fuelled this changed mindset. Since then, they have been consistently wooed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Barisan with "care and bearing gifts". A significant portion of them have shifted their support back. Indians accept that issues like "rising prices, commodities, lodging, good governance" are important but they also face special and urgent issues like high crime, low skills and poverty that require government intervention. Responding to this, Hindraf, quickly expressed "extreme disappointment" at Pakatan Rakyat for its neglect of the interests of the Indian community. Likewise, other special interest groups like the disabled, the Ban Cyanide Action Committee Raub and even oil producing states Kelantan and Terengganu that have been promised 20% oil royalty, have been left out of the important document. But while they are unhappy that their special interest has been left out, it is the failure to mention Indians as a group that is glaring, said a "perplexed" DAP MP. On a larger Malaysian scale, the Pakatan Rakyat manifesto also has some unexpected omissions which are inconsistent with its earlier stated policies, lending credence to some analysts who said the manifesto was hurriedly drawn-up. Among the omissions are its silence on a Goods and Service tax, local government election, freedom of information law and for all politicians to declare their assets, a long standing Pakatan policy. But on other issues that are equally important, Pakatan is well ahead, announcing its pledge to shut down the Lynas plant in Gebeng, review the oil refinery project in Pengerang, Johor, halt construction of dams in Sarawak and reform logging laws. Some of the measures in the manifesto are populist in nature like its pledge to abolish the AES traffic summons system, ending the proposed healthcare tax, lowering fuel, electricity and water charges and abolishing road tolls. These measures are already being implemented by the Barisan government which says it cannot emulate its rival's populism but has to be a responsible government. Nevertheless, Pakatan populism is benefiting the people, by forcing the Barisan into changing long-standing policies like reducing car prices, turning study loans into scholarships and building affordable homes. Since 2009, the Barisan has planned and announced one measure after another, all designed to help the people cope with rising living costs, cut red tape and create jobs via direct BR1M payments to numerous One Malaysia projects. These measures will be detailed in the manifesto that the Barisan would put out in answer to the Pakatan manifesto. It is left to the voters to decide on which coalition they want a tried, tested and united Barisan Nasional or a new, untested and often squabbling Pakatan Rakyat.
|
| Posted: 02 Mar 2013 03:03 PM PST Don't be fooled by their sudden outpouring of love. They're just lusting for your vote. You may hate your political lover boy's guts, but the good news is that you can take everything he gives without returning his love. He will keep on loving you until the votes are counted. And that's the bad news. You won't see him again for another four or five years. Stanley Koh, FMT The heat of election fever shares some characteristics with the heat of romantic infatuation. It is easy to spot a politician in heat. He will display a mad crush on you even if he has never met you before. He will shower you with all kinds of presents—cash, smart phones, and even tyres for your car—just to show how smitten he is. He will take the trouble to find out where you live—and of course where you will vote—and woo you as if nothing else matters in his life. Never mind that you have not seen him around in your kampung since you voted for him in 2008. Yes, powerful politicians are now coming down from their ivory towers to breathe down your neck with their mushy lovey-dovey words of affection and care. But remember Oscar Wilde's warning about romance. "Deceiving others," said the Victorian wit. "That is what the world calls a romance." You may hate your political lover boy's guts, but the good news is that you can take everything he gives without returning his love. He will keep on loving you until the votes are counted. And that's the bad news. You won't see him again for another four or five years. The art of political courtship comes naturally to seasoned politicians. But if current rumours turn out to be true, we will be seeing plenty of fresh faces in this election because BN feels that many seasoned Casanovas have hopelessly lost their romantic charms and therefore their winning ways. We expect BN to hold a crash course for the new Don Juans. If we could peek at the lesson notes, we would probably find something like the following. Walk through your crowd in the demeanour of an eagle gliding to the ground like a sparrow. Maintain a smile and look humble even if your arrogance is bursting to the seams. Shake hands with as many people as possible even if their hands are dirty. Take notice of the children accompanying them. Talk to the child, making sure not to make him cry. Try to elicit a smile from him by making a silly face. If your face is already silly to begin with, try blinking your eyes or pulling your ears. Beat drums, especially if your crowd is predominantly Chinese. After all, the duration of the Chinese New Year festival is up to anybody's interpretation. And, oh, don't forget to wear a costume that is traditional to the majority of your crowd. Short memories It is safe to assume that most of the voters in your constituency are stupid. Otherwise how do you explain BN's perennial winning streak when most Malaysians hate our guts?
|
| Lahad Datu invasion: The real story? Posted: 01 Mar 2013 11:23 AM PST
It appears that the heavily armed group wants to turn the "occupation" into an international issue, specifically to draw attention to its plea for an independent Sulu sultanate. Amir Ali, FMT The sultanate has little resources at its disposal to run the 'government' of Sulu. Thus a fresh deal with Malaysia will help it keep the ball rolling. The Lahad Datu "invasion" is not merely about a group of armed men intruding into Sabah. After weeks of a tense standoff between the "occupiers" and Malaysian security forces, a clearer picture has emerged. It appears that the heavily armed group wants to turn the "occupation" into an international issue, specifically to draw attention to its plea for an independent Sulu sultanate. But the sultanate is financially not in good shape and hence, the group turned its attention to Sabah where it claimed the Sulu sultan has "rented out" the state to Malaysia. The Sulu sultan told AFP on Feb 27 that the Malaysian government is paying the sultanate RM5,300 yearly in exchange for agreeing to let Sabah become a Malaysian state. It appears that the group wants to renegotiate for a higher "rent". By seeking a higher payment, the sultan hopes to keep Sulu afloat. However, the Malaysian government has not acknowledged the existence of such a "rent". The group probably decided that the best way to force the Malaysian government to renegotiate a better "deal" is to occupy the village in Lahad Datu. According to observers, the sultanate has little resources at its disposal to run the "government" of Sulu. Thus a fresh deal with Malaysia will help it keep the ball rolling. Manila's war against "terror" did not include the province of Sulu. But still the province was engulfed in this war as the Abu Sayyaf group spread its wings across the Muslim majority areas. As a result, Manila sent its armed forces to Sulu in its campaign against terrorism. But the Sulu people did not see the presence of the Philippine armed forces as part of the war on terror. Instead, they deemed it as an occupation force, attempting to control the territory and at the same time exploiting the vast riches of the region. It is reported that its natural wealth includes minerals and oil and gas reserves in the Sulu waters. According to observers, the Philippines has so far failed to carry out its oil extraction activities in Sulu. By forcefully entering Sabah, the "Sulu Sultanate Royal Army" hopes to renegotiate the annual fees and also to get Malaysia to extract the oil in Sulu. According to some reports, Manila and its foreign partners have stopped extracting oil in Sulu because of frequent breakdown in the drilling machine.
Independence declaration A little-known event occurred in November 2010 when the sultan of Sulu, Sultan Jamalul Kiram III, officially declared the Sulu province an independent state from the Philippines. The Tausug people (the people of the Sulu sultanate are from the Tausug tribe) see themselves as independent, free and have adopted the syariah as their constitution. This piece of news was not reported in the Malaysian mainstream media. In the peace deal concluded between Manila and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), the Sulu province was not included. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/02/lahad-datu-invasion-the-real-story/# |
| BN using Anwar to confuse voters? Posted: 01 Mar 2013 11:14 AM PST
The 11th hour faux pas by a PAS delegate has been picked up and highlighted with the usual hype and spin by the Barisan Nasional-controlled media and turned into a firestorm threatening to engulf Pakatan. Selena Tay, FMT It is very obvious that BN keeps creating issue after issue to finish off Pakatan while, at the same time, giving out cash to woo the rakyat. The mainstream media is continuing to harp on the so-called disagreement among Pakatan Rakyat component parties over the choice of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim as prime minister. This is done with the intention to create a perception among the public that Pakatan is constantly at loggerheads due to this issue and therefore unfit to govern. PAS has been blamed as the main culprit in this matter because during the PAS muktamar (general assembly) in November last year, an overzealous PAS member had proposed that PAS president and Marang MP, Abdul Hadi Awang, be the prime minister should Pakatan succeed in gaining control of Putrajaya in the 13th general election. The 11th hour faux pas by a PAS delegate has been picked up and highlighted with the usual hype and spin by the Barisan Nasional-controlled media and turned into a firestorm threatening to engulf Pakatan. Pro-BN political analysts plus various individuals have also joined in the fray criticising Pakatan as failing to reach a consensus. On Feb 26, a mainstream English daily has even reported that PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, popularly known as Mat Sabu, has refrained from openly endorsing Anwar. This is in contrast to the stand made by DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng who firmly endorses Anwar as the candidate to be the prime minister due to his good performance when he was the finance minister. The same English daily also reported that there was talk that a compromise has been reached between PAS and DAP leaders for Umno veteran Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, the long-time and current Gua Musang MP, to be considered as the prime minister-designate. This report certainly paints DAP in a bad light, making it seem that while Guan Eng is openly endorsing Anwar, at the back of it, DAP leaders are secretly making deals to put in another candidate. Thus BN's media is now working overtime in attempting to portray DAP and PAS as going against PKR by stabbing PKR's back. This is done with the intention of causing Pakatan to be destroyed from within.
Media propaganda A PKR strategist, who spoke on condition of anonymity, opined that the 13th general election will only be called once big cracks appear in Pakatan. This is because fence-sitters will be influenced by what they perceive as Pakatan breaking up and therefore the best bet would be to stick to voting for BN which has been continuously portrayed as being firm, steady and united. BN's use of massive media propaganda is a factor that cannot be underestimated. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/02/bn-using-anwar-to-confuse-voters/# |
| Populist policies will hit us hard Posted: 28 Feb 2013 02:44 PM PST
Tay Tian Yan, TMI There is a country well endowed with natural resources and boasting a highly efficient, incorrupt government. Her citizens nevertheless have to pay pretty hefty taxes. Income tax rate is as high as 40 per cent, not to mention an additional 10 per cent consumer tax. This country is most positively rich. I'm not going to keep you in suspense. It's Australia. But sorry, Australia doesn't provide free tertiary education. On the contrary, tuition fees are sky high, about A$30,000 (RM96,000) a year for an ordinary university, and this figure is growing at an annual rate of 10 per cent. There are three ways young Australians can gain access to universities: 1. Their families provide part of the expenses, and some parents actually emphasise they have secured loans for their children's education. 2. Bank loans, which will have to be paid back upon graduation. 3. Part-time jobs such as restaurant waiters, apple pickers, etc. It's hard indeed, but for the sake of better future prospects, exorbitant prices still have to be paid. Australian students are a very practical lot. All that they can wish for is not-so-drastic increases in tuition fees and more humane bank interest rates. Alternatively, they can count on their parents to fork out a little more. They don't take to the streets, demanding the government take over their burdens for the simple reason that they made the choice of attending the universities themselves, and should therefore not get the public to share their burdens. The opposition parties never pledge free tertiary education as they know they won't be able to honour it anyway. There is another country endowed with reasonable resources. The government is of mediocre efficiency and accountability levels. The tax rate in this country is not that high, being capped at 26 per cent, but given the not-so-high income levels of ordinary wage earners, such a rate appears to be pretty unbearable. This country is by no means a wealthy state, at best a middle-income country. You might have guessed it. It's Malaysia. It won't be too hard for young Malaysians to attend universities. There are so many of them around, in fact way too many! Tuition fees can be as low as RM2,000 to RM3,000 a year for public universities, RM30,000 to RM40,000 (non-medical courses) for private universities. Young Malaysians need not beg for bank loans or work part-time to pay their tuition fees. If they go to a government university, 90 per cent of the expenses have already been absorbed by the government (from taxpayers' pockets to be exact). The remaining 10 per cent can be settled with PTPTN loans (which many use to acquire the latest smartphones). If they opt for a private university, they need both the PTPTN and family support.
|
| Posted: 28 Feb 2013 12:08 PM PST
Let's start by speaking up. I am Muslim. And I love dogs. Elza Irdalynna, Free Malaysia Today By now, many Malaysians are aware of Pak Mie and his heroic deeds of rescuing and caring for over 500 dogs in Alor Setar, Kedah. Most of us are amazed by his spirit, and have even rallied together to help him in his cause. Yet a note that keeps recurring in the articles and videos that feature Pak Mie and his wife is one that disgusts me, as I'm sure it has for anyone with a heart. Despite Pak Mie's purest intentions, a majority of his Malay community has shunned and condemned him, labelling him as an infidel and morally corrupt. Why are the Muslims of this country (particularly the Malay Muslim group) so filled with hate toward the canine species? Growing up, I was ill-informed and learned that Muslims weren't allowed to own dogs. I later understood that this was a simplified version of the teachings, and untrue. Dogs are considered to be dirty, and there are specific ways to cleanse oneself according to Islam when touching a dog when it's wet or its feces and urine. However, it was and had never been haram for a Muslim to own a dog. Why the silence? Yet it is common for many Malaysians to see dogs getting beaten, objects or hot boiling water thrown at them, and I've even heard of cases where razor blades are stuffed into sausages and fed to the dogs. A friend of mine had his dog poisoned by his Malay neighbour. Dogs aren't just considered a nuisance by this group of people; they're a target for violence. Still, what angers me most is not the cruelty of these misguided Malay Muslims. What makes me angry is the silence of other Muslim dog lovers. I know there are plenty of us out there who not only are against cruelty towards dogs, but are also Muslims who own dogs. Yet whenever such disgusting acts take place, where is your voice? Why must we keep our ownership a secret? We fear judgment and so we leave the fight for the rights of these animals to the non-Muslim community. Last October, I lost my six-month-old Shetland Sheepdog in a hit-and-run. We were coming back from our morning walk, and his leash fell out of my hand. He ran back to the park near our house. When I caught up to him, his dying body was twitching in the middle of the road, his head soaked in blood. As I cradled my baby, neighbours rushed to my side. I was touched by their assistance – one ran back to her house to get some blankets, another went to get a bag, and two other dog owners walked me home, comforting me. I am forever grateful to them for their kindness. Jaqen was a very friendly dog. He was popular among the kids and other dog owners at our park, and would show off his "fetching" skills when we played ball. But I recall little kids who played with him, asking me, "Are you Malay?", and upon my reply would say, "My mother says Malays cannot have dogs." I would patiently correct each misinformed child but I was annoyed at how parents nonchalantly pass this information to their children. It's bad enough you hate dogs; must you also teach your children to do the same? Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/01/silence-is-easy/
|
| A manifesto that hoodwinks voters Posted: 28 Feb 2013 10:52 AM PST People in a peaceful rally against the Selangor government for failing to provide preschool allowance as promised in the 12th general election manifesto. Selangor menteri besar has stated that a manifesto is not a promise. NOT COST-EFFECTIVE: It's baffling why Pakatan is insisting on emulating bankrupt countriesTun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, NST PAKATAN Rakyat has unveiled its manifesto. It is all about reducing government revenues and increasing spending. This is to be achieved by lowering taxes, reducing the number of taxpayers by raising tax-free allowances, doing away with tolls, and more. On the other hand, the salary bill will be increased because of an increase in minimum wage, there will be free education for everyone and roads and highways will be built and maintained. With 1.1 million employees, the government's salary bill is very big. By increasing the minimum wage to RM1,100, not only will those drawing less than the minimum wage get an increase but those earning more must also be given a wage increase to maintain their status as superiors to those below them. The salary scales of all grades will have to be increased in order to do this. It is not about raising the salaries and wages of those earning below the minimum wage only. This will be in addition to the RM2 billion because of the recent rise of the minimum pay to RM900. The cost of education will also increase by more than RM2 billion because of free education. The repair and maintenance of highways will also run into several billions of ringgit. Currently, the cost of petrol subsidies is about RM18 billion. If petrol prices were to be lowered, then several more billions of ringgit will have to be added to government subsidy. On the other hand, revenues will decrease by several billions of ringgit with taxes lowered, the number of people paying taxes reduced and highways made toll-free. Revenues will also decrease as higher wages for the business sector are bound to reduce profits as well as the taxes paid to the government. Some businesses may have to close down or move to other countries. There will be less investment, both foreign and domestic. And more unemployment.
At one time, the manufactured goods sold in Malaysia carried European brands. Today, they are almost all from Japan, Korea and China. Except for German cars, all the motor vehicles on the roads are from Asian countries. For decades, the Europeans and Americans have been increasing wages and providing perks to their workers. The prices of their products increased accordingly and could not compete in the market. They lost the market. But they keep increasing their high cost of living. Today, they are facing an irreversible financial crisis. Greece, Spain, Portugal and even Italy are on the verge of bankruptcy or have become bankrupt. Even Britain and France are in financial trouble. The United States is also in deep financial crisis. It faces the need to reduce government spending (sequestration) or increase taxes. Sequestration will mean less money for education, healthcare and defence. The number of teachers would have to be reduced. Even the control towers at some airports would have to cease operations. Military bases, weapons and personnel would have to be reduced. An austerity programme will slow down growth and increase unemployment. Like the Europeans, the Americans also do not like to reduce their spending. They refuse to pay more taxes. In fact, the rich are demanding tax reduction. The financial crisis in Europe and America is basically because of overspending. Until they cut back on their spending and increase taxes, their economy will not recover. Pakatan's manifesto advocates the very things that have bankrupted Europe and America. If Pakatan is responsible, it should work out the cost. It is not too difficult to do this as government employees' salaries as well as developmental and maintenance needs are known. We know the number of people who will get a pay increase; we know the cost of maintaining educational and healthcare institutions; we know the cost of maintaining roads and highways; and we know the cost of development. Instead of merely commenting, economists and financiers should work out the mathematics. Then, the people will understand what the manifesto really represents. But, on the other hand, Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has said a manifesto is not a promise. Obviously, Pakatan is preparing to renege on its manifesto. This is not surprising. In Selangor, the Pakatan government has failed to honour its promise, including providing free water and allowance for single mothers. Pakatan's manifesto is obviously meant to hoodwink the electorate.
|
| Busy fighting the enemy within Posted: 28 Feb 2013 10:39 AM PST
Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak has survived several health scares and is moving to secure his Mentri Besar post as well as to put in place his choice of successor in Kedah. Joceline Tan, The Star IT is quite fortunate that Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak has a great sense of humour given the periodic speculation about his health. The Kedah Mentri Besar has grown quite used to people imagining that he is about to meet his maker. For instance, there was a death in his house on the outskirts of Alor Setar last Sunday. His sister-in-law, the elder sibling of Azizan's first wife, had passed away and there were cars parked outside the house and people milling about. When a reporter called to tell him that people had wondered what was going on, he quipped: "Is that why you phoned me? To ask if I had died?" That is why many reporters like him he is terribly witty when in a good mood and sharp-tongued when feeling grouchy, but never boring. Actually, Azizan is looking quite healthy these days. He seems to be responding to treatment after a series of health scares over the past year. He has put a bit of weight back on and looks like his old distinguished self. However, curiosity over the activity at his house last weekend had more to do with his political health. For the last week or so, PAS supporters had been staging protests against Azizan with some of them going to the extent of asking him to step down. As such when people heard about the busy scene at Azizan's house, they thought he was bowing to the pressure to call it a day. It was wishful thinking because that is the last thing on his mind. Azizan has made it clear that he will be leading his party into the general election. He intends to defend his Sungai Limau seat and he has not discounted the fact that he will still be Mentri Besar after the election. His supporters argue that if Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, who is 81 and sickly, is still contesting the election, Azizan who is 13 years younger can do the same. But the problem is that Azizan is planning to put his opponents in PAS out of his way. He has submitted a fresh list of election candidates to the PAS central leadership that will effectively cut his opponents off from below the knee. In the new list, Datuk Phahrolrazi Mohd Zawawi, who is Azizan's chief threat to the Mentri Besar post, will be sent from the Pengkalan Kundor state seat to the Jerlun parliamentary seat. Datuk Dr Ismail Salleh andDatuk Dr Hamdan Mohd Khalid, the two assemblymen aligned to Phahrolrazi, will be dropped. It was as good as sending Phahrolrazi, who is the party's No 2 man in Kedah, into political exile. Phahrolrazi's state seat is located in the Kuala Kedah area where he is also the PAS division chief. Being sent to Jerlun is akin to being plucked from a tree in his own garden and chucked into a new and hostile backyard to grow anew. But who can blame Azizan for wanting Phahrolrazi out of the way? Phahrolrazi's group had tried but failed to topple Azizan when he was lying on a hospital bed recovering from a heart attack. Azizan would have to continually look over his shoulder if Phahrolrazi continues as an assemblyman. Last year, Phahrolrazi declined to be reappointed as a state exco member. The PAS central leadership had to intervene and when Phahrolrazi relented and rejoined the state exco, Azizan demoted him to a less important portfolio and promoted another loyalist Datuk Taulan Mat Rasul over Phahrolrazi. The state civil servants say the two men are barely talking. However, the two nemeses exchanged broad plastic smiles and even shook hands in front of their president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang during the Chinese New Year do in Alor Setar. Phahrolrazi was on a talk show on Astro Awani last week during which he described his boss as a three-cylinder engine car. As everyone knows, a three-cylinder car is economical to maintain but it cannot go as fast as, say, the BMW, which has a six-cylinder engine. Phahrolrazi is an engineer and it was his way of saying that the Mentri Besar was under-performing when he should be zooming ahead at the speed of a BMW car. And if that was not enough, he said he was prepared to take on the top job if that is what the top leadership wanted. It was a touchy interview and the boss did not appreciate being described as a three-cylinder vehicle. Read more at: http://thestar.com.my/columnists/story.asp?col=joceline&file=/2013/3/1/columnists/joceline/12774309&sec=Joceline
|
| Posted: 28 Feb 2013 10:31 AM PST
The irony is, all these goodies are coming out of my tax dollars. Yet, because I am single, over 30, earn a living income and already have purchased an apartment (closer to hovel when you consider property prices in PJ), I get zippo. N. Shashi Kala, fz.com I HAVE a confession to make... with all the talk of elections and goodies being handed out willy nilly, I'm feeling kinda left out. I mean, there's BR1M for senior citizens and for those from poor households, RM200 smartphone rebate for youths under 30, RM200 book vouchers for students, RM100 school aid for each child, Kedai Makan 1Malaysia for cheap meals, KR1M for household goods, PR1MA for first-time house buyers, TR1M for taxi drivers and a host of other goodies. The irony is, all these goodies are coming out of my tax dollars. Yet, because I am single, over 30, earn a living income and already have purchased an apartment (closer to hovel when you consider property prices in PJ), I get zippo. Yes, I fall squarely in the middle class with high taxes and few reliefs or rebates (the yearly RM1,000 book rebate is one few I enjoy). The rich – who usually have their own businesses – tend to find ways to avoid paying or at least substantially reduce the amount of taxes they pay (thanks to creative accounting and undeclared income stashed overseas). But for salaried employees like me, the IRD gets first dibs on my money even before I do. It has been years since the government has shown any kindness to those like me, for whom finishing a 7-year car loan is cause for celebration – never mind that the repairs bills have been on the up and up. Also, I suspect that those in this group are among the more regular charitable donors, as they have more disposable income. You could say that, hey, you're not exactly suffering, so why do you need help? But that's not quite true. My generation bought our homes by ourselves – we did not have the luck of having our parents put down a hefty down payment for it. We left home right after school (to work or go to uni) and never moved back in. When I wanted to buy my first car, I used my savings and took a loan to buy a small, second-hand Charade. The monthy loan repayment cost RM384, a huge sum for someone pulling slightly less than a thousand salary. Nowadays, most of the twenty-somethings I know drive brand new Myvis or Protons paid for by their parents. I guess the point I am trying to make is that nothing was given to us – we worked hard to get here. And cost of living increases strike us just as hard. Escalating cost of private healthcare, and car prices that border on the ridiculous (seriously, paying 300K or more for a depreciating asset is ludicrous, unless you are very rich) are just some of the examples. We are stuck in between the rich – for whom shelling out 20K for a handbag is just a shopping footnote - and the poor who end up diluting infant formula purchased at Kedai 1Malaysia to make it last longer. We are stuck in middle class hell and it feels like all our hard-earned money is being siphoned off as handouts to special interest groups. But these kind of populist, one-off measures do nothing to improve the lot of the poor.
Read more at: http://fz.com/content/hey-wheres-my-share |
| 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 | |
